Let’s put aside the fact that the “builder or his proxy” (a single individual) will be the first “judge” that will measure the “skills” of each contestant (and that it’s unlikely the “builder” is qualified to do so) and instead focus on the 3 “impartial judges….all of whom are well-educated” (whatever that means).

The contest rules indicate that there are 3 categories or “parameters” that will be evaluated: 1) Creativity 2) Persuasiveness and 3) English grammar & punctuation. It seems obvious that a qualified judge could possibly “measure” someone’s “skill” in grammar and punctuation, but what exactly is the measurement of “skill” for such objective parameters as “Creativity” and “Persuasiveness”?

For example, the “skill” of an athelete can easily be measured by the statistics of “hits” or “points” or “yards”, but what specific criteria does one use to measure “Creativity”? If one defines creativity as having both “originality” and “appropriateness”, then each “judge” will view the “creativeness” of each entry differently based on their own unique personal background, experience, and world view. What’s “original” to one person may not necessarily be to another. Same goes for what’s “appropriate”.

Several attempts have been made to develop a “creativity quotient” of an individual similar to the Intelligence quotient (IQ), however none of these have been unsuccessful. Most measures of creativity are dependent on the personal judgement of the tester, so a standardized measure is difficult, if not impossible, to develop. Since Sheri is so adamant that this is a CONTEST OF SKILL, perhaps she can enlighten us as to how she has succeeded in coming up with a way to uniformly and fairly measure it (for all contest parameters) where others have failed. (Kraft, U. (2005). “Unleashing Creativity”. Scientific American Mind April: 16–23). http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=unleashing-creativity

Persuasion, like creativity, is another objective quality that has no standardized method of measurement. In addition, since the varied methods of persuasion typically appeal to the vastly different areas of “reason” (using logic, rhetoric, scientific method, or proof) and “emotion” (using faith, propaganda, seduction, tradition, or pity), each “judge” of persuasion will “score” a particular essay entry based on the judge’s own personal perspective — which by definition will be different than the other judges —– and the judge’s “subjectivity” (or lack thereof) to various methods of persuasion.

However, in contrast to creativity, recently some methods of measuring persuasion have been proposed. These methods most often involve direct measurements at the brain invloving neuroscientific measurement protocols, using several approaches including Electroencephalography (EEG), Electrocorticography (ECoG), Magnetoencephalography (MEG), Positron emission tomography (PET), and Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). (Dr. A. K. Pradeep, NeuroFocus, Inc., Berkeley, CA “Persuasion: The Science and Methods of Neuromarketing” September 2007). Does Sheri plan to incorporate such methods for accurately measuring the effect of each essay’s persuasion on the brain of each judge? Sounds expensive, but clearly scientific.

And finally, the Rules state that the parameters are “not limited to” the 3 parameters listed…so one should assume that there “might” be other (“invisible”) parameters that are used for which no contestant can ever possibly be aware of. Seems quite vague and ambiguous to me, but hey, it’s a CONTEST OF SKILL, so why worry, right?

This is nothing more than a personality or popularity contest, and has little, if anything, to do with skill. For all I know, that in itself may be legal, but they should really call it what it is.

“a contest of skill is legal however a RAFFLE is illegal unless you are a non profit organization.”

After looking in my law books and trying to find out if Hawaii law provided an exception for charitable gambling in order to benefit non-profits, and unable to find any, I went to:

http://www.gambling-law-us.com/Charitable-Gaming/

It states,

” Many states have enacted laws exempting certain charitable gambling activities from the applicable anti-gambling laws. The most commonly exempted activities are bingo and charitable raffles as well as certain types of casino games. Hawaii and Utah do not have any charitable gaming laws.”

Smith’s assertion that gambling proceeds from things like lotteries & raffles are allowed to benefit non-profit entities like charities & schools is apparently untrue. In fact just the opposite is true: Hawaii law specifically prohibits proceeds from any illegal gambling activity from going to any entity. Even if Hawaii did allow charitable gaming, the charitable organization would have to set up it’s own event. It’s more than just a stretch to think a private individual would be allowed to set up an illegal gambling scheme and then donate just a small portion of the proceeds to charity in order to legitimize their illegal activity, while keeping the majority of the proceeds for themselves, which is precisely what Smith is proposing to do. Smith’s assertion that her scheme is a “CONTEST OF SKILL” is also untrue, for as soon as she requires players to wager $101 in order to play, Hawaii law says it’s gambling. You don’t have to believe me, just read the law. How Smith can claim that neither I, nor any of her other critics haven’t done any research is beyond me. If anyone hasn’t done their research it’s Smith & her legal counsel. If Smith’s attorney advised her that giving any of this money to charity would make this all perfectly legal, he is grossly mistaken, perhaps even negligent in his duty to his client. If anyone in the Prosecutors Office, the Attorney General’s office, or the Dept. of Consumer Affairs rendered a legal opinion stating Smith’s plan is legal, let’s see it in writing. I’m waiting.

http://www.bigislandweekly.com/articles/2008/12/31/read/news/news05.txt

Read the article at the above mentioned site by Tiffany Edwards Hunt, & then read the comments below. I’d love to hear from any legal expert who can refute my reasoning and my interpretation of Hawaii law as they relate to gambling. In short, Hawaii law says if you have to put up money, it’s gambling. A true game of skill requires no money wager to participate. Hawaii law specifically prohibits any of this money from going to schools or any other social organization. The only ones who will make out on this deal are Smith/Williams. I believe that Sheri Smith’s claim that this is a new & innovative method of selling their home is false. I believe that others have tried this same scam before and have been shut down because it was judged to have been a form of illegal gambling. If I am wrong on any account, prove me so & I will admit that I was wrong.

It only takes 500 people to send in an essay and you’ve banked a quick $50,000 dollars (and then all the people have to keep saying is they haven’t received enough entries yet…)

Where is the way to monitor the amount of entries? Trust the people actually selling the place?

That’s not entirely true – she wrote about the contest and said, “”Essay 101,” has an entry fee of $101 which sent up red flags in your columnist’s head as potentially illegal.” So she asked some questions. This is responsible journalism; it is irresponsible to restate her sentence and say she “wrote about it as a possible scam”. That’s just trying to skew the report.

“The Police have been contacted, an investigation is ongoing… ” Well, that’s not entirely true either – it is just your inference. In Erika’s article, you could read this: “maybe it’s a game of skill, maybe it’s not, it just requires additional investigation to find out,” Damerville said.” There are a lot of “could’s” in the same article – the police COULD investigate further, the PA office COULD look into it; this is not the same as saying “OH my God, this is a scam, we’d better do something!!!” Because that’s not what’s happening.

Looks like you just needed an excuse to get your own blog link listed somewhere, hoping for traffic, by mis-quoting your source and make things sound bad. Because we all know bad news is more interesting than good news.

And good news is what this “Contest of Skill” (NOT a “raffle”) sounds like – reading the site, I see only good coming from this, for the couple giving away the home, to the winners of the home and the cash prizes, to the local schools who will get some money from the contest too.

Even if I don’t enter or win the contest, it is great to contribute to someone who intends to find the good life and to participate with a small token!!!

The spirit of aloha…