Navigate the JREF Website Join Now
James Randi Educational Foundation

JREF Forums Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Registration is free! Calendar Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Search Home  
JREF Forums : Powered by vBulletin version 2.3.5 JREF Forums > JREF Topics > ***Million Dollar Challenge*** > $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Pages (6): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6]   Last Thread   Next Thread
Author
Thread Post New Thread    Post A Reply
AmateurScientist
JREF Kid

Registered: Dec 2001
Location:
Posts: 1676

quote:
Originally posted by Metullus


Unless JREF will cover the taxes for me.



Can't do it. The amount of the tax they pay for you counts as income to you. You then have to pay tax on that amount too.

AS

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 09:40 AM
AmateurScientist is offline Click Here to See the Profile for AmateurScientist Click here to Send AmateurScientist a Private Message Find more posts by AmateurScientist Add AmateurScientist to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
SwissSkeptic
Scholar

Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Land of cheese and skis
Posts: 58

Originally posted by Beth Clarkson

"Anyone who applies is considered to be either delusional or a fraud and it treated as such - not a pleasant experience."

Beth,
from reading through the thread about your claim I got the impression that most posters answered you in a polite way and were sincerely trying to be helpful. I honestly don't think people tried to ridicule you at all.
But how do you expect people here to react to somebody displaying a) malicious intent or b) a vast amount of stupidity? (As I don't see any other reasons for Seans behavior - jmercer summarised it neatly a couple of pages ago)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 09:56 AM
SwissSkeptic is offline Click Here to See the Profile for SwissSkeptic Click here to Send SwissSkeptic a Private Message Find more posts by SwissSkeptic Add SwissSkeptic to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jmercer
Muse

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 580

quote:
Originally posted by Beth Clarkson
People here wonder why JREF gets so few serious claimants. I think this quote sums it up nicely. This attitude is pervasive in JREF. Anyone who applies is considered to be either delusional or a fraud and it treated as such - not a pleasant experience. Brusqueness, which is often perceived as rudeness, is typical. People with high sensitivity to the emotions of others (which is typical of those who are earnestly exploring psychic phenomena) are repelled by such treatment and often go away rather than continue the process. I know, via private correspondence, of at least one claimant who felt that way and withdrew her claim.



Beth - you've made an outright statement that JREF gets very few "serious claimants" because of the way claimants are treated.

Good - that's a point that can be debated, at least to some extent. Unfortunately, you've provided neither context nor evidence to support your claim (other than a single anecdote), so you need to clarify the basis for your assertion.

Are you claiming that Kramer's emails are the source of your stated issue? If so, please go through the 60-plus threads in the Challenges section and identify which threads support your position so we can have a meaningful discussion.

If you're claiming it's the forum posts, your argument is utterly without merit . Claimants don't even have to look at the forums, let alone participate in them. The only correspondence they need to deal with are between themselves and JREF. They can completely ignore our existence if they wish, still be tested, and still win 1,000,000. (Not to mention fame, glory, and residuals from their subsequent book publishings and TV appearances, and the worship & thanks of psychic believers everywhere!)

Regarding your comment about "high sensitivity to the emotions of others" as a justification for avoiding proving their claims... your assertion is that we don't get serious claimants at all due to this sensitivity. That means that these "serious claimants" are avoiding making a claim in anticipation of being offended!

Now that's sensitive.

__________________
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke

"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth.... For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it." - Patrick Henry

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 10:39 AM
jmercer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jmercer Click here to Send jmercer a Private Message Find more posts by jmercer Add jmercer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jmercer
Muse

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 580

quote:
Originally posted by SwissSkeptic
Originally posted by Beth Clarkson

"Anyone who applies is considered to be either delusional or a fraud and it treated as such - not a pleasant experience."

Beth,
from reading through the thread about your claim I got the impression that most posters answered you in a polite way and were sincerely trying to be helpful. I honestly don't think people tried to ridicule you at all.
But how do you expect people here to react to somebody displaying a) malicious intent or b) a vast amount of stupidity? (As I don't see any other reasons for Seans behavior - jmercer summarised it neatly a couple of pages ago)



Welcome to the forums!

__________________
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke

"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth.... For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it." - Patrick Henry

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 10:40 AM
jmercer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jmercer Click here to Send jmercer a Private Message Find more posts by jmercer Add jmercer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
athon
Graduate Poster

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: agar plate no. 9
Posts: 1459

Re: Funny...

quote:
Originally posted by KRAMER
Does this sound fair, and, more importantly, POLITE?




