Merged The challenge is coming to an end.

[Nucular]

I could see how the JREF proper would frown on the idea. Too much possibility for confusion.

But there might be 'selling points' as it were - it should draw people, participants and spectators alike, to the forum and perhaps then to the JREF proper.

However, if they were amenable, I personally was picturing using forum threads to generate a protocol. We already have practice in that on this very MDC forum.

Yes, I think there are plenty of us here on the board who've bickered about correct protocols etc. and contributed to some of the official protocols too - but how would we know when there was a consensus? A time-limited poll perhaps?

I was also thinking we'd have members do the testing. Or ask skeptical groups to do it, much as the MDC is conducted.

Yes, there wouldn't be too much reason why it shouldn't quite closely resemble the MDC in that respect, I agree.

Another problem, however, would be a need for lawyers. If we could get around that, I for one would be ready to donate.

Lawyers to draw up terms similar to the MDC, lawyers or perhaps a bank to hold the money as Goldman-Sachs do for the MDC... what else do we need them for? If, or when, there's protest by a losing applicant there's the possibility that legal representation would be needed I suppose.

That could all be addressed by JREF support, but it all starts then getting more like it's an official JREF thing again.

 

[Nucular]

but how would we know when there was a consensus? A time-limited poll perhaps?

Actually, this could be solved in something like a moderated thread, maybe with one person appointed 'protocol officer' for each application, similar to Kramer/Jeff Wagg/RemieV.

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

Actually, this could be solved in something like a moderated thread, maybe with one person appointed 'protocol officer' for each application, similar to Kramer/Jeff Wagg/RemieV.

I like that idea. I imagine a protocol team, even with only two people, would take some of the pressure off an individual officer. And I certainly have the impression there are people chomping at the bit to be more active around here. This could potentially give them a nice opportunity.

As for lawyers, my main concern would be the almost inevitable disputes that would arise from failed tests. It's not immediately clear how those kinds of legal problems could be avoided.

 

[Pinocchio]

Final Chapter

I guess in the end Randi will retire, pocket the million and escape to Hawaii with Sophia Loren. I mean, he's the closest thing to something paranormal. He's like a tireless magickal elf from a fairytale. He can pass for Doc, a dwarf from Snow White's castle, any day. He can just award the money to himself and win the challenge.

_______________________________________

I thought one of the main regulations of the Challenge was: it shall continue until the prize is awarded. I guess stuff like that can be arbitrarily changed, oops.

I feel it all started going downhill at about the time when Kramer left and the website's look (particularly the main banner) was modified to what looks like a symbol of mourning or a tribute to someone who is, er, dead?

I wish it wasn't so, but it seems like three things might soon disappear from the face of the earth:
Challenge
Randi
JREF

How is that for rational thinking?

So I guess the psychics win. They have more money, exposure, followers, and everything else the JREF would like to have, but can't achieve it. A few more years, and those same psychics, healers and shamans will have successfully endured the James Randi scare... Peter Popoff is already celebrating.

R.I.P.

 

[Nucular]

And I certainly have the impression there are people chomping at the bit to be more active around here. This could potentially give them a nice opportunity.

Yes, I thought that too - doesn't seem to be many of them around at the moment though does there! Think we could run the TDC between the two of us?

 

[Cuddles]

Actually, this could be solved in something like a moderated thread, maybe with one person appointed 'protocol officer' for each application, similar to Kramer/Jeff Wagg/RemieV.

There would certainly need to be one person with the final say in things. I'm not sure it would work to have a different person for each test though, for consistency you'd want the same person every time.

I think one of the main problems would be documentation. It's all very well coming up with protocols and discussing self-tests and so on on a forum, but when contracts involving money get involved, everything needs to be written down and signed. While I don't know much about legal thingies, I suspect that if you have a challenge with a monetary prize, you have to have a registered office and someone officially in charge.

Having had a quick look into this, it may not be as difficult as I first though, in the UK at least. All that would need to be done would be to set up a registered charity. I'm not sure exactly how the money would be dealt with, and I suspect lawyers would need to be involved, but it doesn't actually seem too difficult at all. I'll look into this a bit more later when I have some time.

As for lawyers, my main concern would be the almost inevitable disputes that would arise from failed tests. It's not immediately clear how those kinds of legal problems could be avoided.

While the JREF is the subject of fairly regular litigation, as far as I'm aware none of it has been due to the challenge, either due to failed tests or anything else. I think the important part is the final contract. As long as that's a watertight legal document, there should be no grounds for legal action. As long as it is made clear that you are not obligated to test anyone, no-one can sue you for not testing them either. Obviously there would be the usual complaints about bias, cheating, the money not being there, and so on, but I think it would be restricted to whining and not anything legal.

 

[Hindmost]

On the lastest skeptics guide to the universe podcast, Randi talks about the MDC...take a listen.

glenn

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

Yes, I thought that too - doesn't seem to be many of them around at the moment though does there! Think we could run the TDC between the two of us?

