🚀 go-pugleaf

"|-|ercules" <radgray123@yahoo.com> wrote\\
> 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".
> 

Make that 6! not 3^6 as there is no replacement.


Herc
 

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.


Sylvia.

"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