My final little say here; you have retained my complete respect through all of this, Kramer. You examined what's happened, taken everything into account and evaluated how you'll do things again in the future. That's all anybody can do.

The JREF is only stronger for it. This is one of those few threads where an argument has arisen and all parties have benefited from it (well, maybe not necessarily Sean...but it's still a win-win situation).

Athon

__________________
"There is a mask of theory over the face of nature." William Whewell

"Fact I know; and Law I know; but what is this Neccessity, save an empty shadow of my own mind's throwing?" - T.H. Huxley, 'On the Basis of Physical Life', (1870)

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 10:48 AM
athon is offline Click Here to See the Profile for athon Click here to Send athon a Private Message Find more posts by athon Add athon to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
SwissSkeptic
Scholar

Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Land of cheese and skis
Posts: 58

quote:
Originally posted by jmercer
Welcome to the forums!


Thanks for the welcome

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 10:57 AM
SwissSkeptic is offline Click Here to See the Profile for SwissSkeptic Click here to Send SwissSkeptic a Private Message Find more posts by SwissSkeptic Add SwissSkeptic to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Beth Clarkson
Scholar

Registered: Dec 2004
Location:
Posts: 96

quote:
Originally posted by SwissSkeptic
Originally posted by Beth Clarkson

"Anyone who applies is considered to be either delusional or a fraud and it treated as such - not a pleasant experience."

Beth,
from reading through the thread about your claim I got the impression that most posters answered you in a polite way and were sincerely trying to be helpful. I honestly don't think people tried to ridicule you at all.
But how do you expect people here to react to somebody displaying a) malicious intent or b) a vast amount of stupidity? (As I don't see any other reasons for Seans behavior - jmercer summarised it neatly a couple of pages ago)



Thank you sir. For the most part, people have been quite polite and helpful to me. That's true, btw, not just on this forum, but throughout my life. Being polite to others will generally elicite polite behavior back. Even when it doesn't, I strive to remain civil rather than responding in kind. Everyone loses his or her cool occasionally, and responding politely allows them a chance to regain it, while responding in kind generally degrades the interaction irrepairably.

However, people who have been quite reasonable in their initial inquiries have been treated with less than the most civil of responses. Sean is one example. The snow in July guy is another. The claimant I have corresponded with privately is a third. I don't feel that any of them exhibited a malicious intent or a vast amount of stupidity (though I do realize others may disagree on that point )

Now, Kramer, Randi and the entire staff of JREF is free to treat any inquiries of any sort in any manner they wish. It's their challenge and their money. But for those who wonder why they don't see more challenge applications from people who are neither frauds nor seriously mentally ill, I think that is a major contributing cause. Treating everyone with the assumption that they they are one or the other (you might note that Kramer came right out and said that I was delusional) is going to repell a lot of the potential claimants who are neither, both from applying in the first place and from working with JREF to design a mutually acceptable test protocol after they've applied.

Now, if that's not a concern to JREF, that's okay. As I said, it's their challenge; they can run it as they see fit. But if they want more applications from claimants who are neither mentally ill or fraudulant...well, enough has already been said in both this thread and one on the california weatherman regarding that.

Beth

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 11:09 AM
Beth Clarkson is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Beth Clarkson Click here to Send Beth Clarkson a Private Message Find more posts by Beth Clarkson Add Beth Clarkson to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Beth Clarkson
Scholar

Registered: Dec 2004
Location:
Posts: 96

[QUOTE]Originally posted by jmercer
Beth - you've made an outright statement that JREF gets very few "serious claimants" because of the way claimants are treated.

I didn't intend that to come across as a debateable point. I haven't conducted a scientific survey, attempted to measure all posted correspondence regarding 'civility and tone' nor have I corresponded with legions of potential applicants to discover why they don't apply. I've just formed an opinion based on my own experiences and the correspondence that's been posted between JREF and claimants in this section of the forum. If you don't agree, that's okay.

Beth

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 11:23 AM
Beth Clarkson is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Beth Clarkson Click here to Send Beth Clarkson a Private Message Find more posts by Beth Clarkson Add Beth Clarkson to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
SwissSkeptic
Scholar

Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Land of cheese and skis
Posts: 58

quote:
Originally posted by Beth Clarkson
Thank you sir. For the most part, people have been quite polite and helpful to me. That's true, btw, not just on this forum, but throughout my life. Being polite to others will generally elicite polite behavior back. Even when it doesn't, I strive to remain civil rather than responding in kind. Everyone loses his or her cool occasionally, and responding politely allows them a chance to regain it, while responding in kind generally degrades the interaction irrepairably.

