Skill testing question: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 16:15, 28 May 2020

Latest revision as of 16:32, 23 July 2025

(22 intermediate revisions by 15 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{UseShort description|Canadian English|date=Decemberlegal requirement for 2009contests}}

{{Use Canadian English|date=January 2021}}

{{More citations needed|date=August 2018}}

[[File:Skill testing question (cropped).jpg|thumb|upright=1.3|Example of a contest form with skill testing question on the bottom and free entry alternative listed in the fine print]]

'''Skill testing questions''' (or '''STQ''') are a legal requirement attached to many [[competition|contest]]s in [[Canada]].

Line 8 ⟶ 10:

The Promotional Contest Provision of the [[Competition Act]] also states that "selection of participants or distribution of prizes is not made on the basis of skill or on a random basis."

Courts have accepted that estimating the number of beans in a jar<ref>''R. v. Dodds'' (Ontario High Court of Justice, 1884)</ref> as a game with skill, as well as estimating andthe number of votes will be cast in an upcoming election<ref>''R. v. Johnston'' (Ontario High Court of Justice, 19041902)</ref> as a game with mixed skill and chance. Thus neither example requires additional STQ as the skill component has been met.

==Question format==

The most common form that these questions take is as an [[mathematical exercise|arithmetic exercise]]. A court decision ruled that a mathematical STQ must contain at least three operations to actually be a test of skill. <ref>{{citationcite web |url=http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/internet/index.cfm?itemID=1279&lg=e#:~:text=Canada%20Trust%20Company%20case |title=Information Bulletin - Article 74.06 of the Competition Act - Promotional Contests |publisher=Competition Bureau Canada needed|date=November2005-08-05 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070325035822/http://www.competitionbureau.gc.ca/internet/index.cfm?itemID=1279&lg=e#:~:text=Canada%20Trust%20Company%20case|archive-date=25 March 20182007}}</ref> For example, a sample question is "(216 × 45) +- (1012 ×÷ 34)" (Answer: 3877). The winner should not receive any assistance (e.g. using a calculator, asking another individual to calculate the answer for the winner) in answering the STQ. Enforcement of these rules is not very stringent, especially for small prizes. Enforcement is often impossible if the winner chooses the time and ___location to answer the question (for example, the question is attached to the prize claim form). In most cases, there is no individual monitoring to ensure the integrity of answering STQ without assistance and the winner will submit the claim form having affirmed that they completed STQ without any assistance. In some cases, the player may not be required to answer the STQ to claim a prize. The questions are also becoming easier.<ref name="wired">{{cite web |url=https://www.wired.com/2007/01/dumb-math-tests-a-canadian-thing/ |title=Dumb Math Tests a Canadian Thing |publisher=Wired |date=2007-01-18}}</ref> For contests held in other countries but open to Canadians, a STQ must be asked of any potential Canadian winner.

==Consequences for not answering correctly==

Since those sections of the Criminal Code require elements of skill for the winners to be awarded of their prize, not answering the STQ correctly can result in the prize not being awarded. This has happened in at least one occasion for [[Tim Hortons]]' Roll Up the Rim contest winner in 2008.<ref>{{cite web |first=Harold |last=Carmichael |url=http://www.saultstar.com/2008/06/21/refused-for-getting-skill-testing-question-wrong-sudbury-woman-finally-gets-her-prize |title=Refused for getting skill-testing question wrong, Sudbury woman finally gets her prize |publisher=Sault Star |date=2008-06-21|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180804105927/http://www.saultstar.com/2008/06/21/refused-for-getting-skill-testing-question-wrong-sudbury-woman-finally-gets-her-prize|archive-date=4 August 2018}}</ref> The individual failed to answer the same STQ correctly on the prize claim form twice due to a learning disability. Tim Hortons refused to release the prize until the intervention of a local newspaper. Anecdotally, getting the answer wrong is often not an obstacle to claiming a prize and the winner is given another chance to calculate again.

==Free entry alternative==

The sameCriminal sectionCode of lawalso prohibits receiving consideration in exchange for playing the games, resulting in a related peculiarity of Canadian contests: the ''free entry alternative'', which is usually indicated by "No purchase necessary" in the [[fine print]] of a contest.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Lipton |first1=Michael D. |last2=Lazarus |first2=Morden C. |last3=Weber |first3=Kevin J. |title=Games of Skill and Chance in Canada |journal=Gaming Law Review |date=February 2005 |volume=9 |issue=1 |pages=10–18 |doi=10.1089/glr.2005.9.10}}</ref> Generally this means that it is possible to enter the contest for free by, for example, writing a letter to the entity sponsoring the contest and requesting a game piece or entry form.

==References==

Line 23 ⟶ 25:

{{DEFAULTSORT:Skill Testing Question}}

[[Category:CanadianLaw lawof Canada]]

[[Category:Gambling regulation]]

[[Category:Year of establishment missing]]