• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Information on Protocol for Pavel Ziborov Applicant

Thanks GzuzKryzt. I wonder how much different the 11 June proposal was to the earlier January one, and which of Pavel's requests and RemieV's responses to those requests were incorporated.

Norm

You're welcome, mate.

But the point is not "what do [people] think" but: How does Pavel act?



If this were an episode of "24" and I'd be Jack Bauer, I'd now be standing next to Pavel, holding a gun to his head and saying: "Make your simplified protocol proposal NOW!"
Of course I'd never pull the trigger, since I would only be searching for a sincere claimant who could do as he claims to be able to do or the president [read: search for a sincere claimant] dies.
 
Pavel, could you get 16 or more right in this (sketch of a) test:

1. There are two photographs. One shows something (e.g. Statue of Liberty on a bright sunny day), the other shows nothing (e.g. picture of black canvas).
During an open test, when you are allowed to see the photos, you calibrate and see if the conditions are ok.

2. 20 trials, ten minutes per trial, a break for you when needed.

3. You are handed one of the photos in an envelope. It could contain either one. What photo is inside the envelope is decided by the roll of a die beforehand.

4. You try to come with an answer in less than ten minutes per trial. Break whenever you want.

5. Repeat 19 times.

Please simply answer "No" or "Yes".

Pavel performed his own tests and reported an average success rate of 70% (this is from the post you quoted earlier). The answer to your question is in the table I posted just after this post. Using a 70% success rate, the chance that Pavel would get 16 correct is 24%.

Linda
 
The thing I am wondering now Pavel, is do you believe you could hit 17 out of 20? Do you believe it would be any different if it was 170 out of 200? If the answer to both of these questions is no, then the entire process was a waste anyway, you should have known from the beginning that you would have to beat 1000 to 1 odds.

I'm sorry, but it is unreasonable for you to say this. Pavel found that he could hit 14 out of 20. And if he hit 140 out of 200, that would satisfy the 1000 to 1 odds. That was all he asked for - a chance to perform according to his claim, instead of a different claim. What is this obsession with asking him to perform a different claim?

Linda
 
Thanks. The question is not what represents Pavel's interest, but can he meet the standard required, which I infer from your post would be 17 out of 20, unless they agree to 16 out of 20, which they apparently have done in the past.

But that's not what the Million Dollar Challenge is about.

The Million Dollar Challenge does not say, "here's a test and anyone who passes it can win a million dollars." It says, "tell us what you can do and let's see if we can devise a test which demonstrates this ability, that you are unlikely to pass due to chance."

Linda
 
Pavel performed his own tests and reported an average success rate of 70% (this is from the post you quoted earlier). The answer to your question is in the table I posted just after this post. Using a 70% success rate, the chance that Pavel would get 16 correct is 24%.

Linda

I guess incorporating the chances to get 17, 18, 18 and 20 correct would not increase Pavel's theoritical/mathematical/calculational/arithmetical significantly, would they?

Would any of you take a shot at a million dollars with t/m/a/c odds of one in four - drawing spades in a poker deck - especially when you could cover your tracks easily? (Linda, I am totally leaning on your math here.)
 
I must say I find it very telling that Pavel has responded to several people here recently, but completely ignored both my and GzuzKryzt's simply worded questions. I expressed concern very early in this thread that Pavel could only get results that appeared significant to him by complicating the protocol with multiple pictures and multiple envelopes and multiple trials. He has, from the very beginning, avoided all talk about any simple 50/50 style protocol because he knows he can't make that work. I will ask one more time.

Pavel,

Can you, or can you not, if given an envelope containing one of two possible, known photographs, successfully identify the photograph significantly more often than half the time?
 
But that's not what the Million Dollar Challenge is about.

The Million Dollar Challenge does not say, "here's a test and anyone who passes it can win a million dollars." It says, "tell us what you can do and let's see if we can devise a test which demonstrates this ability, that you are unlikely to pass due to chance."
It appears that the trouble with Pavel's claim is that he never had a good idea of what he could do before he made the claim. He did not specify what rate of success he had, and whenever somebody suggested a protocol for him, he changed it.

By now he should have a fairly good idea of what the JREF demands, and if the challenge is extended, he can resubmit his claim in a year, and by this time he can have measured his accuracy with a simple protocol as suggested by people here. He should avoid waffling over how many types of pictures, and if they are photographic prints or any other material.
 