However, people who have been quite reasonable in their initial inquiries have been treated with less than the most civil of responses. Sean is one example. The snow in July guy is another. The claimant I have corresponded with privately is a third. I don't feel that any of them exhibited a malicious intent or a vast amount of stupidity (though I do realize others may disagree on that point )

Now, Kramer, Randi and the entire staff of JREF is free to treat any inquiries of any sort in any manner they wish. It's their challenge and their money. But for those who wonder why they don't see more challenge applications from people who are neither frauds nor seriously mentally ill, I think that is a major contributing cause. Treating everyone with the assumption that they they are one or the other (you might note that Kramer came right out and said that I was delusional) is going to repell a lot of the potential claimants who are neither, both from applying in the first place and from working with JREF to design a mutually acceptable test protocol after they've applied.

Now, if that's not a concern to JREF, that's okay. As I said, it's their challenge; they can run it as they see fit. But if they want more applications from claimants who are neither mentally ill or fraudulant...well, enough has already been said in both this thread and one on the california weatherman regarding that.

Beth



*emphasis mine*

I agree with most of what you're saying but the way Sean acted doesn't strike me as very polite. He received legal verification just after inquiring, what he did after that seems like harassment to me. But there's really no point in discussing this as everything has already been said. Furthermore I think KRAMER made it quite clear that being rude to potential applicants is not part of JREF policy and that they're taking the concerns you (and others) stated very seriously. He even made a public apology to Sean, which -in my opinion- takes a lot of integrity to do.

edit: spelling

Last edited by SwissSkeptic on 02-11-2005 at 12:38 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 11:41 AM
SwissSkeptic is offline Click Here to See the Profile for SwissSkeptic Click here to Send SwissSkeptic a Private Message Find more posts by SwissSkeptic Add SwissSkeptic to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jmercer
Muse

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 580

quote:
Originally posted by Beth Clarkson
quote:
Originally posted by jmercer
Beth - you've made an outright statement that JREF gets very few "serious claimants" because of the way claimants are treated. [/B]


I didn't intend that to come across as a debateable point. I haven't conducted a scientific survey, attempted to measure all posted correspondence regarding 'civility and tone' nor have I corresponded with legions of potential applicants to discover why they don't apply. I've just formed an opinion based on my own experiences and the correspondence that's been posted between JREF and claimants in this section of the forum. If you don't agree, that's okay.

Beth



Fair enough. I'll drop the issue, since it's just an opinion rather than an assertion. Everyone's entitled to their opinions.

I do have a suggestion for you, in all seriousness. I can understand why you would have this perception given the examples you've cited. I probably would have too - except when I started in the forums I started going through the Challenge Applications threads out of curiosity.

Once I got a decent cross-section of exchanges between Kramer and applicants (setting aside Kramer's private comments in the threads themselves), I came to the conclusion that most would-be applicants are treated courteously until it becomes apparent that they have reached the point where they should have already put in their application. Most of the time, Kramer simply cuts off the conversation with an 'apply or leave us alone' comment of some type.

Fairly frequently, people are informed in the kindest way that their claim will not be processed, the reason for the decision, and the suggestion that they seek professional help. This is a bit controversial in the sense that it may or may not be JREF's place to suggest such a thing; but there's no question that continuing the process with some people would be a disservice to them.

Take a look at the threads. You may find yourself adjusting your viewpoint to some degree.

__________________
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke

"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth.... For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it." - Patrick Henry

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 12:02 PM
jmercer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jmercer Click here to Send jmercer a Private Message Find more posts by jmercer Add jmercer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Metullus
Scholar

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: The Redwoods, Nor Cal
Posts: 76

Re: Re: Much ado about, well, not much...

quote:
Originally posted by DevilsAdvocate
Yes. There is something. Or at least there was. In the guy's very first communication he said:

That would allow for a logical assumption that the successful claimant will get bonds. The questionable sentence doesn't exactly say that, but you could interpret the sentence to mean "The prize is bonds". It is just not a very clear sentence. It is missing some implied words: "The surety for the prize...", "The money is held...", etc. Not a big deal. It should have been simply cleared up a long time ago. And JREF should have recoginzed the little problem of the wording and fixed it and moved on.



That is Sean's version of what the website says. I think that the actual challange language is a lot clearer:

“…James Randi Educational Foundation will pay to the claimant the remainder of the reward, for a total of US$1,000,000. One million dollars in negotiable bonds is held by an investment firm in New York, in the "James Randi Educational Foundation Prize Account" as surety for the prize funds. Validation of this account and its current status may be obtained by contacting the Foundation by telephone, fax, or e-mail.”

