Loading Profile...
EMPLOYEE
Should Hubdub insiders who settle questions be allowed to make predictions?
To date, Hubdub staff who settle questions have also participated in making predictions on those and other questions. We have strived to be as objective as possible on every settlement and settlements are regularly cross-checked. However some users perceive that this conflict of interest may cause us to incorrectly settle questions for our benefit. We can change the rules to:
(1) No restriction (status quo)
(2) No predicting on questions within their category
(3) No predicting on any questions
Thoughts?
(1) No restriction (status quo)
(2) No predicting on questions within their category
(3) No predicting on any questions
Thoughts?
5
people have this question
I have this question, too!
Tell me when someone answers.
The more people who ask this question, the more it gets noticed.
The more people who ask this question, the more it gets noticed.
The best answer from the company
-
Thanks for everyone's responses on this. A couple of you have also brought up the issue of gaming which we are looking into and should have something to share with you by Monday.
With regards to settlement, it feels to me the general rule should be that no one person should be both referee and participant. That obviously creates a conflict of interest.
However in resolving if the people who settle questions can make predictions I want a solution that scales. We've always known that having a team of administrators settle every question does not scale and had planned to open up this process to trusted users (we've thought up a few ways to ensure accuracy and timeliness). If we decide now that anyone who settles any question shouldn't be allowed to make a prediction on any question then users who wanted to settle questions could not make predictions. I don't think we would have many volunteers.
Therefore I propose that category editors will not make predictions in their own category. As I am a point of escalation across all categories I will bar myself from predicting in any category (I was falling off the leaderboard anyway!)
Additionally it should be transparent to everyone which user ids are part of the Hubdub team. Therefore all user ID's from Hubdub team members will be clearly indicated.
Over the next few weeks we should be able to start to share with you how we plan to open settlement up.
The company and 1 other person say
this answers the question
The best answer from everyone
-
Hi Nigel, I'm not sure if I feel as strongly as some of the other respondents on this issue but have to agree that the best way to stem the rising tide of concern would definitely be to go with:
(3) No predictions on any questions
I can understand the enthusiasm of the hubdub team, as this site is a great concept and they must feel intimately involved in the process. However, the site can only work if there is a guarantee of objectivity in judging, much the same as in any sporting competition, debate or awards process.
Here's a possible idea: Have you thought of recruiting a group of independent judges whose ONLY job is to become expert on hubdub rules and procedures in order to resolve sticky issues of wording, scope or propriety? This would be as opposed to relying on your content experts whose primary role could then be confined generating the news links, providing guidance to users and, if they wished, participating in the game-play also. Frankly, I'd welcome the opportunity to go head-to-head with "thedoctor", "tisha" and the rest of your team of experts and see how our predictive skills match up... But NOT if they're also going to be the final arbiters of any disputes or anomalous outcomes.
Finally, I just want to say that I'm impressed with how quickly you're handling this matter. In launching a beta version like this, I'm sure that there will be glitches in process, just as much as technology. I have no lack of confidence in your ability to work out these wrinkles. Keep up the good work ...
I’m pleased that you're taking action to resolve this problem!
3 people say
this answers the question
Create a customer community for your own organization
Plans starting at $19/month
-
Inappropriate?(3) No predicting on any questions
i simply cannot participate anymore unless this playing field is leveled!
again lack of confidence, personally i don't care about end dates or voiding questions, what i want is to know the person who decides those things is not benifiting even with a name in the scoreboard, these decisions being made are useless without makin it clear you WILL NOT participate Immediately until i see that i will no longer bet in any manner whatsoever and if it is not clearly stated within a few days on the log in page or somewhere very noticable i just won't be here ever again!
I’m angered
-
Inappropriate?I Didn't Realize You Were Participating! It Seems Very Unfair To The Users! You Should Either Participate Or Moderate Not Both!
I Certainly Hope That The Comments Added For This Question WILL NOT Be Provided By Your Moderators Either As It's Obvious How They Feel Considering They Are Allready Participating, Also How Is Anyone Else Going To Know To Come Here To This Question And Answer Board To Weigh In Unless You Post Some Sort Of SPECIAL Alert When They Sign Into The Hubdub.com Page (Site) I Didn't Realize It Existed Til I Looked At The Comments On The Original Edwards Question Which I Created?
If You Ever Expect To Draw Advertisers At Some Point It Will HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED!