I guess incorporating the chances to get 17, 18, 18 and 20 correct would not increase Pavel's theoritical/mathematical/calculational/arithmetical significantly, would they?

I'm sorry I didn't make this clear. Since Pavel would still pass if the threshold was set at 16 and he actually got 18, the values in the table represent his chance of getting 16 or more correct.

Would any of you take a shot at a million dollars with t/m/a/c odds of one in four - drawing spades in a poker deck - especially when you could cover your tracks easily? (Linda, I am totally leaning on your math here.)

I don't think that question is really fair. If that was my only choice, I might. But that's only if I didn't have to spend hundreds or thousands of dollars on international travel, printing photographs, supplying envelopes, etc. in order to get the chance to draw a spade. If I was only being given one chance at the prize, and the rules indicated that I could set it up so that drawing a spade, heart, or diamond would get me the million, wouldn't you expect me to ask for that set-up instead?

Linda
 
I must say I find it very telling that Pavel has responded to several people here recently, but completely ignored both my and GzuzKryzt's simply worded questions. I expressed concern very early in this thread that Pavel could only get results that appeared significant to him by complicating the protocol with multiple pictures and multiple envelopes and multiple trials. He has, from the very beginning, avoided all talk about any simple 50/50 style protocol because he knows he can't make that work. I will ask one more time.

Pavel,

Can you, or can you not, if given an envelope containing one of two possible, known photographs, successfully identify the photograph significantly more often than half the time?

Pavel's answer to you when you first asked the question was yes. And the last protocol he submitted (the one which was just rejected) was a simple 50/50 protocol.

Linda
 
It appears that the trouble with Pavel's claim is that he never had a good idea of what he could do before he made the claim. He did not specify what rate of success he had, and whenever somebody suggested a protocol for him, he changed it.

I agree that that was how it started. But what was different about Pavel, and what led me to respect his application, was that he took what people said and tested himself in order to determine just what it was that he would be able to do under testing conditions. That is where he came up with a success rate of 70% and what sort of conditions he would need for a test (such as the subject/composition of the photograph). What you call 'waffling' was Pavel trying out the various things that were suggested to see what worked and what didn't. This is exactly what we want claimants to do.

By now he should have a fairly good idea of what the JREF demands, and if the challenge is extended, he can resubmit his claim in a year, and by this time he can have measured his accuracy with a simple protocol as suggested by people here. He should avoid waffling over how many types of pictures, and if they are photographic prints or any other material.

How will that help him? He did all that already and was told that he would have to work with a trial number that is inadequate to allow him to pass. The only way it will help Pavel to re-apply is if Randi changes his mind about the number of trials. How can Pavel make that happen?

Linda
 
But that's not what the Million Dollar Challenge is about.

The Million Dollar Challenge does not say, "here's a test and anyone who passes it can win a million dollars." It says, "tell us what you can do and let's see if we can devise a test which demonstrates this ability, that you are unlikely to pass due to chance."

Linda
Well, yes, but there is no point in designing a test that Pavel can pass if it doesn't exceed the 1000 to 1 threshold. I guess I don't understand why the 17 out of 20 test would not measure his claimed ability. I am sincerely curious as to whether he believes a 170 out of 200 test would do a better job.
 
I agree that that was how it started. But what was different about Pavel, and what led me to respect his application, was that he took what people said and tested himself in order to determine just what it was that he would be able to do under testing conditions. That is where he came up with a success rate of 70% and what sort of conditions he would need for a test (such as the subject/composition of the photograph). What you call 'waffling' was Pavel trying out the various things that were suggested to see what worked and what didn't. This is exactly what we want claimants to do.
But he did all of this self-testing while in the middle of the processing of the claim. I agree that he was being shoe-horned into something that was not what he claimed he could do, but this was because he was imprecise from the beginning. During the process he refined his claim, but he managed to change it so many times that they gave him an ultimatum.

How will that help him? He did all that already and was told that he would have to work with a trial number that is inadequate to allow him to pass. The only way it will help Pavel to re-apply is if Randi changes his mind about the number of trials. How can Pavel make that happen?
I hope that if Pavel makes an accurate claim from the beginning, stating what percentage of success he has, the JREF will also accept an adequate protocol. Historically, they have accepted protocols giving much better odds than the 1000:1 that is generally assumed.
 
