Thursday, August 25, 2005

Paul gets involved

   I have been corresponding with an applicant for the JREF one million dollar challenge. This is part four of a series. Part one is here.

Paul Gets Involved


   It was clear to me from reading the response to the 'Audio Critic' on the JREF forums that the majority of the posters really did not understand the mind of an audiophile. Many of them could not fathom why a man would spend two hundred dollars on a CD player, much less two thousand. Having worked in the audio business for more than a decade, I felt that I might be in a position to act as a moderator between the skeptics, and the challenge applicant. I e-mailed him and offered to assist him in any way I could in the design and negotiation of a test protocol.
   Unbeknownst to me, another forum member had made the same offer. The three of us exchanged e-mails for a couple of weeks trying to fine tune a protocol that both the applicant and the JREF would find satisfactory. The closer we got, the farther away we seemed to get. Every time we got one obstacle cleared, Kramer, the JREF facilitator threw up another one.
   About this time an odd thought occurred to me. The JREF rarely gets directly involved with the detail oriented work of negotiating an acceptable protocol and scheduling a preliminary test. Especially when the applicant lives at the other end of the country, as this one did. They usually contact a local skeptical society near to the applicant, and have them handle the whole thing. The JREF simply approves the final test protocol prior to the testing date, and requests protocol modifications if it feels there is a methodology error that would invalidate the test.
   In this case, they were handling all negotiations directly, and being very difficult to deal with. I couldn't understand why at first. Then, I came to the realization that, as I stated in the previous installment, they did not accept that this applicant could be as easily self deluded as those who claim to be able to cure diabetes with homeopathic remedies, or cause a person's hand to grow visibly in mere moments by mind power. They were sure he was trying to devise some way of cheating.
   They made statements like, "the applicant will never be allowed to touch any of the CDs," and, "the applicant will not be allowed to look at his audio system during the listening test." The applicant, feeling that the JREF was dealing in bad faith, began questioning more of the restrictions he was being asked to adhere to. The forum members began to get abusive, accusing him of trying to back out of the test. He was repeatedly asked if he had done any rudimentary blind listening tests at home, to which he answered in the negative. He went so far as to accuse the JREF representative of lying about the course of the negotiations, and suggested that he might seek the advice of legal counsel. The JREF broke off negotiations and rejected the application.
   It was that sudden. One day we were working towards one of the most interesting and exciting tests the JREF had ever performed, and the next day we were standing in a pile of ashes wondering what had happened. Theories and accusations were advanced against both sides. Some held that the JREF had dealt too harshly with the applicant. The applicant himself accused them of dealing in bad faith, and of maneuvering the talks toward an unsatisfactory conclusion deliberately. This is a theory that fits in well with those who believe that the one million dollar challenge is an elaborate ruse on the part of  James Randi.
   The majority of those involved in the online discussion were of the opinion that the applicant lost confidence in his ability to demonstrate his claim, and so waffled until the JREF got fed up with him. In the foundation's defense, this is an all too common occurrence. When applicants discover the nature of the controls the JREF is going to insist upon for a satisfactory test to take place, many of them immediately realize that they will not be able to successfully pass. There are three usual reactions. Either the applicants simply disappear, never to be heard from again, or they begin waffling, claiming date conflicts, illness, or just about anything else is preventing them from completing the test, or they go on the offensive, accusing the JREF of not actually having the money, or of having no intention of ever paying it, even toa successful claimant. The third strategy is the one employed by Silvia Browne, who agreed to a definitive test design almost four years ago, but has never actually come forward to be tested under the protocol she agreed to.
   What is the truth in the case of the Audio Critic Protocol? I believe that both side are partially to blame in the failure of this test to proceed. The JREF is guilty of not realizing just how eccentric the applicant was. This is a guy who believes that applying stickers to the windows of his house has improved the sound of his stereo system. The applicant is guilty of the appearance of waffling. Early in the negotiation process, he indicated to the JREF that a test could be scheduled quite quickly, perhaps within a month. He then tried to postpone that date by two months due to personal obligations. I think it was at this point that the JREF's Kramer decided that the applicant was a flake that would never consent to be tested.
   All this took place in March and April of this year. It has taken me this long to put it all down in words because I have been struggling with this last installment. As storytelling goes, it is unsatisfactory. No test was undertaken. The Audio Critic neither passed nor failed. No conclusions about the Golden Sound Intelligent Chip can be drawn.
   Will another GSIC user step forward to pursue the challenge? We can only hope. In the meantime, the JREF is currently in negotiations with an astrologer, a practitioner of homeopathic medicine, and a woman who claims she is "able to make the hand of a human being grow...with the power of [her] brain and [her] soul, translated into words." I'll let you know how it goes.

   Tomorrow: What has happened since, a GSIC update.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's all kind of sad, isn't it? -Karen

Anonymous said...

Dear Paul,
Interesting... they thought that the person would cheat, while you state that the real problem was that the person was delusional...
natalie