Loading Profile...
EMPLOYEE
Proposed rule amendments
Since we published the rules on February 14th there has been a few gaps and inconsistencies have come to light. Therefore I am proposing we make the following amendments to the rules. Let me know what you think.
Current rules are here: http://www.hubdub.com/public/goodques...
Proposed amendments and additions:
2.2.1 Subject to change
• Changes to the rules will only be made in consultation with users [Added]
• These rules will change over time. In the event of a rule change the changes will be notified on the Hubdub notice board. [Unchanged]
• Any rule change may be applied retrospectively on a case-by-case basis [Added]
2.2.5 Types of question
• Questions which refer to the number of times a certain person says a certain phrase or word in a specific speech or debate are not allowed unless there is a recognised news organization that has stated it will or a Hubdub category editor has agreed to maintain a count. [Moved from 2.3.1 Political Category and amended]
2.2.10 Creating questions
• The term ‘by’ will be considered to be inclusive of the date referenced. E.g. ‘Will the satellite hit earth by March 25th?’ will be settled as a ‘Yes’ if it hits on March 25th or on any date prior. [Added]
• The terms ‘at’ or ‘on’ in reference to dates will be considered to only include the point in time referred to. [Added]
2.3.4 Business category
• Questions can be made about the major indexes (Dow Jones Industrial Average, NASDAQ Composite Index, FTSE 100, DAX, BSE, Nikkei and Hang Seng) but should not be made about the performance of individual stocks [BSE, Nikkei and Hang Seng have been added]
2.3.5 Hubdub category
• Self-referential questions which can be gamed easily like “Will this question get on the homepage?” or “Will this question get H$100,000 in predictions?” are not allowed and will be voided [Amended]
• Self-referential questions that cannot be settled to all outcomes (e.g. ‘Will this question be voided?’) are also not allowed and will be voided [Added]
2.3.6.1 Weather
• Questions regarding the weather for a specific area must be clearly defined and listed in NOAA (http://www.noaa.gov/wx.html) or other reputable online weather sources that issue frequently updated weather reports (i.e. http://www.weather.com). In countries outside the USA, an equivalent organization or online news source will determine settlement. [Amended]
• Questions should be specific and clearly worded. For example, "Will the temperature in Washington, DC, exceed 50 degrees Fahrenheit on Tuesday, <month>, <day>, <year>?” [Added]
</year></day></month>
Current rules are here: http://www.hubdub.com/public/goodques...
Proposed amendments and additions:
2.2.1 Subject to change
• Changes to the rules will only be made in consultation with users [Added]
• These rules will change over time. In the event of a rule change the changes will be notified on the Hubdub notice board. [Unchanged]
• Any rule change may be applied retrospectively on a case-by-case basis [Added]
2.2.5 Types of question
• Questions which refer to the number of times a certain person says a certain phrase or word in a specific speech or debate are not allowed unless there is a recognised news organization that has stated it will or a Hubdub category editor has agreed to maintain a count. [Moved from 2.3.1 Political Category and amended]
2.2.10 Creating questions
• The term ‘by’ will be considered to be inclusive of the date referenced. E.g. ‘Will the satellite hit earth by March 25th?’ will be settled as a ‘Yes’ if it hits on March 25th or on any date prior. [Added]
• The terms ‘at’ or ‘on’ in reference to dates will be considered to only include the point in time referred to. [Added]
2.3.4 Business category
• Questions can be made about the major indexes (Dow Jones Industrial Average, NASDAQ Composite Index, FTSE 100, DAX, BSE, Nikkei and Hang Seng) but should not be made about the performance of individual stocks [BSE, Nikkei and Hang Seng have been added]
2.3.5 Hubdub category
• Self-referential questions which can be gamed easily like “Will this question get on the homepage?” or “Will this question get H$100,000 in predictions?” are not allowed and will be voided [Amended]
• Self-referential questions that cannot be settled to all outcomes (e.g. ‘Will this question be voided?’) are also not allowed and will be voided [Added]
2.3.6.1 Weather
• Questions regarding the weather for a specific area must be clearly defined and listed in NOAA (http://www.noaa.gov/wx.html) or other reputable online weather sources that issue frequently updated weather reports (i.e. http://www.weather.com). In countries outside the USA, an equivalent organization or online news source will determine settlement. [Amended]
• Questions should be specific and clearly worded. For example, "Will the temperature in Washington, DC, exceed 50 degrees Fahrenheit on Tuesday, <month>, <day>, <year>?” [Added]
</year></day></month>
3
people like this idea
I like this idea!
Tell me when this idea gets some attention.
The more people who like this idea, the more it gets noticed.
The more people who like this idea, the more it gets noticed.
Create a customer community for your own organization
Plans starting at $19/month
-
Inappropriate?See my comment below. I'm okay with the other changes but had some questions about this category.
2.2.1 Subject to change
• Changes to the rules will only be made in consultation with users [Added]
Are you certain about this? I appreciate the open and libertarian approach, but if I was Hubdub I would say something more like:
"Hubdub management will endeavour to solicit and incorporate community feedback into rules changes.". The community is important, but it is your site. I realize that "be made in consultation with users" doesn't mean you have to abide by the desires of users.