If You Do Not But Still Wish To Have People Play Fair You Should At The Very Least Ask People To Agree To This As A Term When They Sign Up For An Account!
But I Still Fervently Believe It Is Unfair In General That Any Site Moderators Are Allowed To Participate!
I’m Wishing I Had Been Told And Feel Cheated!
2 people say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?i also don't think they should be playing at all...we have a brand new #1 because of a question that had been flagged and apparently was given the go-ahead. after the question ended it was decided for someone who added his own words into the question and the links for the reasoning behind the settlement didn't even back up what that person was saying. even tho i sent in multiple links from authoritative sources the question was resolved in his favor. multiple people objected and the question was eventually voided, but he gets to keep his money and position and more than 26 hours after the question ended the money still hasn't been returned to my acct for the void. maybe hubdub team member just doesn't understand his own topic, maybe he's friends with the new #1, maybe our leader is one of your own...how do we know? you don't even seem to follow your own rules concerning this website. i read that in the event of a disputed question you would be asking other users what they thought, and while i dont expect you to ask the ones directly involved with the question every single person discussing the question said the new leader was wrong except the hubdubber. you guys totally screwed up the john edwards endorsement question. people were losing money left and right because we don't understand whats going on and it seems as tho the people getting high dollars are not doing it the right way. it simply creates too much doubt in everyone's mind.
I’m frustrated
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Thanks for posting the question Nigel.
It really shows you are listening to the members.
My position is that ethically it is wrong for anyone who is affiliated with Hubdub, from the Founders to the editors to even investors to place any prediction (bets) on the system.
I am also very keen on the idea of rewarding questioners somehow.
Rememember, especially members, this is a beta and by participating like this we are helping to create an awesome site.
I’m confident
2 people say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Hi Nigel, I'm not sure if I feel as strongly as some of the other respondents on this issue but have to agree that the best way to stem the rising tide of concern would definitely be to go with:
(3) No predictions on any questions
I can understand the enthusiasm of the hubdub team, as this site is a great concept and they must feel intimately involved in the process. However, the site can only work if there is a guarantee of objectivity in judging, much the same as in any sporting competition, debate or awards process.
Here's a possible idea: Have you thought of recruiting a group of independent judges whose ONLY job is to become expert on hubdub rules and procedures in order to resolve sticky issues of wording, scope or propriety? This would be as opposed to relying on your content experts whose primary role could then be confined generating the news links, providing guidance to users and, if they wished, participating in the game-play also. Frankly, I'd welcome the opportunity to go head-to-head with "thedoctor", "tisha" and the rest of your team of experts and see how our predictive skills match up... But NOT if they're also going to be the final arbiters of any disputes or anomalous outcomes.
Finally, I just want to say that I'm impressed with how quickly you're handling this matter. In launching a beta version like this, I'm sure that there will be glitches in process, just as much as technology. I have no lack of confidence in your ability to work out these wrinkles. Keep up the good work ...
I’m pleased that you're taking action to resolve this problem!
3 people say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?I don't care if moderators participate. Presumably they're interested in prediction or they wouldn't be involved in the first place. I'm willing to trust them to avoid conflict of interest until they prove themselves untrustworthy; it's not like real money is involved. I. do think they should be identified with an asterisk on the Leaderboards, mostly because they've had more time to amass H$. -
Inappropriate?I think Volodya has a good point. I too would like to see the moderators indicated as such on the Leaderboard. If moderators are allowed to vote, then transparency is key. I think some of the backlash is coming from people not knowing that voting was open to the moderators. I don't see an ethical problem as long as it is very clear what the rules are, and people know what they are getting into.I agree with AlanD that it would be interesting to see how well you can compete with the content experts, so I like the idea of them also betting, but this assumes that we all know who those experts are. I don't know how realistic his idea of having separate moderators and experts would be since I don't know all that is involved with the operations and business end of the site.
It does make sense that a person should not moderate a question for which they also placed a bet, but I'm not sure it has to be all or nothing. Perhaps the site should agree to use a "third-party" moderator (someone who has not placed a bet on the particular question) to settle disputes over voided or settled questions. That way, those who put work into this site can enjoy the fruits of their labor, users will have a little more assurance of fairness, and those who find the idea of betting against the "experts" intriguing will be free to do so.
