waffles June 10, 2014 June 10, 2014 For starters the challenge is not legally enforceable. The application is a contract, man. It's completely legally enforceable within the terms specified, which are actually pretty short and to the point. The application is here if you want to read it yourself, because obviously you haven't. If a successful applicant does pass Randi's tests, Randi can tell the applicant to get lost, because Randi makes them sign a statement that the applicant will not sue Randi or the JREF for whatever reason concerning the challenge. Half true. Here's the quote from the application that I'm assuming you're talking about: 8. By accepting this Challenge, the Applicant waives any and all claims against James Randi, the JREF, the JREF’s employees, officers, directors, and any other person. This waiver includes, but is not limited to, injury, accident, and damage of any kind, including damage and/or loss of a physical, emotional, financial, and/or professional nature. Notwithstanding anything else in this paragraph, should the Claimant pass the Formal Test, the Claimant does not waive any claims against the JREF that might be necessary to enforce payment of the Prize. Look closely at the last sentence. You can still claim for breach of contract if they don't pay, because you don't waive that right. Randi also has exclusive ownership of any evidence of the tests. Again, close, but wrong. 3. The Applicant agrees that all materials and peripheral properties (photographic, recorded, written, etc.) gathered as a result of the test procedure, the protocol, and the actual testing, may be used freely by the JREF. The JREF has rights to the evidence, yes, but they don't own it. You can still do what you want with it. Furthermore, Randi reserves the right to change the agreed upon terms of the test during the test. So, for example, if a hypothetical psychic were able to produce hits at 1/1,000 odds, Randi could raise the bar and ask them to produce 1/1,000,000 results. He can simply keep raising the bar until they fail. Completely wrong. 1. This is the primary and most important of these rules: The Applicant must state clearly, in advance, and the Applicant and the JREF must agree upon, what powers or abilities will be demonstrated, the limits of the proposed demonstration so far as time, location and other variables are concerned, and what will constitute both a positive and a negative result. You agree beforehand on success. You decide for yourself if you believe the million dollar challenge means anything. Personally, I see it as a magician's trick. I'm not even the biggest Randi fan here; I'm not even a big Randi fan. But for fuck's sake, all you seem to be capable of is baseless slander. Can you not read, or are you incapable of substantiating your claims with reading? None of what you said is true, and personally I think that Randi is after the truth; at least, he is very confident in his truth. He won't need to pay out, I reckon, but damn right he would (have to) if anyone really did demonstrate paranormal phenomena.
Anduin June 11, 2014 June 11, 2014 I made a mistake in my first post, "If a successful applicant does pass Randi's tests, Randi can tell the applicant to get lost..." should have been "If a successful applicant does pass Randi's preliminary tests, Randi can tell the applicant to get lost..." Aside from that, I stand by the statements I made. I'll elaborate for you, as you seem to have overlooked the fact that there is more than one test involved in claiming the million dollar challenge. This is key to the argument that the million dollar challenge is not genuine, because nobody has ever passed the preliminary challenge. "1.4 Has anyone ever gotten past the preliminary test? No. Some people use this fact as a reason not to apply – and yet the protocol is never altered once the applicant agrees to it. In fact, we ask the applicant to design the test." Quoted From: http://www.randi.org/site/index.php/1m-challenge/challenge-faq.html Completely wrong. You agree beforehand on success. You agree beforehand on the protocol of the preliminary test. Randi can then renegotiate and change terms as he pleases. The formal test is the only one that enjoys contractual protection. "Any challenge that might risk being demonstrable can be kept out of consideration by having the application rejected. That, as all aspects of the "Challenge" rest firmly in the entirely interested hands of James Randi and his "Educational" Foundation. Another definitive "out" of the kind Randi boasted of having is the possibility that Randi's people can re-negotiate the agreed to protocol "At any time prior to the Formal Test" That would effectively prevent any claims that put Randi in danger from being "Formally" tested. Any "Preliminary Test" that looked like it could destroy Randi's brand could be short-circuited by these kinds of outs." Quoted From: http://zthoughtcriminal.blogspot.com/2013/04/on-randi-prize-10.html This is what I meant when I said Randi has the right to keep raising the bar on the test until a challenger fails. Again, close, but wrong. The JREF has rights to the evidence, yes, but they don't own it. You can still do what you want with it. They have more than just rights to the evidence. Randi and his "Educational" Foundation have the right to lie, misrepresent, distort and slander without the risk being sued. JREF requires applicants to grant the rights to all video, audio and written record of the tests to the JREF, and also to waive any legal claims stemming from the challenge. In other words, anyone who ventures into Randi’s lair, seeking to win $1 million, will find their every word and deed therein subject to Randi’s editing and promotional exploitation, without any legal recourse. I'm not even the biggest Randi fan here; I'm not even a big Randi fan. But for fuck's sake, all you seem to be capable of is baseless slander. Can you not read, or are you incapable of substantiating your claims with reading? None of what you said is true, and personally I think that Randi is after the truth; at least, he is very confident in his truth. He won't need to pay out, I reckon, but damn right he would (have to) if anyone really did demonstrate paranormal phenomena. This is not baseless slander. There is a great deal of material online that points out the various loopholes of Randi's challenge. Next time you reply to somebody I would suggest not snapping at them, although I admit I was at fault here for not specifying that I was talking about the preliminary test. I forget sometimes that few people know that nobody has ever taken the formal test. The preliminary test is the only one that has ever been taken. If somebody did demonstrate paranormal phenomena, he would not need to pay out, because he could either not allow them to be formally tested, or he could set impossibly high odds for the formal test based on the results of any preliminary tests. 