Well, yes, but there is no point in designing a test that Pavel can pass if it doesn't exceed the 1000 to 1 threshold. I guess I don't understand why the 17 out of 20 test would not measure his claimed ability.

Because he has measured his success rate as 70% (i.e. 14 out of 20).

I am sincerely curious as to whether he believes a 170 out of 200 test would do a better job.

A 140 out of 200 test would exceed the 1000 to 1 threshold, while a 14 out of 20 test wouldn't. See my first post on this issue here. However, what Pavel suggested was 67 out of 100.

Linda
 
But he did all of this self-testing while in the middle of the processing of the claim. I agree that he was being shoe-horned into something that was not what he claimed he could do, but this was because he was imprecise from the beginning. During the process he refined his claim, but he managed to change it so many times that they gave him an ultimatum.

I agree. It would probably have been better if he had started with a challenge thread for the purposes of coming up with a protocol and submitting his application after he had worked through some of these issues. However, because none of us speak for the JREF, and more specifically, because Alison does not speak for Randi (i.e., it all comes down to him), going through the process of refining a claim and forming an acceptable protocol without involving Randi may end up as a massive waste of time anyway. Come to think of it, isn't that what we usually advise when people show up here with a claim? Send in an application?

I hope that if Pavel makes an accurate claim from the beginning, stating what percentage of success he has, the JREF will also accept an adequate protocol. Historically, they have accepted protocols giving much better odds than the 1000:1 that is generally assumed.

How will that help? Do you think Randi will change his mind in a year and allow for more than 20 trials? And if so, doesn't that suggest that his current stance is capricious rather than well-considered?

Linda
 
Come to think of it, isn't that what we usually advise when people show up here with a claim? Send in an application?
I think that is more of a joke when encountering the really wacky ones. When forumites think they are dealing with a serious person, most will be willing to help constructing a protocol, and we practically always ask the claimants to try out the protocol at home before they submit it.

How will that help? Do you think Randi will change his mind in a year and allow for more than 20 trials? And if so, doesn't that suggest that his current stance is capricious rather than well-considered?
No, you are right. The stance seems rather capricious. On the other hand, we do not know what exchange went ahead of the decision. If Randi heard that the claimant had already negotiated on several different protocols, it might have resulted in his gruff decision.
 
OK.. let me answer some questions for people who just refuse to see the answers in my other posts and in the post along the threads...
And who trying to reason out JREF actions.. instead of see it as it is.. or at least try to see what is the real issue here...they trying get me to something that would help them to reason it out.. well I am not as stupid..
why don't you say simple plane.. Pavel I “hate” you.. that all.. I know it any way..:)


I had to specify my accuracy before...??

According to the challenge rule I did stated my accuracy rate when I made an application other wise it would not be accepted.. and if some one not remember, there was whole fuss from my side, when I asked JREF many times different questions, such as what are the minimum odds needed, what is the minimum success rate etc...i did bugged them as I have tried to make my application as proper as possible to avoid resending it again or when it would come up that I did something not exactly needed in application etc.. If you will spare some time you will find my posts, when I say it that I asked JREF and send a few email and PM to Remiev etc and it was ignored and the answer from Remiev was... I will not read your email and will not answer it until you send application we'll not discuss anything.. any way your application can be do more or less with data and exact and finale one we'll be fixed, (sort of) during the negotiation and when it will come to the final protocol... ( not exact words but I can find and quote it if some one want or you can find it on threads...)

Regarding my “waffling” there were allot of so to say before I send my application as I did my best to try the best option to show my ability.. and if some one remember I proposed 100 pairs test long time a go, and than we just came back to it again.. and 100 test protocol by the way was written with help of the professors that tested me at UNCC Charlotte...

I said from the beginning when it came to time of the test, I said I don't want to be judged by 15 minutes test.. as its not enough to properly perform claimed ability..

YE ye.. you say. Just excuses.. just when I tried to bring point of stress and the limitations that conditions you during performing test. It doesn't really help to make it better as you all understand..
as I have said before even when Piano player knows hit theme perfect and rehearsed all week, when it comes to performing it in front of audience even great player can “screw up” during play.....