Some will still argue that this leaves "ethical" problems, but only the people who have to have a separate "referee" when they are playing board games at home. This is a free site, it isn't real money. As long as everyone knows the rules of the game, I don't see why we can't all play. Get a grip people. I thought this was supposed to be fun. It's a new site, and a new concept. Let's give the administrators time to work this out.
I’m sad that so many are so angry over this.
-
Inappropriate?HD has an incredible opprotunity to be extremely popular. I hope that the team will not have any time to place bets/wagers, because they are so busy working the tremendous volume of increased users.
I think there should be a limited number of real bonafide questions released each day by the team and by the team ONLY,with suggestions for Q/wagers being submitted by users within a time frame, that way no gaming the system could happen. perhaps different catagories within topics - short term Q (daily stock closings) mid length Q (will sattelites crash to earth and where) and far out/open time frame Q's (will Castro still be Cuba leader at end of 2008)
I second the phrase/advice by smidge76 for us to get a grip and let the admin. work it out.
I’m confidently excited
-
Inappropriate?you are completely right shadowfax.
I haven't had any time to make predictions in the past week.
Donal
(Sports Editor) -
Inappropriate?I understand the HD insiders wagering up to the point where the beta became public. I am not one to assume any wrongdoing on the part of the HD staff, however, while I don't feel nearly as strong as others apparently do, why even give the slightest perception of impropriety. They can ask questions, as they are the most familiar with the system, but I don't think they should answer/place wagers
I’m wondering what the huge deal is.
-
Inappropriate?Wagering by administrators won't change the outcome of the news story--
So long as wagering on new questions isn't initiated @ '99%' stacked on the 'unlikely side' of the outcome (enabling correct wagers at 1%,) have fun!
Hey, 4d, I was #1 BEFORE the weather question with $13,000+. What did you lose? A big $25? Hey, I'll give it to you from my own acct! I offered to return my profits from the question. as I'd be back at $30,000 in a week or so, regardless.
I’m happy
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Bluesea, I agree. I think the issue is that admins have the ability to void questions and people may be concerned that if they wager on one side of an outcome and they start to be on the losing side, they could void the question. Not saying that is/will happen, but it goes to my point of perception of impropriety.
www.hubdubforum.com -
Inappropriate?I'm not quite ready to give up on hubdub, but I'm getting close. I think the matter of admins making predictions is a secondary concern. The real issue is, it's not a lot of fun to watch people climb the leaderboards by gaming the system, apparently without repercussions. I confess I posed a few "gaming" questions myself, in the interest of testing the limits and application of the rules, and hopefully improving the system. I took pains not to generate any big profits for myself, as a glance at my H$ will verify. Apparently, hubdub has no ability to roll back outcomes to where they would have been without gaming. That said, I think the only way you will retain credibility and users is to declare a winner in the first round of predictions, and reset everyone at H$1000. Presumably you've learned enough in these first few days of live use to eliminate at least the worst abuses.
-
Inappropriate?Volodya, you make a very, very good point and I agree to a point. Gaming the system, as we have found, can easily be done. However, bear in mind, this is a beta test, so these are the exact types of things the dev team is looking for. I would suggest running as it for another week or so, so that the public beta has been for two weeks. During that time, work on fixes for this, and other known issues. Then, let everyone know that phase II of the beta is coming and everyone will be reset to H$1000 for a fresh start. Will irk some people, but those of us (and I would tend to lump you in with this) that like the site and see potential in the entertainment of HD, will understand the need and start anew.
www.hubdubforum.com
I’m confident all will work out
-
Inappropriate?I have no problem at all with letting the live beta run a bit longer, resetting everyone on, say, Monday, February 11, 12:01 AM PST (see, tarheelv, I'm learning which time zone to use!) That would give everyone ample time to get used to the idea that their "winnings", ill-gotten or not, will disappear. I'd even go further and suggest that even once hubdub is out of beta, the leaderboard be reset maybe quarterly, to allow new users a chance to reasonably compete. That would in turn allow an annual playoff between the top two or three predictors from each quarter, competing against a set of questions selected by hubdub staff, or maybe voted on by users. That's probably better, so everyone feels involved in the playoffs.
