2 articles on how it was basically impossible to get through the application process to be tested, and that even before, during and after the test you could be disqualified at Randi's whim:
Virtually no one (perhaps 15? i am guessing but have only seen 10 names in print) made it to actual testing, out of over 1,000 applications received.
Astronomer Dennis Rawlins, part of the same skeptic organization as Randi, wrote a long essay on the deceptions and intrigues in which Randi was involved there, Randi's poor character, etc.:
Co-founder of the same skeptic organization, Marcello Truzzi, quickly left it, stating that they were deniers rather than skeptics and had their mind made up rather than being willing to go out and actually test things. (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcello_Truzzi and https://www.unknowncountry.com/insight/csicop-founder-says-denial-not-skepticism)
Dennis Rawlins, in the essay mentioned above, stated as follows: "[Randi] assured me how cautious he was in the testing for his well-publicized $10,000 prize for proof of psychic abilities (for which he acts as policeman, judge and jury -- and thus never has supported my idea of neutral judgment of CSICOP tests. 'I always have an out,' he said."
Asked about this comment, Randi, in his usual fashion, claimed to be taken out of context, but his rebuttal about what he actually said sounds like a post-hoc confabulation: "Concerning the challenge, I always have an 'out': I'm right!"
Finally, in the next post, I will share Rupert Sheldrake's thoughts on Randi. Sheldrake's research on unexplained abilities in animals is well-conducted and credible. Randi's response to it was smoke, mirrors and lies.