Loading Profile...
EMPLOYEE
Congo plane crash settlement
The question
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/What_w...
was settled as "Plane" yesterday, referring to the Congo plane crash. At the time, there were reports that all on the plane might have perished, but currently (a day later) the death toll is "at least 21 people" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/734...
Why was this settled so quickly? If this is the 99.9% rule in action, then Houston, we've got a problem.
Sadly, the bus crash in India is more likely to reach the 50 death mark (it's at 45 now and there's still people missing), but at the moment no event has matched the question's criteria. The question should still be open.
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/What_w...
was settled as "Plane" yesterday, referring to the Congo plane crash. At the time, there were reports that all on the plane might have perished, but currently (a day later) the death toll is "at least 21 people" http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/734...
Why was this settled so quickly? If this is the 99.9% rule in action, then Houston, we've got a problem.
Sadly, the bus crash in India is more likely to reach the 50 death mark (it's at 45 now and there's still people missing), but at the moment no event has matched the question's criteria. The question should still be open.
1
person has this problem
I have this problem, too!
Tell me when someone solves it.
The more people who report this problem, the more it gets noticed.
The more people who report this problem, the more it gets noticed.
Create a customer community for your own organization
Plans starting at $19/month
-
Inappropriate?Hmm, both situations are looking rather confused at the moment - it may well come to which happened first. Suspending may have been a better solution, but I think it's probably best if we leave it settled for now and resettle if the bus crash in a day or so if necessary.
I’m undecided
-
Inappropriate?Nothing like a resettlement of a question. That way so many more people can win. It seems to me that we are still nearly 3 months after launch of the site still dealing with a consistency problem. There are 10 of you Hubdub admins, I suggest you get together and decide a consistent way to settle questions. I will buy the first round of drinks, take 1,000 hubdub dollars and leave a big tip.
-
Inappropriate?once again inconsitency..then y cant we apply the same argument for the merger of airlines or other areas..settle then resettle..either things are settled too quickly or too slowly or voided after many wagers or left open because of so many wagers...i am not even bothering with these types of questions anymore..for me to research every nook and cranny of how a questions will get setlled isnt worth it..this is for fake money and should be more fun than work not vice versa and this far down the line the problems remain..i personally think and have said from the beginning that questions should be solved in an easier manner than they are now..what is the harm in settling a question based on an announcement?..is it so horrible?..wouldnt it make the site more fun and easier to manage since everyone will know the rules and there wont be as much back and forth on every question?..but others have different opinions but this is going down the road of becoming very much more a sports site i think because people as ive said b4 are going to get tired of tying up their money in markets that can get voided after time, settled too soon, or just interperted in a new way or a different way then they thought and is just not worth the headache to analyze..i keep preaching simplicity but maybe i have a different idea of what that is
1 person says
this solves the problem
-
Inappropriate?Right, having done some further investigation, this was settled on initial reports which claimed to be accurate but have now obviously been revised.
To be fair is pretty unusual for air crashes since airlines generally have good figures about the numbers of people involved. In the case of other types of accident we would have regarded early eyewitness reports as suspect. We should therefore have suspended the question pending more authoritative information, but it being an air crash we assumed the given figures to be more definite than they turned out to be.
The issue is not the same as the merger question, since the press reports there were definitive reports of an actual event (ie. a decision by the company), and the disagreement was caused by a subsequent U-turn. Here the reports were broadly speculative, and therefore were simply not good enough sources to settle the question.
I appreciate your concern crudsy that these types of question are more open to interpretation than sporting or money-market questions, and I can see the appeal for many users in sticking to these well-defined 'logical' markets, and we would like to feel that the site supports them in playing the game their way.
Other users are interested in areas where less well-defined 'logical' questions exist, and we intend to continue serving them as well. As far as possible this will be through providing rules and procedures which make these questions better-defined, but there is always going to be some room for disagreement on certain questions. I guess if this sort of resolution process doesn't appeal to you, that you are best off avoiding these questions
-
Inappropriate?I disagree this time with InfernalMachine.
As the one who first requested settlement, I think that there was not any doubt on the count of the victims. Everyone of the major news sources cited the number between 75 and 83 and this was for many hours. There was no reason of waiting for what will happen.
Only a day later appeared the news that the body count is much lesser.
But even now CNN report 38 dead and 20 still missing and local autorities looking for more bodies under the wreckage. Final count could be (and obviously will be) over the 50 mark set in the question.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/africa/...
Other sources cited the same.
This is not a bad action and we cannot wait endlessly in the "suspend" status of the question untill everything is completely clear.
In fact, the case is very clearly settled in the rules: the settlemet is based on reliable news reports and without waiting the 100% secureness of the news. If after the settlement new data appears, the question is not resetled.
And this is correct.
There is no problem here and - sadly - the settlement would prove itself correct: there would be more than 50 victims in that strange plane crash.
Sorry for my not so good english.
I’m indifferent
-
Inappropriate?IF the death toll reaches 50, then of course the question should be settled as is. But if not, then I don't really "get" the idea of just letting it go.
This question could easily have remained open for weeks or months more. So where is the need to rush to settlement?
It reminds me of the questions about temperature reaching a certain amount in a certain place on a certain day. If someone reads the forecast on the morning of the day in question, and submits that for settlement (reasoning that the forecast is probably correct. so why wait for the official data), then is that okay? The initial reports, when no-one could have known the actual death toll, are essentially forecasts, guesses, estimates. The particular situation demonstrates how those guesses can be wrong - they were based on the estimated number of people on the plane, which is not where the majority of deaths occurred.
It suggests to me that for questions that relate to disasters and counts, it's more than reasonable to wait for official confirmed figures. Maybe it's just me, but I've never felt that "getting it right" ruined my experience at Hubdub, while I have felt that dubious and incorrect settlements have.
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE
