For athletics, the point isn't so much that the race is for men or women, but that people with certain hormones (eg testosterone) have a greater power output than those without. Therefore having the two compete against each other is unfair. Competitions are therefore split into those with those hormones ("male events") and those without ("female events")
As such, whether you are XXY or some other unusual genetic combination, the question is are you racing against other people with the same basic advantages as yourself. The male/female split is just an easy way to determine it for 99% of the population.
"Ok, I'll poor ink on your suit as you head into work, rig the office chair in your cubicle to fall the moment you sit on it, and do it day after day after day like a common troll to see how long it takes for me to get fired or for you to send in a report."
As you suspect, the answer is not very long. However that's not the point. In that example you would, presumably, classify what you were doing as pranking or practical joking. I would call it harassment or trolling.
My point is those on the receiving end of the nastier trolls have a different opinion of what's going on that the perpetrators. One action, two names. Both cause hassle for someone else for your own amusement.
And with each there are levels - if you switched my mouse around occasionally or used dry humour like your father it is on a very different level to causing physical damage or similar with practical jokes.
Well artists get to decide that what they do is art, and in most modern cases I personally disagree.
Trolls can probably decide whether what they do is practical jokes. In this case I probably agree that it is. After all, with most physical practical jokes, the recipient doesn't tend to see the funny side. Tripping people up, pulling their chairs out, covering them with ink ... all practical jokes to the joker, all as welcome to the recipient as trolling.
I've considered different ways of measuring the time as a way of removing false starts.
Currently if you start too early then you are disqualified. Twitch too early and you're out. Harsh, and it's not really what people want to see - they want to see a race with all contestants.
I would propose retaining the starting gun so that all contestants run at the same time (as oppposed to time trials like on cycling where everyone starts one after the other). Your base time is measured as time from the gun to the time you cross the line. However, if you go before the gun instead of being disqualified, you are penalised by adding twice the time you went early to your total time (has to be at least once times the time early, to offset the advantage you got from starting early, and I added a penalty of an additional one times).
Since all contestants are starting at about the same time, the adjustments made should be small - small enough that they won't interfere with the public watching to see who wins, in that if it's decided by the adjustment then it's probably close enough that normal viewers can't tell who won without replays etc.
Should mean that there's no disqualifications from false starts, all races will be run with all entrants, and the skill of going as soon as possible after the gun is retained.
The 2012TicketAlert wasn't the only company that was using an automated system checking for new tickets. Touts were also running a similar systems so that they can snap up tickets as they become available and then sell them on the black market. 2012TicketAlert seems to be a piece of collateral damage in the olympic's fight against touts rather than a direct victim. See comments from LOCOG at the bottom of http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-19112520
Could LOCOG do better at selling tickets? Absolutely. Are they victimising 2012TicketAlert? Don't believe so.