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?i see it this way if hubdub users make question suggestions then the staff can spend their time doing what they should be doing, RUNNING THE BETS, gaming the system is only going to occur until the staff write or at the very least review ALL questions BEFORE ANYONE including the question suggester, ihave heard the good idea of rewarding the person who originally suggested it!
it's really all part of getting the system running i know, but to be honest, I for one want the guys at hubdub to create Wonderful And Evocative Questions we can all enjoy placing a wager on, WITHOUT the Other Influences Of Outside INTERFERENCES, By giving the staff 2 Jobs And 2 jobs only:
1) Write And Review Questions
2) Settle All Question Disputes
Some Of The Questions I Have Seen Are Full Of Errors, Intentional or Otherwise, If Hubdub Uses their professional skills to simply Phrase Questions And Give Odds, Nature Takes Over With The Public!
Let's Assume For A Moment You Professionals Might Be WRONG, But We Vote To Follow Your Answers, Or A "PRO" Gives Some Inside Info To Some They Favor Then That Advantage Could Also Result In Someone Beating A User Who Should Have Every Fair Chance Themselves In This Game, I Don't Buy It If You Professionals Have A Lot Of Money You Can GAME Your Own System FOREVER Thats Not What We Want I KNOW THAT MUCH!
Get A Professional Writers And Editorials Team, Set Fair Odds, Then Let Users Take Over!
Heck Maybe The Best Reward Would Be To Your Company If You Found These So-Called Professionals From The Pool Of Users, Playing Fairly, That's My Take.
I’m Just Wondering WHY SOMEONE WOULD EAT DOG FOOD?
-
Inappropriate?Yes Having All Questions Reviewed First To Extract Any Errors Is All Thats Nessecary For Them To Extract Rigged Questions.
But Thats The Point If They Get To Vote They Can Trigger A "Panic Market" Any Time They Want By Simply Placing A Bet With Their LEADERBOARD Sums Of Cash, Come On These Are Also Polls, We Want To Know What Other People In The Public Think Not "PROFESSIONALS", Obviously They Need To Set Odds That Should Be Their Only Involvement
As A Suggestion If Someone Suggests A Question You Could Simply Send Them By Email A One Time Use Link To Place A Bet At The Original Odds Your Team Determined, It Is Play Money Afterall And If You Happen To Turn Internet Users Into Pros, They Would Be Much More Likely To Traffic Your Site, Lets Be Real That Makes You RICH (with some advertising..based on site traffic) And Not Just Play Money Either! Compliance With U.S. Gambling Laws Seems Shaky If You Bet, Don't You Think?
If Not Simply UNETHICAL, To Say The Least!
I’m indifferent
-
Inappropriate?You are not betting real money, so gambling laws are not applicable. There are no prizes (as of now), so again, gambling laws are not appplicable.
I do think a hold on new questions for review maybe the best suggestion to avoid gaming the system. Either that, or the person who posts the question can't wager on it until it has been reviewed. -
Inappropriate?shouldn't the gains be based on the number of voter and their votes, instead of letting how much they wager affect the outcome so much, isn't this really the point, the editors have money and are therefore able to affect our wagers drastically when they make bets, is it even fair that another user should be able to affect everybody else's odd's so drastically, Wouldn't this make far more sense based on each user geting just one vote instead of giving leaders lop-sided chances to begin with?
regardless of how much money you have don't change everybody else's chances, moderator or not!
an acceptable compromise is changing the structure more in line with that and presto it becomes disadvantageous to RIG the system and cheat, WOW Both Problems Solved In 5 Minutes Flat!
I’m hoping you take the suggestion!
-
Inappropriate?the point is that the admins are making rules arbitrarily and even breaking the rules that are already posted...if you look in the FAQ, it says that if they reverse a decision, they won't take away the h$ that they had given to the original winner, but in the reply that the admins placed in the weather question on here they stated that they would give the original winner his stake back only...they also state in the FAQ that they would ask other users what they thought if there was a disagreement over a question. while i cant verify whether they did this or not, not a single person in our discussion agreed with your point of view and everyone said you were wrong...a simple look at a dictionary and theadmins could have figured this out. they also posted two links which are supposed to give the definitive answer to the question and neither link backed up your position. i sent them links with correct data from professional and government people to back up my claim and they would not accept it. the issue is not how much i lost, even tho i STILL have not gotten it back even tho they voided the question, but how much you won by adding words into a question that had already been flagged and deemed ok to continue. if they change rules arbitrarily, don't follow their own FAQ and post links that give a very poor reasoning behind their decision, it looks like favoritism. and since they make their own bets, we don't know who's one of the team. and btw, i clicked on your name when you placed that bet and you were not in first place at the time.