No prob. You donate the money, square away the legal junk, work out protocols, and do the testing. I’ll take it upon myself to bravely handle the rest.

Having had a quick look into this, it may not be as difficult as I first though, in the UK at least. All that would need to be done would be to set up a registered charity. I'm not sure exactly how the money would be dealt with, and I suspect lawyers would need to be involved, but it doesn't actually seem too difficult at all. I'll look into this a bit more later when I have some time.

Be interesting to know if you come up with anything. I’m wondering, though, just how formal the challenge would have to be. When two people make a bar bet, there aren’t really major legal ramifications, are there? Up to $5,000 and you’re still in small claims court, at least in my home state according to a quick google. What if we didn’t promote it beyond a kind of bar bet, and just made sure we had a solid written agreement?

While the JREF is the subject of fairly regular litigation, as far as I'm aware none of it has been due to the challenge, either due to failed tests or anything else. I think the important part is the final contract. As long as that's a watertight legal document, there should be no grounds for legal action. As long as it is made clear that you are not obligated to test anyone, no-one can sue you for not testing them either. Obviously there would be the usual complaints about bias, cheating, the money not being there, and so on, but I think it would be restricted to whining and not anything legal.

This, actually, is comforting.

 

[Cuddles]

Be interesting to know if you come up with anything. I’m wondering, though, just how formal the challenge would have to be. When two people make a bar bet, there aren’t really major legal ramifications, are there? Up to $5,000 and you’re still in small claims court, at least in my home state according to a quick google. What if we didn’t promote it beyond a kind of bar bet, and just made sure we had a solid written agreement?

Well, I've looked a bit more and it all looks pretty simple really. In the UK, anything like this would be covered by the Gambling Act 2005. As far as I can tell, competitions based on skill rather than chance have pretty much nothing governing them at all. As for accounting, small charities need to file an annual report and that's pretty much it. "Small" here meaning less than £100k income and less than a few million in assets. Also, to be registered as a charity in the UK only requires that the majority of assets are held in the UK or that the majority of trustees are resident here, so it could easily be set up here and still be an international prize. I imagine the situation is the same for most countries.

I've also emailed Randi to see what he thinks of this as an idea.

This, actually, is comforting.

Just to be clear, I don't actually have any inside knowledge of any lawsuits. I just haven't heard of any relating to the challenge.

 

[Cuddles]

I've also emailed Randi to see what he thinks of this as an idea.

Well, I had a reply and he seems to think it's a possibility. So, who would actually be interested in running/helping run a slightly-less-than-million-dollar challenge?

 

[Nucular]

Well, I had a reply and he seems to think it's a possibility. So, who would actually be interested in running/helping run a slightly-less-than-million-dollar challenge?

Well, I won't actually eat my hat, but I might chew it a bit - I'd have thought Randi would have summarily dismissed the idea. But, given that he hasn't, I for one am up for helping run a SLTMDC, as you put it, time permitting (I'm sure that's a caveat for everyone anyway).

But perhaps the most important question of all is... isn't there a cool acronym we could use?

 

[Ryan O'Dine]

Well, I had a reply and he seems to think it's a possibility. So, who would actually be interested in running/helping run a slightly-less-than-million-dollar challenge?

Thanks for doing all the research, and especially communicating with Randi. I’m with Nucular in my surprise, but it’s sure a pleasant one.

As far as contributions, I’m willing to donate a little to the pot, and would love to interact with applicants (I can be ridiculously patient). Whether I could do much more would depend on what's required, but my interest is high.

But perhaps the most important question of all is... isn't there a cool acronym we could use?

I tried to push this in another context, and it may not work here, but how about SANE -- the Skeptical Action NEtwork?



Also, I’m thinking of starting a thread about this in the Gen Skep subforum where it may get a wider audience. If there’s no objection, I’ll start one sometime tomorrow, probably in the AM, EST.

 

[Nucular]

I tried to push this in another context, and it may not work here, but how about SANE -- the Skeptical Action NEtwork?

Yes, I quite like the sound of that - the SANE Prize, or the SANE Challenge

I thought of the Paranormal And Pseudoscience Challenge (the PAP challenge), but that's slightly frivolous.

Or maybe the Extraordinary Claims Testing Organisation Prize (ECTOprize).

But I'm starting to remind myself of my sister's band, of which 'rehearsals' consisted of heated arguments about what they should be called, and no music ever got played

Also, I’m thinking of starting a thread about this in the Gen Skep subforum where it may get a wider audience. If there’s no objection, I’ll start one sometime tomorrow, probably in the AM, EST.

No objections here, that would be useful.

What needs to happen before this works? Presumably final permission won't be forthcoming from Randi until we send a formal proposal.

A mechanism for processing and holding donations would be a start - I have no clue about online moneytaking etc.

An account which produces interest which automatically goes straight onto the prize fund?

Maybe an incentive for donations akin to the 'forum donor' badge given to people who've given money to the forum?