Same case here.. in response to the question..
I know my ability more and better than anyone ales and taking all of my tests and experiences in consideration I can say.. 15 minute test with 20 pairs is not enough to perform my ability first of all for the reasons that LINDA perfectly described ( and you can ignore it as much as you like but it does not change the point any way) second of all. With the stress and all the conditions it make it tougher, its one thing to perform test with friend and relaxed state and other when you all “tight up” so to say..

When I done many tests with simple pairs.. I can state and say, its not always go perfectly “stable” for different reasons some of them unknown to me..but the known one I have tried to mutilate..in order to be able to perform out most. And Prove that I do have claimed ability.

The test with 100 pairs would allow me to do so, cause its give me enough time, and more comfortable conditions to perform test.
For example as I have said, its not “working stable” like, some times I get 7-8-9 even 10 right out of set of 10! But some times less and ones I remember during test with academics.. I managed ( don't know how) to be right only 3! times out of 10 when even by chance I were suppose to get minimum 5! Thanks to professors that did not judged me by the test when I got only 3 out of 10..! They concluded it after summing all the tests that we had, where still my average result was much more that expected by chance only!

Same here, lets say I agree to JREF “ fair offer”during test let say first set of 10 I would get only 3 right.. Am I dilute freak? And what do you say if next set of 10 I will get let say 9 correct? And if I agree to their protocol than with results 12 correct I will fail and will be officially ridiculed! That what they want..

That why even if during sets of 10 some of the results might be sort of average and even lower than expected by chance, still summing up the results I will perform and prove claimed by me ability!
Do I have a point??

I think that is the main reason why JREF do not want to test me that way ( though I have agreed to the most of there requests sometimes even against my own interest but just to move on the protocol).

Cause during 100 pair tests, 10 sets of 10 I will perform results that will make everyone who really can count and interested in establishing the truth, to wonder whether the guy (me) really have the ability and worth taking seriously! That the problem! Disagree?

That's why JREF don't agree that my protocol is reasonable! because it is... and in any case they have the way to defend themselves, even if I would perform much higher, they would say..well.. ye.. looks like more then average... but in the end of the day we are challenge not a scientists.. and if there is any scientists who interested they welcome to test him... Good luck..

Last thing.. Linda is right.. challenge at least as it presented officially, is not about here is the TEST, you pass it you win.. we not interested in any of your ways.
But in reality it looks like.. when Rendi says.. ( not exact words) like.. you say you can play violin.. great.. come and show it to us.. you welcome if you will we'll give you 1.000.000$... and when person applied and all moving on “he says”.... But we don't tell you, that you cant play as you usually do, we have to tight up your hands and you cant stand you have to sit etc... Ah.. you cant play ti that way?? Ok, than you just fake.. self deluted psycho... good bye! Who's next...??

I think I clearly ones again reasonably answered the questions and explained my point!

As simple as that!
 
Last edited:
pavel, your long post gives us some information about why you wanted things a certain way, but it doesn't give us any real information about the actual dialog that went on between you and the JREF.

I understand Linda's point just fine, and I agree completely. A 20-trial test is insufficient to differentiate between random chance and the advantage you claim. But I have no insight as to the path taken by you and the JREF to get to the square on which you now stand.

Would you be willing to share some details? And, by the way, I am not interested in what you think was meant, only in what was actually said or written.
 
pavel, your long post gives us some information about why you wanted things a certain way, but it doesn't give us any real information about the actual dialog that went on between you and the JREF.

I understand Linda's point just fine, and I agree completely. A 20-trial test is insufficient to differentiate between random chance and the advantage you claim. But I have no insight as to the path taken by you and the JREF to get to the square on which you now stand.

Would you be willing to share some details? And, by the way, I am not interested in what you think was meant, only in what was actually said or written.

I never said what I think they meant!
What information you want to know..? the last protocol that was sent to JREF after taking to consideration their suggestions and objection..?? Here it is..


PAVEL ZIBOROV, Clairvoyant
preliminary protocol, May 15, 2009

Materials Required

200 size 10 manila envelopes, (no internal lining)

200 size 7 ¾ plain paper envelopes, (no internal lining), sufficiently opaque so as to satisfy JREF that Ziborov cannot see the contents.