The meaning is clear:

1. Prize is $1,000,000.00 United States Dollars.
2. One million dollars in negotiable bonds is held as surety for the prize funds.

It does not say that the prize money is in the form of bonds, neither does it say that the prize money is being held in the form of bonds; in fact, it does not even say that the bonds will be the source of the prize money. It says that bonds are held as surety for the prize funds. A guarantee that the funds will be available if the prize is claimed, no more – no less.

If the second sentence read ‘Two million pounds of Polish sausage is being stored in a freezer in Krakow, Poland, in the “James Randi Education Foundation Prize Account”…’ would anyone argue that the language even implies that payment would be in the form of Polish sausage?

Were I to have responded to Sean’s initial query I too would have said that the precise nature of the bonds are not relevant – bear in mind that Sean’s first missive made no mention of his belief that the bonds were the prize. Only later does it become apparent that he was operating under such a misapprehension.

While I would hope that my correspondence would be less acerbic than was Kramer’s, I could not guarantee it would be so; Kramer deals with pen pals that go out of their way to misinterpret the most simple sentence every day, all day. In this case, I think the language is clear and I would wager that Kramer is (and was) of the same opinion.

Sean’s initial misunderstanding may well have been genuine, but it is not, I think, the fault of the JREF language. Frankly, I found some of Sean’s questions just a little bit unnecessarily argumentative, particularly when he suggested a payoff over 40 years as being a concern. That is tantamount to calling James Randi a fraud and JREF’s challenge a scam – at that point I would certainly have taken umbrage.

Actually, I think that that with which we are dealing here is what Spider Robinson calls “rupture” – two people using similar words, but speaking two very different languages.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 12:49 PM
Metullus is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Metullus Click here to Send Metullus a Private Message Find more posts by Metullus Add Metullus to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
IXP
Thinker

Registered: Oct 2004
Location: The most liberal state in the U.S. and proud of it!
Posts: 137

Re: Re: Re: Much ado about, well, not much...

quote:
Originally posted by Metullus
That is Sean's version of what the website says.


The line Sean originally quoted that caused the confusion was a direct quote from the JREF site, from the introduction provided under the link to the challenge. This line has subsequently been removed because it DID imply (incorrectly) that the bonds were the prize.

This entire ordeal was caused by two misunderstandings:

Sean mistakenly thought that the bonds would be awarded as the prize. His question did not directly address that, but was rather about the nature of the bonds, based on his misconception.

Randi and Kramer's early responses did not clarify this misconception. In fact, Randi's second response "immediately convertible into money" seems to confirm it. I believe they missed the fact that Sean misundertood how the prize would be awared. If they had understood this and corrected it, I suspect Sean would have gone away satisfied, and we would now be having a lot of fun proposing protocols for fire-ball throwing tests.

__________________
"When reason sleeps, monsters are produced" -- Goya, title of etching that is my avatar

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 01:48 PM
IXP is offline Click Here to See the Profile for IXP Find more posts by IXP Add IXP to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Beth Clarkson
Scholar

Registered: Dec 2004
Location:
Posts: 96

Take a look at the threads. You may find yourself adjusting your viewpoint to some degree. [/QUOTE]

Thank you for the suggestions, but I've already read through a good deal of the correspondence posted, not just the ones I mentioned. Not all, and primarily the more recent ones, but a large enough sample to capture the general tone that comes through. (I'll probably read more as I have time. They are rather interesting.)

I agree, Kramer has been reasonable and polite in the beginning of most such conversations. However, even when he starts out politely, the general tone and civility seem to degenerate rather quickly and frequently in my opinion. Perhaps reasonably so, perhaps not; when the point of dropping civility ought to be reached has been debated here at length already.

Regarding the additional comments that he posts. Even if not part of the actual correspondence, they might well be read by the claimants and other potential claimants. I'm certainly not the only one to have done so. Thus, I do include those in my evaluation of how JREF treats claimants. To post some of the comments I've seen posted here is, well, impolite in my opinion. It doesn't reflect well on JREF and I think it would discourage people from applying. I'm not including posts made by other participants in the forum in my assessment as they are not representatives of JREF.

Now, they aren't running JREF for my benefit; he can post whatever he likes. But I do think that those who have expressed concern about the image that it projects have a valid point. I, and presumably others, will base our opinion of JREF on the content of such correspondence and posts.