8. By accepting this Challenge, the Applicant waives any and all claims against James Randi, the JREF, the JREF’s employees, officers, directors, and any other person. This waiver includes, but is not limited to,injury, accident, and damage of any kind, including damage and/or loss of a physical, emotional,financial, and/or professional nature. Notwithstanding anything else in this paragraph, should the Claimant pass the Formal Test, the Claimant does not waive any claims against the JREF that might be necessary to enforce payment of the prize. Nobody even makes it to the final test unless Randi allows them to be tested. That's the magician's trick here. An applicant can only sue Randi if they pass the formal test. If they are treated unfairly in the preliminary test, and dismissed, they can't sue Randi at all, and Randi can parade edited clips of them around as he pleases. I could go into a lot more detail about the problems with Randi's challenge, but I don't want to bloat my post. More at: http://michaelprescott.freeservers.com/the-challenge.html
waffles June 11, 2014 June 11, 2014 I made a mistake in my first post, "If a successful applicant does pass Randi's tests, Randi can tell the applicant to get lost..." should have been "If a successful applicant does pass Randi's preliminary tests, Randi can tell the applicant to get lost..." Contractually they can't: At that point [after the application is accepted and protocols are agreed on], the Claimant will become eligible for the Preliminary Test, which, if successful, will result in the Formal Test. And I'm unsure about suing for breach of contract there. But I'm not sure it would matter a lot as far as credibility is concerned. Both explained below. You agree beforehand on the protocol of the preliminary test. Randi can then renegotiate and change terms as he pleases. The formal test is the only one that enjoys contractual protection. "Any challenge that might risk being demonstrable can be kept out of consideration by having the application rejected. That, as all aspects of the "Challenge" rest firmly in the entirely interested hands of James Randi and his "Educational" Foundation. Another definitive "out" of the kind Randi boasted of having is the possibility that Randi's people can re-negotiate the agreed to protocol "At any time prior to the Formal Test" That would effectively prevent any claims that put Randi in danger from being "Formally" tested. Any "Preliminary Test" that looked like it could destroy Randi's brand could be short-circuited by these kinds of outs." http://zthoughtcriminal.blogspot.com/2013/04/on-randi-prize-10.html This is what I meant when I said Randi has the right to keep raising the bar on the test until a challenger fails. Well, you're not wrong I suppose. The contract does state that this right only exists "if issues are discovered that would prevent a fair and unbiased test", but then perhaps that's not fantastic assurance for you. It's not inconceivable that the JREF might use such an approach, but I think it's unlikely - I'll explain later on. They have more than just rights to the evidence. Randi and his "Educational" Foundation have the right to lie, misrepresent, distort and slander without the risk being sued. JREF requires applicants to grant the rights to all video, audio and written record of the tests to the JREF, and also to waive any legal claims stemming from the challenge. In other words, anyone who ventures into Randi’s lair, seeking to win $1 million, will find their every word and deed therein subject to Randi’s editing and promotional exploitation, without any legal recourse. I am not sure about that. I don't have an expert opinion on it - maybe you do - but I don't think you can waive all rights to sue under any circumstances. This is certainly true in the UK, and I suspect true in the US as well. Injury through negligence is of little concern I suppose, but since the kind of slander you describe isn't really related to your application I'm not sure that you've waived your rights to sue over that either. This is not baseless slander. There is a great deal of material online that points out the various loopholes of Randi's challenge. Next time you reply to somebody I would suggest not snapping at them, although I admit I was at fault here for not specifying that I was talking about the preliminary test. I forget sometimes that few people know that nobody has ever taken the formal test. Alright, I'm sorry for snapping at you. But no, I do know that no-one's taken the formal test. That's the funny thing about a lot of the arguments presented by you and others - that no-one's passed the preliminary test kind of makes complaints about the formal test halfway invalid (in a practical sense) so far. For example, it might (and I mean might as in I'm not sure but probably) be true that the JREF can effectively stop people who have passed the preliminary test from taking the formal test. But that potential has apparently never been used. And sure, it might deter some people from applying, but then even passing the preliminary test is significant - you are free to publish that you've done so under terms that the JREF has agreed to, and come up with a positive result as agreed to by them. If they then refuse to administer the formal test, or otherwise block it in process (like I was talking about above), then that's a mark against their brand of scepticism. And sure they could construct a propaganda campaign against you for that (although, like I said, I doubt its legality), but it's a fairly incontrovertible truth in itself. You can make your own recordings, of course, and do it the 'honest' way - certainly there are no shortage of Randi-haters who would pounce upon it. I am aware of the anti-Challenge literature and, honestly, I agree with a lot of it. But I don't agree with a lot of what you've said.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.