20 4x6 inch photographs supplied by Ziborov as either physical photographs or electronic files, each copied 10 times for a total of 200 photographs (reproduced photographs, not photocopies) (One additional pair, chosen randomly by JREF, reproduced for open test.)

100 Post-It notes

100 paper clips

10 Post-It notes of a different color from the 100 noted above

Two 6' folding tables, chair for Ziborov, chair(s) for testers as desired

2 pieces of masking tape

Magic Marker

Clipboard, with blank cover sheet

List of pairs

Pen

2 Walkie-talkies

A digital clock

A mask

Ear plugs

Two bottles of water

Two boxes (not transparent)

OPEN TEST MATERIALS: 1 pair of photographs selected at random double enveloped with two Post-It notes in a third color affixed to the exterior of each envelope correctly indicating which photograph is inside each

Stipulations

No speaking except as noted within the test.
No walkie-talkies, aside from those used by testers, within the test.
No cameras, camcorders, camera-phones, etc. aside from those used by the JREF or testers within the test.
No sleight-of-hand, trickery, or cheating.
No manipulation of the envelopes besides as is outlined in the testing protocol.

If any of the above listed are violated, or if it is determined the subject has attempted to tilt the results in his favor due to trickery of any kind, the test will be halted immediately and considered a failure.

If there is a setup or technological problem, or if for any reason the test must be halted due to extenuating circumstances rather than trickery, the test may be conducted at a future date. Claimant will bear the cost of additional runs of the test.

Failure of the test will not constitute reason for a re-test. The claimant may re-apply one year after the date of the original test in the case of failure.

Stipulations Made by Claimant

Pavel may put on and take off the eye mask and ear plugs at his discretion.

No talking or any kind of distraction with light or sound or any other ways of interruption during the test except as specified within the protocol. No cell phone use or text messaging will be allowed during the test. No photography during the test will be allowed. (Except for video taping by JREF and Ziborov, if he wishes.) No substance with a strong odor will be allowed in the room same, including perfume. No photos or pictures of any kind will be permitted in the room nor visible from the test room, except for those used in the test. Subject to mutual agreement and the convenience of both parties, an attempt will be made to conduct the test during good weather and beginning in the afternoon. JREF party may bring up to four observers.

Ziborov may bring one observer plus one further person to videotape the procedure. Neither will be permitted to speak. They will not be permitted to move. They will either be in a cordoned area or in chairs. If they need a break, they will be permitted to raise their hands at which point the testers will wait for the current pair to be complete and then allow his Ziborov’s observers to leave. The test will halt at that time. Breaks by Ziborov’s observers will be deducted from Ziborov’s time limit. If Ziborov’s observers speak, they will be warned once. If they speak a second time, the test will be halted and considered a failure.

All parties will attempt to maintain a quiet and peaceful atmosphere.

Before the test begins, Pavel will affirm that the environmental conditions are satisfactory. Time keeping will then begin. When suitably comfortable and relaxed, Pavel will ask for the first pair.

During the test any person present may raise his or her hand to inform the others of suspicious behavior of anyone in the room. However, no shouting or interruptions will be allowed during the process of identifying the photo. If there are any doubts or suspicions, the person shall raise his/her hand silently and inform the others after Pavel has finished with identification of the current pair and announced his answer.

Testing Protocol

In advance of the test, JREF staff or volunteer testers chosen by the JREF will reproduce the twenty photographs provided by Pavel ten times each, for a total of 200 photographs, which will be paired in accordance with Ziborov's wishes (to be determined), for a total of 100 pairs of photographs.

The photographs will be sealed inside size 7 ¾ envelopes. The size 7 ¾ envelopes will then be sealed inside size 10 envelopes.

The pair of associated photographs inside the double-envelopes will be paper clipped together, and a Post-It note will be affixed to the exterior of the envelope, identifying the two photographs. The order of identification will always be the same, such that a lamppost and the moon would always be identified as “lamppost/moon” and never “moon/lamppost,” regardless of the order of the envelopes, which should be randomly shuffled (within their pair) before being paper clipped by another party who is not aware of which envelope contains which photo.

The paper clipped pairs of envelopes will then be arranged in sets of ten, such that each set of ten contains all twenty photographs, and will result in ten sets of ten pairs of photographs.