Beth

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 02:16 PM
Beth Clarkson is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Beth Clarkson Click here to Send Beth Clarkson a Private Message Find more posts by Beth Clarkson Add Beth Clarkson to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Beth Clarkson
Scholar

Registered: Dec 2004
Location:
Posts: 96

Take a look at the threads. You may find yourself adjusting your viewpoint to some degree. [/QUOTE]

Thank you for the suggestions, but I've already read through a good deal of the correspondence posted, not just the ones I mentioned. Not all, and primarily the more recent ones, but a large enough sample to capture the general tone that comes through. (I'll probably read more as I have time. They are rather interesting.)

I agree, Kramer has been reasonable and polite in the beginning of most such conversations. However, even when he starts out politely, the general tone and civility seem to degenerate rather quickly and frequently in my opinion. Perhaps reasonably so, perhaps not; when the point of dropping civility ought to be reached has been debated here at length already.

Regarding the additional comments that he posts. Even if not part of the actual correspondence, they might well be read by the claimants and other potential claimants. I'm certainly not the only one to have done so. Thus, I do include those in my evaluation of how JREF treats claimants. To post some of the comments I've seen posted here is, well, impolite in my opinion. It doesn't reflect well on JREF and I think it would discourage people from applying. I'm not including posts made by other participants in the forum in my assessment as they are not representatives of JREF.

Now, they aren't running JREF for my benefit; he can post whatever he likes. But I do think that those who have expressed concern about the image that it projects have a valid point. I, and presumably others, will base our opinion of JREF on the content of such correspondence and posts.

Beth

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 02:26 PM
Beth Clarkson is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Beth Clarkson Click here to Send Beth Clarkson a Private Message Find more posts by Beth Clarkson Add Beth Clarkson to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Beth Clarkson
Scholar

Registered: Dec 2004
Location:
Posts: 96

OOps

Sorry about the double post. My computer got hung up and I thought it didn't go through.

Beth

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 02:29 PM
Beth Clarkson is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Beth Clarkson Click here to Send Beth Clarkson a Private Message Find more posts by Beth Clarkson Add Beth Clarkson to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Beth Clarkson
Scholar

Registered: Dec 2004
Location:
Posts: 96

Re: Re: Funny...

quote:
Originally posted by athon
My final little say here; you have retained my complete respect through all of this, Kramer. You examined what's happened, taken everything into account and evaluated how you'll do things again in the future. That's all anybody can do.



I second this opinion. We all of us lose our cool at times.

Beth

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 02:30 PM
Beth Clarkson is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Beth Clarkson Click here to Send Beth Clarkson a Private Message Find more posts by Beth Clarkson Add Beth Clarkson to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jmercer
Muse

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 580

Re: OOps

quote:
Originally posted by Beth Clarkson
Sorry about the double post. My computer got hung up and I thought it didn't go through.

Beth



I don't think it's your computer - the forum seems slow. I think it's all the traffic over the ABC show last night. It seems to be a very popular thread.

__________________
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke

"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth.... For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it." - Patrick Henry

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 03:26 PM
jmercer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jmercer Click here to Send jmercer a Private Message Find more posts by jmercer Add jmercer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jmercer
Muse

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 580

quote:
Originally posted by Beth Clarkson
Take a look at the threads. You may find yourself adjusting your viewpoint to some degree.


Thank you for the suggestions, but I've already read through a good deal of the correspondence posted, not just the ones I mentioned. Not all, and primarily the more recent ones, but a large enough sample to capture the general tone that comes through. (I'll probably read more as I have time. They are rather interesting.)

Beth
[/QUOTE]

Ah, ok... thanks. I got the impression that you hadn't really been looking at stuff other than the recent controversial threads. Fair enough, then.

__________________
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke

"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth.... For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it." - Patrick Henry

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 03:35 PM
jmercer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jmercer Click here to Send jmercer a Private Message Find more posts by jmercer Add jmercer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
billydkid
Muse

Registered: Aug 2002
Location: little town, usa ny
Posts: 724

Look

quote:
Originally posted by peebrain
What I'm complaining about is that Kramer will take the time to explain to everyone in the forum the answer to my questions, but he doesn't have time to give me the same respect in an e-mail. Hell, he could have just copy/pasted what he wrote on the forum into the e-mail... or he could have linked me to the forum pages that explain it. Instead, he tells me I'm full of sh*t (which he edited out of the emails he posted), and ignores me because I have no intention of applying - which again, isn't relevant to the questions I presented. Notice how none of YOU have intention of applying, yet he answers your questions.

Apparently I used the wrong channel of communication - I should have publically asked the questions, instead of privately.