A formal set of rules, plagiarised or otherwise.

Would we simply create an analogue of the JREF Challenge, or would we fiddle with the rules, for instance, the definition of 'testable claim', limits on re-application following failure, etc.?

All topics for the main thread, I suppose.

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

How about a challenge with no prize at all? Then we can listen to all the people who used to say "I don't do it for the money" instead say "Why would I do it for free?"

~~ Paul

 

[arthwollipot]

Can someone post a link here to the main thread so that I don't miss it?

 

[DevilsAdvocate]

Sigh. I think I could win the Million Dollar Challenge with a psychic prediction that the JREF will not exist in 2015. Unfortunately, the prize would no longer be available.

This is the beginning of the end. There is an old saying: “never touch your principal”. It appears JREF is violation this axiom both figuratively and literally.

Another poster in support of the end of the MDC raised another old saying: “money attracts money”. The MDC is one million dollars of money attracting money. Once it is spent—then what?

The BIG QUESTION is what will JREF do with the one million dollars?

I don’t mean to be such a Cassandra, but I’m skeptical that JREF can effectively use the money to substantially influence people to accept scientifically proven facts over woowoo beliefs. Changing a mind is a long slow process of weighing in more convincing evidence for a belief than the weight of a very long held belief. It takes time. You can’t just throw a million bucks at it and expect it to stick.

So what will the JREF do? The only way it works is if JREF spends the money on promotion to get more money for JREF. Otherwise, the money is spent, the MCD is gone, and eventually Randi is gone as well. Then, the JREF is gone.

Will Randi do that and can he pull it off. There were previously big claims from Randi about going after the major charlatans-Sylvia Brown, John Edward, and so on. It didn’t happen.

I suspect the million dollars will be squandered away quietly on short lived events while the JREF dissipates to a little known ghost of the past.

I hope James Randi can prove me wrong.

 

[Imrational]

I've used the $1,000,000 Challenge many times to argue against various woo-meisters. It's a shame to see it end.

To be honest, I always thought it was an insurance policy. Couldn't that be an option? Collect some small amount of funds and use that to bankroll a million dollar insurance policy? It wouldn't carry the weight of actually having the money on hand, but it'd fill the gap of not having anything.

I do not feel anger at Randi or anyone else regarding this. Randi has contributed so much to the cause of Skepticism. It's up to each of us to carry a candle into the dark.

 

[Cuddles]

All topics for the main thread, I suppose.

OK, I started a new thread [url="http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3348872#post3348872]here[/url].

 

[danfcon1]

Does this have to be the end?

Is it be possible to obtain a bond from an insurance company that would guarantee the prize? I seem to remember that Lloyds of London assures against all sorts of loony things from happening, perhaps they could sell JREF a bond at a reasonable price that would permit the challenge to continue, yet allow the capital to be released.

 

[Cuddles]

How about a challenge with no prize at all? Then we can listen to all the people who used to say "I don't do it for the money" instead say "Why would I do it for free?"

~~ Paul

This has been suggested a few times. I think this could work if done by someone as prominent as Randi, since getting him to admit that an ability was in fact real would count as a big victory for most woos, even without money involved. However, it really opens the field for accusations that he is scared of actually putting anything substantial at risk. Since it is easy for someone to just donate the prize to charity, this excuse has never really been a sensible one anyway. Claims that Randi is a fraud or biased or whatever can carry weight with those inclinded to believe that sort of thing, but refusing to help people by taking money away from the evil skeptics and giving it to those in need can't look good in from any point of view. In any case, Randi has made it clear that the money is not the problem, it is the time and resources needed. Having no prize wouldn't help that at all.

Is it be possible to obtain a bond from an insurance company that would guarantee the prize? I seem to remember that Lloyds of London assures against all sorts of loony things from happening, perhaps they could sell JREF a bond at a reasonable price that would permit the challenge to continue, yet allow the capital to be released.

I think this is how The Atheist does his challenge, except with a betting shop rather than an insurance company. I doubt any insurer would touch it, but it's certainly possible as a bet. There are two main problems though. The first is that it is even easier for the woos to claim the money isn't there, since it actually isn't. There is the promise to pay it, but given that they question the legitiamcy of bonds and banking in general, this is unlikely to inspire much confidence. Also, it takes the final descision out of the hands of the challenge and puts it with the bookie. This shouldn't be a problem since legal contracts would be involved, but getting third parties involved will always complicate things.

Secondly, this would cost money. The point of the challenge is that the money is sitting there waiting to be paid out. If no-one wins the challenge, no-one loses anything, apart from expenses. To go the betting or insuring route, money needs to be paid out. Insurance might be a yearly sum, betting might be an amount each test. Either way, you would be paying for the privilege of testing people. If there was a good chance of somenoe winning, this could save money compared with paying it all yourself, but given that the whole point of the challenge is that we don't believe anyone will ever win, this would be a whole lot mor expensive.