The ten sets of paper clipped and double enveloped pairs of photographs will be arranged on one 6' folding table side by side, and the ten Post-It notes of a different color from the ones affixed to the envelope will be used to note the set number, 1-10.

At the end of the table, a clipboard with a list of all photo pairs will be placed, with a pen attached. Beside this, a digital clock with numbers large enough to be read at a distance of twelve feet will be placed for time-keeping purposes.

A second table (and chair) will be provided for Ziborov to sit at. The bottles of water will be placed on this table for Ziborov to consume as he wishes.

The following protocol requires four JREF staff members or volunteer testers at a minimum. One will sit near, but at least three feet away from, Ziborov for the duration of the test. The another will move back and forth between the envelopes and Ziborov. The remaining two will be relief testers, and will be used in the case that JREF Staff or volunteer testers request a break. Their specific functions will be detailed below.

At the time of the test, Ziborov will enter the testing room. The moment he enters the room, the eight hour time limit will begin counting down. He will not be permitted to approach the table where the sets of photographs are, and must always remain at least five feet away from the table. The five foot mark will be indicated by a piece of masking tape affixed to the floor.

OPEN TEST: (The following paragraph indicates an open test, wherein Ziborov will ensure his abilities are working using envelopes he knows the contents of. The protocol for an open test differs from the rest of the testing, and should be treated as a separate entity.)

Ziborov will, when he indicates he is ready, be handed the double-enveloped photocopied photographs with Post-It notes of a third color correctly identifying the contents of the envelopes by a relief tester before the test begins to ensure that his abilities are working. He will be permitted to handle these two envelopes in any way he wishes, including opening them and examining the photographs. After he has ensured his abilities are working, the relief tester will exit the room with the envelopes, Post-Its, and photographs from the open test and dispose of them by tearing them in half outside the testing room.

JREF staff or a volunteer tester will remove the first set of ten pairs of photographs from the table, and place each paper clipped pair side-by-side on the floor no less than three feet from Ziborov. The three foot mark from Ziborov will be indicated by a piece of masking tape affixed to the floor.

Ziborov may point to the pair he wishes to work with.

JREF Staff or the volunteer tester will remove the Post-It note from the exterior of the chosen pair and announce aloud which two photos are contained inside the envelopes. The tester will read from the Post-It note, in the order the photos are identified there.

JREF Staff or the volunteer tester will place the Post-It note in the first box on the floor where the pair was sitting, remove the paper clip from the envelopes, place the paper clip on top of the Post-It note, and approach Ziborov with the double enveloped photos.

Ziborov may hold the envelopes. Flip the envelope in his hands during identifying the content. He can not examine the envelopes, attempt to see through them, or open them. He can not bend them. He can not mark them.

Ziborov will decide which photo one of the envelopes contains. He will indicate which he wishes to identify by placing the one he does not wish to identify on the floor. Only after the envelope he does not wish to work with is on the floor will he be permitted to announce what he believes the content of the other envelope is. He must identify the photograph using a single word decided upon in advance. He cannot, for example, say “light” for “lamppost” if the descriptor for the photograph has already been decided to be “lamppost.”

After the announcement is made by Ziborov, the first JREF staff will take the unused envelope back to the three foot mark and re-affix the Post-It note to the exterior of the unused envelope. They will use the Magic Marker to mark through the selection on the Post-It note that Ziborov announced, and place the envelope in the second box at the three foot mark.

At the time that the first JREF staff member or volunteer tester is placing the unused envelope in the box, the second JREF staff member or volunteer tester will open the envelope selected by Ziborov and check its contents. The second JREF staff member will announce “yes” to indicate a hit or “no” to indicate a miss.

The first JREF staff member or volunteer tester will note on the clipboarded list whether or not Ziborov's selection was correct by writing either “Y” for a hit or “N” for a miss next to the pair on the list. The JREF staff member will hold the clipboard so that Ziborov cannot see the marks when writing, and use the blank cover sheet to cover the record at other times.

All opened envelopes will remain behind Ziborov (assuming he is facing the table). All unopened envelopes will be immediately returned to an area beyond the three foot mark.