~Sean



What the hell do you care? The winner of the challenge get a million dollars. Is there any way to make that clearer? Even if it wasn't EXACTLY a million (which it is) what do you care? Nevermind the fact that if you can do anything paranormal (which you can not) you would become the most famous man in history having been the only person ever to successfully and authentically demonstrate a paranormal ability of any kind at all. You could make countless millions of dollars if you had any paranormal ability, what on earth are you fretting about Randi's piddling million for?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 08:24 PM
billydkid is offline Click Here to See the Profile for billydkid Click here to Send billydkid a Private Message Find more posts by billydkid Add billydkid to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Metullus
Scholar

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: The Redwoods, Nor Cal
Posts: 76

Re: Look

I use my psychotic - I mean, psychic - abilities for the good of mankind and the whales, which is the only reason I have not applied for the prize. And marsupials, I really like marsupials.

Considerations of mere money are far beneath me. But if I was interested in the money - which I am not because I am a spiritual type person - I would read the bleeping contract before I started bugging people with questions about what denomination the money is in! If, after reading the relevant portions of the application / contract, I had questions, I would ask them.

But then I read the owner's manual before I call technical support.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 08:38 PM
Metullus is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Metullus Click here to Send Metullus a Private Message Find more posts by Metullus Add Metullus to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
kittynh
The Hupsu Detective

Registered: Dec 2002
Location:
Posts: 6455

When I win I want it all in commemorative states quarters. Heavy on the Minnesotas.

__________________
"I don't believe in curses, you make your own destination." highly paid member of the Red Sox

"With God gone from his life, he felt reborn and revitalised by an entirely new kind of knowledge." Martin Brookes

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 09:21 PM
kittynh is offline Click Here to See the Profile for kittynh Click here to Send kittynh a Private Message Find more posts by kittynh Add kittynh to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
webfusion
Critical Thinker

Registered: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 271

Wayyyyy back on Feb 7th

Un-freakin-believable, this thread is still humming along?

Sean, the paranormal wanna-be who got the details he sought, more than once, through various channels including the well-versed participants on this respected and informative forum, said that he was now
"satisfied with the answers provided to continue to pursue the money" -- when was this said? Hmmmmmm, back on Feb 7th, right here in this thread.
Badda Bing, Badda Bam.

Where was there a mistake made? Not by James Randi, (who wears Spongebob Square Pants underwear, I have it on good authority), the very guy that runs a little thing called the Million Dollar Challenge for everyone's general amusement (or education, or scientific advancement, or whatever, see video of Yellow Bamboo).

You all remember The Amazing Randi, who is standing right there in front of the vault (I love that photo so much, I reproduced it on this thread early-on, 'cause as they say, one picture is worth a million dollars) -- well, Randi right off the bat saw this guy Sean was a loser. Randi has this uncanny ability, not paranormal, just an ability, to sniff out the sh*t right from the get-go. He wrote Sean, buzz off Bozo, and you saw that his right-hand man, KRAMER pretty much has the ol' snifferoo in tune, too. They make a great tag-team, working in synchronicity to stop guys like this cold. Full stop. Their initial emails said it all. Really.

So, where did this all go horribly wrong?
Right here:
"Do you have a paranormal claim, sir?"

That one little sentence opened the floodgates. It was beyond polite, it was actually an engraved invitation for Sean to step into the open gaping hole and begin his flubber and fluff routine and start creating Dagwood-sized 'baloney' sandwiches!

Too bad KRAMER issued the empty threat that followed, saying he would stop answering him if he continued to ask about the millon bucks.


OK, so Sean admitted on Feb 7th that he was now
"satisfied with the answers provided to continue to pursue the money" --

Well, I'm not satisfied, dammit. I want Sean to put his notarized signature on the JREF Application, and that's all we all wanna see with his name on it, from this point forward. Enough commentary. Let's cut to the chase.

To quote the guy overlooking things with his steely gaze from up there on the Forum Header:::::::::::::::::::
A-P-P-L-Y or G-0 A-W-A-Y

Bottom Line.
_____________________________________

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 11:20 PM
webfusion is offline Click Here to See the Profile for webfusion Click here to Send webfusion a Private Message Visit webfusion's homepage! Find more posts by webfusion Add webfusion to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
alfaniner
Muse

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Sorth Dakonsin
Posts: 857

quote:
Originally posted by kittynh
When I win I want it all in commemorative states quarters. Heavy on the Minnesotas.


Actually, the Wisconsins might be a bit more valuable. There is a printing flaw in some them, making them instantly valuable to collectors.

__________________
Praying for people and leaving things up to God is exactly the same as doing nothing.

If the Universe was designed, why is it necessary that there was only one designer?

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-11-2005 11:29 PM
alfaniner is offline Click Here to See the Profile for alfaniner Click here to Send alfaniner a Private Message Find more posts by alfaniner Add alfaniner to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
webfusion
Critical Thinker

Registered: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 271

how many quarters will equal $990,000

http://www.usatoday.com/money/2005-02-10-quarter-usat_x.htm

Extra cornstalk leafs. Sheesh! What I wanna know, who ate that slice of cheese?

247,500 = twenty four thousand seven hundred fify rolls
of chump change.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-12-2005 01:23 AM
webfusion is offline Click Here to See the Profile for webfusion Click here to Send webfusion a Private Message Visit webfusion's homepage! Find more posts by webfusion Add webfusion to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
princhester
Thinker

Registered: May 2003
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 244

Here we go again.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-14-2005 02:21 AM
princhester is offline Click Here to See the Profile for princhester Click here to Send princhester a Private Message Find more posts by princhester Add princhester to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
TheBoyPaj
Muse

Registered: Aug 2003
Location: Holmfirth, England
Posts: 839

I know this is opening a whole can of worms, but I was watching the video lecture mentioned on this thread and Randi definitely said "you win a million dollars in negotiable bonds".

The thing is, I just tried to go back to confirm what I heard and the page has gone!

__________________
Small, ineffective and indistinguishable from chance: That's the PSI effect.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-17-2005 10:08 AM
TheBoyPaj is offline Click Here to See the Profile for TheBoyPaj Click here to Send TheBoyPaj a Private Message Visit TheBoyPaj's homepage! Find more posts by TheBoyPaj Add TheBoyPaj to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jmercer
Muse

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 580

Hm... well, even so. A million dollars in liquid funds is still a million bucks. Heck, cash is just a bunch of certificates based on the current value of gold. So when you get right down to it, even a million dollars in cash isn't a fixed value, especially on an international basis.

I worked for a number of international companies, and exchange rates were always studied and used in order to make money. In fact, there are traders that make their money playing the international money exchange marketplace.

__________________
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke

"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth.... For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it." - Patrick Henry

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-17-2005 10:32 AM
jmercer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jmercer Click here to Send jmercer a Private Message Find more posts by jmercer Add jmercer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13896

Exactly.

Look at the value of the dollar. Wouldn't you rather have bonds instead??

__________________
SkepticReport.com
Email: editor@skepticreport.com

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-17-2005 11:18 AM
CFLarsen is online now Click Here to See the Profile for CFLarsen Visit CFLarsen's homepage! Find more posts by CFLarsen Add CFLarsen to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Metullus
Scholar

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: The Redwoods, Nor Cal
Posts: 76

quote:
Originally posted by TheBoyPaj
I know this is opening a whole can of worms, but I was watching the video lecture mentioned on this thread and Randi definitely said "you win a million dollars in negotiable bonds".


Given the number of times that Randi speaks and likely mentions the prize I would be surprised if he did not make such a reference; I would expect that it would happen not infrequently. That he did make such a comment does not change or even define the nature of the prize: there exists a contract that spells out quite clearly what the prize is.

One million dollars U.S.

Period.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-17-2005 11:50 AM
Metullus is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Metullus Click here to Send Metullus a Private Message Find more posts by Metullus Add Metullus to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
webfusion
Critical Thinker

Registered: Nov 2004
Location:
Posts: 271

not gold-based

in the USA, this statement is incorrect:

"Heck, cash is just a bunch of certificates based on the current value of gold."

President Richard M. Nixon took the American currency off the gold standard: (The Bretton Woods system) ended on August 15, 1971, when Nixon ended trading of gold at the fixed price of $35/ounce. At that point for the first time in history, formal links between the major world currencies and real commodities were severed". The gold standard has not been used in any major economy since that time.

http://economics.about.com/cs/money/a/gold_standard.htm

FYI.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-17-2005 03:03 PM
webfusion is offline Click Here to See the Profile for webfusion Click here to Send webfusion a Private Message Visit webfusion's homepage! Find more posts by webfusion Add webfusion to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
KRAMER
challenge facilitator

Registered: Apr 2004
Location: Broward County, FL.
Posts: 531

FAQ link

http:///

__________________
KRAMER,
JREF Paranormal Claims Dept.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-17-2005 03:39 PM
KRAMER is offline Click Here to See the Profile for KRAMER Click here to Send KRAMER a Private Message Find more posts by KRAMER Add KRAMER to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
jmercer
Muse

Registered: Jan 2005
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 580

Re: not gold-based

quote:
Originally posted by webfusion
in the USA, this statement is incorrect:

"Heck, cash is just a bunch of certificates based on the current value of gold."

President Richard M. Nixon took the American currency off the gold standard: (The Bretton Woods system) ended on August 15, 1971, when Nixon ended trading of gold at the fixed price of $35/ounce. At that point for the first time in history, formal links between the major world currencies and real commodities were severed". The gold standard has not been used in any major economy since that time.

http://economics.about.com/cs/money/a/gold_standard.htm

FYI.



Ooops! I stand corrected, and I thank you for that!

__________________
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." - Edmond Burke

"We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth.... For my part, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it." - Patrick Henry

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-17-2005 03:45 PM
jmercer is offline Click Here to See the Profile for jmercer Click here to Send jmercer a Private Message Find more posts by jmercer Add jmercer to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
kookbreaker
Graduate Poster

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Directly over the center of the Earth!
Posts: 1486

Bad link Kramer.

The text works, however.

__________________
We really need to get rid of Oprah and bring back the "ABC After School Special." . Those things were a moral compass for my entire generation.... Before Oprah, kids learned to work out their problems. Under Oprah's regime, kids just sit around waiting for Angels to help them. -Rodney Anonymous.

If Michael Jackson dies then I'm personally blaming you Kookbreaker! -luvtinayohters

That's not fair! Kookbreaker gets blamed for all the cool stuff! - Roadtoad

"As for your "point" about separate schools for Atheists, I'm tempted to say
that there already are separate schools for Atheists - we call them
"the best Universities" " - Rodney Anonymous

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-17-2005 03:47 PM
kookbreaker is online now Click Here to See the Profile for kookbreaker Click here to Send kookbreaker a Private Message Find more posts by kookbreaker Add kookbreaker to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
Shera
New Member

Registered: Feb 2005
Location:
Posts: 9

The prize is BONDS

Per the official FAQ, the prize is mostly BONDS not cash.
See http://www.randi.org/research/faq.html#3.3:

OFFICIAL FAQ
"3.3. If I pass the formal test and win the Challenge, how will I be paid?
The first $10,000 of the prize money will be paid by check, as stated in the Challenge rules, immediately upon the successful demonstration of their claim. The prize money is held in the form of bonds as a way to publicly show that the money really does exist. These immediately convertible bonds will be awarded to the Challenge winner within 10 days of passing the formal test. The manner of transfer of these bonds will be at the discretion of the JREF and the Challenge winner, in accordance with acceptable legal standards."

Compare that to the draft version of the FAQ in the thread The JREF Million Dollar Challenge Unofficial FAQ: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=52707

DRAFT FAQ
"3.3. If someone wins, how will they be paid?
Although the prize money is held in bonds as a way to publicly show that the money really does exist, the bonds will be converted to US dollars before being paid. The first $10,000 of the prize money will be paid by check, as stated in the Challenge rules. The usual method for paying an amount as large as the remaining $990,000 is via electronic transfer, and it is reasonable to assume that that is how this prize money will be paid as well."


I added the bold text in the body of the FAQ paragraphs.

Since the PRIZE is BONDS and NOT CASH , I predict (no special abilities needed ) that the JREF will once again be asked in the future about the nature of the bonds (e.g. who the issuer is, what type and grade they are, maturity dates, and etc) from someone considering signing a legal contract with them BEFORE they sign a legal contract with them. And the challenge application is a legal document. I don't say so, the JREF says so in the FAQ, paragraph 1.1
(See http://www.randi.org/research/faq.html#1.1):

"The Challenge application, once signed by you, is a legally binding contract between yourself and the JREF. "

I complemented Beleth in the other thread, "The JREF Million Dollar Challenge Unofficial FAQ",
and I do so again. It’s a great FAQ and Beleth did a wonderful job in an unbelievably short period of time.

Shera

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Old Post 02-19-2005 05:49 PM
Shera is offline Click Here to See the Profile for Shera Click here to Send Shera a Private Message Find more posts by Shera Add Shera to your buddy list Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote
All times are GMT -5 hours. The time now is 03:56 PM. Post New Thread    Post A Reply
Pages (6): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6]   Last Thread   Next Thread
Show Printable Version | Email this Page | Subscribe to this Thread

Forum Jump:

Forum Rules:
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
 

< Contact Us - James Randi Educational Foundation >

Powered by: vBulletin Version 2.3.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2005, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Copyright 2003 James Randi Educational Foundation - All Rights Reserved