-
Inappropriate?Thanks for everyone's responses on this. A couple of you have also brought up the issue of gaming which we are looking into and should have something to share with you by Monday.
With regards to settlement, it feels to me the general rule should be that no one person should be both referee and participant. That obviously creates a conflict of interest.
However in resolving if the people who settle questions can make predictions I want a solution that scales. We've always known that having a team of administrators settle every question does not scale and had planned to open up this process to trusted users (we've thought up a few ways to ensure accuracy and timeliness). If we decide now that anyone who settles any question shouldn't be allowed to make a prediction on any question then users who wanted to settle questions could not make predictions. I don't think we would have many volunteers.
Therefore I propose that category editors will not make predictions in their own category. As I am a point of escalation across all categories I will bar myself from predicting in any category (I was falling off the leaderboard anyway!)
Additionally it should be transparent to everyone which user ids are part of the Hubdub team. Therefore all user ID's from Hubdub team members will be clearly indicated.
Over the next few weeks we should be able to start to share with you how we plan to open settlement up.
The company and 1 other person say
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Thanks, Nigel. Good stuff. Just remember, you won't be able to please everyone.
I’m sure it will all work out
-
Inappropriate?I think choice 2) is sufficient for now. As for question creation, I'd say that having the question vetted before it becomes available might save some grief. It also might be a good idea to have the initial probabilities set by someone other than the question creator - this would perhaps allow that person to predict sooner than 12 hours later.
A related issue is the timing of the ending of predictions (especially questions without an exact expected closing time/date). I think we will probably need to have some mechanism for immediately suspending such questions when an outcome "breaks". A recent example was the question "Will Wesley Snipes be found guilty of tax fraud?", which closed about an hour after MSNBC announced the result. Perhaps a mechanism that allows a user to request immediate suspension of a question which then tags and warns all subsequent predictors that their bets may be subsequently disallowed, if the judge agrees with the request for suspension, might help.
-
Inappropriate?Hope To See An Email, From You Guys When You Decide To Stop Participating Entirely, Follow Rulles, And Maybe Use Some Advertising money to pay those you refered to as "Volunteers" To Decide Impartially Question Editing And Play Judge, In Effect, If I Were Your Opponents Lawyer, You Wouldn't Want Me To Be The Judge As Well, If Enough People Just Don't Sign In Anymore Please Don't Take Offense To The Product As Opposed To It's Leadership. I Did Enjoy Playing So You Have a Good Enough Game, But I Don't Wanna Play If I Know I Can Cheat, And That You Are Also Cheating Us All, Well What Kinda Fun Is That?
Anyways Please Email Me If You Have A Change In Policy.
Cancelledbysbc
I’m Saddened By Your Decision, But It's Your Site.
-
Inappropriate?No offense, but what are you talking about? Where do you see advertising on the site? I don't see any ads on the site at all. The site is in BETA! Beta means that the bugs and kinks have not been worked out and the dev team is looking for feedback. By participating in the beta, you should point out how you know you can cheat. How are they cheating you? How much did you pay to participate in the beta testing of the site?
I’m wondering what some people think
1 person says
this answers the question
-
Inappropriate?Hi
I agree with Nigel. There is a conflict of interest. I am therefore cashing out all my positions on the Sports questions and will refrain from making predictions on them in future.
While I accept that there is a conflict of interest, I will defend myself against any implication that I have used my status as a Category Ed to my advantage in terms of the leaderboard.
"I am not a crook"
.....and I am absolutely 100% positive that the same goes for all the other Cat Eds. The integrity of the competition is of utmost importance to us, so we are going to do our best to maintain it and are not going to do anything to undermine it.
Thanks for your feedback and participation in sorting out these issues and helping to make Hubdub a fun and high quality site.
Donal
(Hubdub Sports Editor)
I’m happy that progress is being made!
-
Inappropriate?I think:
(2) No predicting on questions within their category
is a perfect solution.
This (without casting aspersions on the Cat Eds) makes sure that there is no gaming of the system.
I’m happy that I'm on Hubdub
-
Inappropriate?No voting on Predictions by staff period. As fun as it might be this is your job and it is unethical to judge and to play the game.
EMPLOYEE