• These rules will change over time. In the event of a rule change the changes will be notified on the Hubdub notice board. [Unchanged]
"the changes will be notified on the Hubdub notice board"? What does that mean? Did you mean to say, "the changes will be posted on the Hubdub notice board"? Or, "official notification will consist of a posting to the Hubdub notice board"? This, and my next comment, might be semantic differences between Scottish English and Americun English. If so please elucidate me and don't take offense>
• Any rule change may be applied retrospectively on a case-by-case basis [Added]
Retrospectively? Did you mean retroactively?
My Mom was a killer about grammar, vocabulary and proper word usage, and these many years later I'm the same way. I hope these suggestions are useful; they are intended in that spirit.
I’m _trying_ to help!
-
Inappropriate?Maybe there should be a general rule about dates. I just flagged this question:
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_M...
Because I wasn't sure if 1/3/2008 was January 3rd or March 1st?
It might be a good idea if the rules established an unambiguous format for dates. I would suggest YYYY-MM-DD, which is a well established date format that permits easy sorting. I'm not married to a particular format, but I'm advocating a standard format. -
Inappropriate?About self-referential questions:
http://getsatisfaction.com/hubdub/top...
according to this link^ some self-referential questions are allowed: e.g. "Will the 'no' percentage be higher than the 'yes' percentage at suspend date?" it cannot be gamed, and it can be settled.
I’m happy to help!
-
Inappropriate?Thanks for the review. One addition we want to add is that unless otherwise specified we will use a hierarchy of publications in settling US politics questions. The hierarchy is:
-CNN
-FOX
-MSNBC
-Reuters
-BBC
For World the prefered settlement source will be Reuters. -
Inappropriate?FOX???????
Since when has Fox been a reputable news source. Bottom of the list! How about the New York Times? -
Inappropriate?FOX is a fine source for primary race information. The NYT has caused us headaches in trying settle markets, based on delegate counts. For other news the NYT would be fine.
And although the opinion of FOX News is skewed, they will still report something but just with a GOP slant. If enough people aren't happy with FOX we can put it below MSNBC?
Ryan -
Inappropriate?I agree with InfernalMachine re: Fox.
I've also noticed a Hubdub preference for CNN as a source -- CNN in it's glory days *was* the definitive source. It both covered the world, and was world-class. However, since it was bought, their legion of top quality reporters have left; "Headline News" is gone, and much of what's left of CNN is tabloid.
I would rank ABC and/or NBC (includes MSNBC) significantly above CNN. -
Inappropriate?please add the nifty ( http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=%5ENSEI ) . It is a very unpredictable index and keeps bobbing up and down although the volumes are low . It is all the more exciting because on an average it only moves 20 - 30 pts. a day ....more like the nasdaq.
Another index you have missed out on is the Mibtel ( http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=%5EMIBTEL)
I’m waiting for you to add these to the list of valid indices
-
Inappropriate?i saw a comment before about the difference of date shorthand and have taken to abbreviating the month on my questions ie jan. or sept. -
Inappropriate?None of these sources are reliable. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but all of the "mainstream media" is a complete joke. All of these supposedly "mainstream" media sources have severe biases, I prefer to get _MY_ news from Hubdub!
I’m Kidding ... again! But seriously the BBC?
-
Inappropriate?Wasn't it CNN that admitted they "edited the news" so they could gain access to Iraqi officials prior to the US invasion of Iraq?
So much for CNN as an impartial source. I agree wuth you that Fox News is biased, but at least they are a dissenting opinion in the US news.
BBC? Bwa haa haa! About as impartial as Stalin!
I’m willing to accept other viewpoints, but unwilling to abandon mine!
-
Inappropriate?for politics, i'd go with CNN or MSNBC...i usually use msnbc or abcnews, msnbc has a drop-down listing of dates for primaries and separate delegate/superdelegate counts...for instance i've been keeping up with the Super Tuesday vote counting and it'll show me all the numbers from just that day if i want and superdelegates are in a different column from regular delegates,,,,fox is the station that reported florida for bush when everyone else was projecting gore and gore actually won it...i'd drop them off the list completely....at cnn, i check their wire alot...not much substance to the stories, but that's where the headlines come out first........its amazing how much american news i get from the bbc too...usually faster than the u.s. sites as far as getting it on the net, not sure about their politics reporting tho
-
Inappropriate?The good thing with CNN is that they have a simple listing of pledged delegates, and unpledged with totals, so that we don't have to use math to figure out totals. MSNBC doesn't have those total counts. The MSNBC stats require a bit of totaling up. And if my SAT scores have anything to say about my math scores, well......
On FOX, again however skewed they maybe they still report the story. And all media sites report infactual information. The 2004 election being a good example.
Ryan -
Inappropriate?Maybe I overstated my opposition to FOX, but it wasn't stated that they were good for stats (which they well may be). What was said was that FOX was second in a "hierarchy of publications in settling US politics questions". To put that into the actual rules as stated opens Hubdub to a certain amount of ridicule from anyone who has followed the questionable editorializing of the news in favour of the Administration during the past 7 1/2 years. Not trying to make your job harder. Just thinking you might want to flesh that out a little, and maybe move FOX a little further down the list. Politics questions aren't all about primary pop. votes and delegate counts, and the NYT (as "paper of record") would in general be a preferred source to FOX, I believe, no matter one's political affiliation (excepting of course the recent controversial McCain piece!).
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE
EMPLOYEE
