🚀 go-pugleaf

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote 
> On 28/09/2010 12:48 AM, |-|ercules wrote:
>> As Sylvia is the only person to come up with genuine questions
>> to test my psychic dominance, I offer her this challenge.
>>
>> Shuffle your original 6 cosmology questions and post the MD5
>> of the file with a private keyword appended so I can't decrypt it.
>>
>> Read out the first question while filling out the first page at
>> www.HercsHome.com/AskPsychic.html
>>
>> Fill in the second page using any 2 other questions from the list.
>>
>> Repeat for questions 2 to 6.
>>
>> If I can tell you the order of your 6 questions Sylvia puts in her sig line
>> "Herc broke 729:1 odds when I tested his mind reading powers".
>>
>> If I get one question wrong - I put in my sig any of Sylvia's quotes of
>> her choice, "I failed a psychic test of my own design" etc. etc.
>>
>> And the sigs stay on all posts and replies for 1 month. At least 1 post
>> in aus.tv
>> and sci.skeptic.
>>
>> Do you accept my psychic challenge Sylvia?
> 
> Not as it stands, no. You would certainly renege on your obligation 
> regarding a sig line based on some claimed failure on my part to comply 
> with the rules. For example, you would claim that I hadn't actually read 
> out the questions at the appropriate times. Also, I'm not going to take 
> part in any test where my inputs are not in plain view, so as to prevent 
> you from disputing them later, which means no web forms. It's Usenet or 
> nothing. Thus all the steps I'm required to take must be capable of 
> being evidenced by a posting, either at the time, or later by the 
> revelation of a match for a previously posted MD5 hash. That obviously 
> implies no requirement that I not do certain things.
> 
> 6! is the number of possible orders, but each time I provide a list of 
> three questions on the second page, I'm telling you that one of those 
> three is the answer, and cannot appear as the answer in a subsequent 
> test. So the odds you've stated are wrong and higher than in reality.
> 

Yeh I thought that too, weird stat to calculate.

What about a 1 (ONE) question trial, if I get that right we revise the
protocol down to a micron so you're not wasting your time asking
me 5 questions.

Herc