Ziborov may say “Pass” if he is unable to identify one of the photos of a pair. The pair will at that time be paper clipped back together, the Post-It note will be re-affixed to the exterior, and the pair will be returned to its place at the three foot mark.

Ziborov will select the next pair, and the process will be repeated until all pairs of the set of ten have been used.

At this time, JREF Staff or a volunteer tester will stack the remaining ten unopened envelopes with Post-It notes affixed to each with the selection Ziborov made for each pair marked out to the table in the corresponding area for the set number.

JREF Staff will bring forward the next set, in accordance with the Post-It note number affixed to the table, to the three foot mark and repeat the process until all ten sets have been identified.

Ziborov may take as much time as he wishes to identify the photograph in one of the envelopes so long as he follows the requirements for their handling. However, Ziborov's test can total no more than eight hours. If the test goes over the eight hour time limit, it will be halted and considered a failure.

At any point between pairs, Ziborov may request a break. He will do so by saying the word “Break.” Any time Ziborov takes for a break will be deducted from the eight hour time limit. JREF Staff or volunteer testers may break at the same time as Ziborov so long as at least one tester remains in the testing room during the break to ensure all testing materials remain as placed when Ziborov exited the room.

JREF Staff or volunteer testers may also request a break, but may only do so between sets of ten. JREF Staff or volunteer testers may not simply leave the room. They must speak into the walkie talkie issued to them in the following manner “Testing group one to testing group two, break request.” The relief testers will then reply in the following manner, “10-4,” if they are on their way, “10-9” to request that the group repeat their statement because it was unclear, or “10-6” to indicate testing group one should stand by unless it is urgent. If it is an urgent request, testing group one can respond “9-1-1.” If testing group one receives the message and is okay with it, they should respond “10-4.”

If sixty-seven or more of Ziborov's announced responses match the photographs within his chosen envelopes, the test will be considered a success and Ziborov will pass to the final Challenge. However, Ziborov will not be announced as the winner even in the case of getting sixty-seven or more correct responses until all the unopened envelopes on the table have been opened by JREF staff or volunteer testers (in the presence of Ziborov, if he so chooses) and it is confirmed, using the marked-out Post-It notes, that the remaining selection written on the Post-It note indicates the photograph sealed inside the remaining envelope from the pair. This will be done at the end of the eight-hour period, and will not deduct from Ziborov's eight hour limit. In the event an error is found, a re-test will be scheduled (one time only, and at Ziborov’s expense.)

Time required: No more than eight and a half hours.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

p.s. To some one who will say... YE very complicated protocol..but it describes every single stepp of everyone and MOST of the "complication" accumulated be cause of JREFs wishes and suggestions! Which i had to accept and same time make sure its not preventing me from wining, like when they said I cant have water on the table and have to ask every time for a brake to have a sip of water and that time will not be deducted from the 8.5 hours test limits... I had to ask for water on the table, cause with the stress as normal human I will be thirsty more than usual and will need drink often, not to have my mouth dry and be uncomfortable because of it! Original one was much easy!
 
Last edited:
1,182 words

Pavel, I asked for a simple "No" or "Yes". Repeating your points - some valid, some not - was not what I asked for. It adds to the evidence that you are unable or unwilling to have a simple concise discussion, which does not help your point at all.

This kind of answer is exactly what I earlier referred to as "calculated moves":

Firstly, for the untrained eye, for the less patient observer, you seem to answer the question because
a) you say so at the beginning of your post and
b) meander around and thus open your answer to a variety of interpretations.

Secondly, you paint yourself in the corner: The little guy battling the mighty JREF. Jumped on as a criminal, as you said earlier.
That creates the illusion of the JREF solely treating you unfair and unjust, when it usually takes two to tango and both sides in this case did some screwing of the pooch.

Thirdly, you still do not abandon your rejected test proposal, which essentially says "I can't perform to the according to the rules." One might also read it as "I won't perform to the according to the rules."

Fourthly, your point greatly relies on your word only. We have neither seen the test set-up from your test at UNC, nor have we seen the exact results. It is of course not your duty to reproduce it here. It simply puts your argumentation on shaky ground.

And fifthly, the pesky inquirer is usually perceived as the bad guy, because he pesters the [insert metaphor] claimant, when it is really the fault of said claimant if he is unable - or unwilling - to answer a simple question with a simple answer.
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom