Spitzer Market Issues

Spitzer will still be Governor after today. The Larry Craig point above is a great point. He said he would resign and didn't. Announcing intent is not the same as actually resigning. On 3/13/08 he will still be Governor, hence no resignation has taken place

I can't believe this is even a question. Of course he resigned today. Any other interpretation of the facts is just taking liberties with semantics. Standing up and saying "I quit" is resigning, even if you give several days' or weeks' notice. I direct you to dictionary.com - "to give up an office or position, often formally (often fol. by from): to resign from the presidency"; "To give up (a position, for example), especially by formal notification." Are you saying that Spitzer's announcement was not a formal giving up of his office or position? The effective date of the resignation is not the actual act of resignation. The formal notification is.

Here is how the major news services are reporting the event....

LA Times headline.....Spitzer resigns as New York governor

MSNBC Spitzer resigns over call-girl scandal

NY Times SPITZER RESIGNS

Fox News Spitzer Resigns

On, and on and on......this is how it is being reported in the press and now it should be settled. The news reports do not say Spitzer is going to resign, they say he has resigned. If you use major news sources are the verification of your facts, then you should not over rule what they report because YOU interrupt the word resign in a different manner.

When I came across this market in hubdub, it was clear TO ME that it was intended as when will he resign? there was no clarification or further information in settlement details that mentioned when will his resignation TAKE PLACE. Larry Craig has little to do with this discussion. Really. That poor ol' confused man is not the Gov. of New York.

I add the word "former" in front of "Gov."

Let us use Richard Nixon. When did he resign? History has recorded that event as when his annoucement was made. Not when Gerald Ford sat in his place. History will record Elliot Spitzer as resigning on Wednesday 12 March 2008

Let's look at the word resign:

American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This
re·sign (r?-z?n') Pronunciation Key
v. re·signed, re·sign·ing, re·signs

v. tr.

1. To submit (oneself) passively; accept as inevitable: I resigned myself to a long wait in line.
2. To give up (a position, for example), especially by formal notification.
3. To relinquish (a privilege, right, or claim). See Synonyms at relinquish.

So, as you see, the word resign could have the #2 meaning, which is the act of announcing the resignation by formal notification (Which Spitzer did today), or the #3 meaning, which is to relinquish power (Which Spitzer will do on Monday).

Amend the rules so that resignation questions explicitly address either the "I QUIT" announcement, or the loss of power/position/bragging rights.

Right?

Let's just void the question and create a set of fancy new rules.

The "trick" -- so to speak -- about the purpose of this site, in my view, is to accurately predict the outcome(s) of news events -- and I've found it's wayyy tricker than I might have thought.

Hand-in-hand with that is trying to create questions that allow for "unforeseen outcomes" -- which is, also, both challenging and rewarding.

When I checked in earlier today, about 11:00 EDT, I read a news-feed reporting that Governor Spitzer would likely announce his resignation today -- and it would be effective on Monday.

I logged in to Hubdub, and cashed out my position on "Spitzer will resign by Sunday, March 16, 2008" (before 11:30am EDT), and took a net loss of $4,291 -- more than 10% of my total net-worth at the time! :-(

I then took a position on "Spitzer will resign by Sunday, March 23, 2008". If that prediction is successful, I will have a net gain of $11,474. Offsetting the earlier loss, that will result in a "net-net" gain of $7,183.

I don't recall what the exact odds were on my cashed out predictions, but I know they would have netted me far more than the position I am in now. And -- had I had a "crystal ball", and known at the time that the other position would have soared back up -- I wouldn't have taken that $4,000+ loss! (maybe ;-)

In my view, the apparent winning prediction will be "resignation as of the effective date" -- and after the oath of office has been given to the apparent new governor. I backed my opinion with my actions of cashing out, and taking a loss. (And, parenthetically, as I was cashing out, there was no way, I thought, that I would be able to take a successful HD position in the market, as the odds on the first date had dropped so fast, and the second set of dates was, when I was done, above 80%. In short, at the time, my thought was "I took a bath!".

HEADLINES

A lot of the comments in the market thread are about headlines.

Headlines aren't the story -- as many/most folks know. If they were, Thomas Dewey would have been the 34th President of the United States -- "Dewey Defeats Truman", and Elvis would still be alive ;-)

Just as the Chicago Daily Tribune changed it's headline in later editions to reflect the true winner of the 1948 election, other media outlets change theirs as well.

Currently, The New York Times, arguably the newspaper of record for New York State, reports on their website:

Spitzer to Resign Soon; Paterson Set as Successor

Gov. Eliot Spiter, reeling from revelations that he had been a client of a prostitution ring, announced his resignation today, becoming the first governor of New York to be forced from office in nearly a century.

Mr. Spitzer, appearing somber and with his wife at his side, said his resignation is to be effective Monday, and that Lt. Gov. David A. Peterson would be sworn in to replace him.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/nyr...>

No doubt that headline will likely change to something else -- if it hasn't already.

ANOTHER PIECE OF THE ISSUE:

User duckie "called it", last night (at approx. 10:00pm PST), in "Comment #10", when s/he asked: "is this for when he announces his resignation or when he actually steps down as acting governor? because he may announce this week that he is leaving next week and then we go voided, which isnt hip."

Unfortunately, there isn't a Category Editor/Admin available 24/7, so clarification for requests such as this get delayed. [Note to Ryan: pls email me your cell phone nbr. ;-]

Even when there is clarification -- I sometimes still have questions.

The Content Editor clarified this market some four hours ago as:

"The Governor has not stated he will resign on March 12th. He has said that his resignation will be effective next Monday. This means that no resignation has occurred on the 12th. I know some may not like this decision (looking at the odds), but the market does not state a announcement of resignation but "resign." "

... but the market wasn't suspended, -- and still hasn't been -- and that was a total mystery to me!

Until I logged on here, and read the explanation in the OP of this thread ... and then [light bulb: ON] ... it made perfect sense to me. Sure there were the comments in the market thread about "... Sen. Larry Craig announced his resignation and is still in the Senate long after it was supposed to take effect. ..." [user: peterww] -- but even after reading that, I still missed the point, relative to why the market was still open!

I understand the sentiment of the comments in the market thread, pro and con -- as well as in this thread. I've been confused by this market -- and I've learned from it. At the end of the day, my (current ;-) view is that this market is both correctly interpreted, and still open.

Ryan,

To answer your specific question:

"I would propose some sort of rule amendment either stating that resignations are settled once resignation takes place or once resignation is announced.

Thoughts? "

I would opt for the "once resignation takes place". That would, obviously, be consistent with this market outcome, as well as others that are currently open -- and would effectively handle the elusive Sen. Larry Craig's of the future.

I think any amendment (whichever way it is decided) ought be for all markets (e.g. world, sports) -- not just politics.

The thing I find most annoying about this situation is that Ryan posted in the comments of this question how he intended to settle it, and based on that comment I cashed in at a considerable loss (relative to my net worth).

Here's Ryan's 2nd to last comment on this topic (the last announced this GetSatisfaction forum):
"The Governor has not stated he will resign on March 12th. He has said that his resignation will be effective next Monday. This means that no resignation has occurred on the 12th. I know some may not like this decision (looking at the odds), but the market does not state a announcement of resignation but "resign."

Ryan
Hubdub US Politics Content Editor".

If you are responsible for settling the question, and you are make comments such as this, the markets will definitely react, though I don't see much news prediction value in _how_ they will react. IMNSHO, if there was any question about how this question was to be settled it should have suspended immediately upon Spitzer's announcement being reported. Had that occurred, we could be having this conversation with all parties standing to gain or lose based on how they _predicted_ the news. Since it is still open, many will profit based on the near certainty of the outcome (the likely outcomes were initially reduced to one, and may now have expanded to two).

In light of Ryan's comment I feel the only fair outcome for this market is to return the initial investments to all Hubdubbers and void the question. I would not have cashed in if Ryan had not posted his comment, I would have expected the question to be suspended, in order for the escalation process to move to this forum as has occurred in the past (i,e, Where will the dead spy satellite hit earth?).

OTOH, if this does not happen I'm not going to quit Hubdub and publish my password in the comments 8^)

Spitzer isn't resigned right now, he could just as well choose not to resign on the 17th afterall (and face impeachment regardless), the fact is, he only announced resigning, he hasn't physically resigned yet, he's still getting a paycheck till its official.

AAA - I agree that the market's are going to respond (or not) based on clarification made by a Content Editor/Admin.

Ideally, there would have been clarification last night when duckie raised the question -- I hadn't considered that outcome, and my response to duckie's comment proved to be unhelpful.

I cashed out this morning, at a huge loss, and changed positions, way before Ryan's clarification. I then left for several hours, and had no sense of how the question would be settled -- except to say that I anticipated it would be settled when I returned.

For all I knew, my "cashed out" position could have been the "winning prediction" -- and I would be a big two-time loser on the same market.

The point is, the market changed wildly long before Ryan's comment -- it *did* look like the stock exchange questions that change by 80% or more within a minutes time.

TW - my decision to cash in wasn't based on seeing the news prior to Hubdub. I'm working waaay too hard these days for that. I stole a few minutes during lunch to check my positions, saw that this position was taking a beating and went immediately to the comments. When I saw Ryan's comment I decided to salvage what H$ I could. The upside for Hubdub was that I went to Hubdub for the news instead of CNN or FoxNews. The downside is that I based my decision on the comments of an official representative, and now it looks as though it _might_ settle in (what would have been) my favor.

Whatever, it's a game and it's in beta so glitches should be expectation not the anomaly.

http://www.tfd.com/resign
"v.tr.
2. To give up (a position, for example), especially by formal notification.
3. To relinquish (a privilege, right, or claim).
v.intr.
To give up one's job or office; quit, especially by formal notification"

seeing that he has yet to give up the office, he has not fulfilled both parts of the definition of resigning.

words mean things, and thats where the dictionary comes in. perhaps someone can find a dictionary that defines "resign" as just providing notification of intent? until then, looks like this one was settled correctly.

i agree with machine and destry..keep it simple..it was reported by news that he resigned today..that should have been the answer..yes..why was more analysis needed?..if every question has to be broken apart for every scenario nobody is going to waste their time being involved..its taking their time anyway for fake money..do u think people will waste more time for analysis..as was stated it should have been suspended b4 opinion was given and if opinon was no it should have been settled..as others have said use common sense principle..and if it was yes then if he was still in office at some point or something changed reverse it as u did amy winehouse..and asking what color a purple tie should be settled as when there was no purple tie option?..does that really need to be asked..are we analyzing tie colors also..nobody will bother anymore..i cashed out so it doesnt matter to me but i think u r hurting the site for both old and new people by reading inot every question and i feel the settling used to be using common sense..am i wrong?

Governor Spitzer's resignation letter clearly states he is resigning on March 17. PLEASE READ IT!!! http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/resi...

I completely agree. The question is plain and I am getting tired of the endless arguments over interpretation.

He resigned today based on thousands of news sources.

It should be YES. Not VOID, not NO.

If it's anything but yes then many of us are just going to give up.

One of the problems with HubDub (which I like very much) is that people get into any possible interpretation of the question.

The questions SHOULD be written more carefully. That's been an ongoing problem.

However THIS question was written very well and very clearly.

"Will Governor Elliot Spitzer resign from office on 3/12/08?"

The answer is that he resigned his office on 3/12/08, and will officially be leaving on the 17th. You CAN resign a position an leave at a later date.

DO NOT try to add onto a clear question as some are trying to do. I can cite a TON of news stories today that he RESIGNED TODAY.

This is the question. Those who are arguing otherwise either have money riding the wrong way or just poor reasoning skills.

I'm screwed in this market regardless, but www.ny.gov is does _not_ qualify as a "mainstream media source". It might be more accurate than the mainstream media, but that should not matter to Hubdub.

once again Spitzer himself writes in his resignation letter " I resign effective March 17, 2008" So he says he resigns on March 17. Today he is Governor Spitzer, Tomorrow Governor Spitzer and on March 17 he will be Former Gov. Spitzer.

I'm in the "announcing your resignation means resigning" camp despite the date it takes effect. Over the years I've had many co-workers and subordinates resign, only to be retained as consultants, how would Hubdub rule on that. I think it is important to keep the "predict the news" meme foremost on Hubdub ... and that means accepting questions at face value; which does not always mean parsing the question.

IMO, at the time this question was created the intent was quite obviously, "When will Spitzer announce that he is resigning?". All of the pro and con arguments citing dictionary.com, etc, are just users trying to protect _their_ positions.

I propose that trusted Hubdubbers, particularly those that have participated in _this_ forum in good faith, should approve questions prior to their submission to the main site.

Given the many contentious questions and questionable settlements
I may create this question on Hubdub, "Is Hubdub a News Prediction Site or a Futures Market?". Where should I set the initial odds?

HubDub has always been decided based on NEWS stories. ALL of the news stories today say he resigned. Let's not re-write the rules.

http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/resi...

READ! Governor himself states resignation is March 17th.

Yes HE RESIGNED FROM OFFICE TODAY EFFECTIVE THE 17th.

THE QUESTION IS WHEN WILL HE RESIGN NOT WHEN WILL HE LEAVE OFFICE.

HE RESIGNED TODAY.

ENOUGH!

Spitzer will resign effective on March 17. He is still the Governor until the 17th. Enough already.

I agree. I enjoy HubDub but I DO NOT need the stress of these stupid arguments. I've already been through people trying to define words in a question to win. Enough is enough. The plain intent of the question should be followed. If this one goes void or no then I may just say enough is enough. This is supposed to be FUN.

He announced that he will be resigning March 17.
http://www.ny.gov/governor/press/resi...

belarusia keeps repeating the same thing over and over.

do we need spitzer to come to hubdub to satisfy him/her

HE Resigned today... AP, White House, etc...

Really Nigel and crew stop looking so silly, he "resigned" when he announced his resignation. End of story. Settle the question as of the 12th. "Spitzer Resigns" NYTIMES headline.

This is why I just don't hang around anymore. You really need to get your act together fast or this site will tank and very soon.

There are two things.
Firstly, I made my prediction as 'yes' (he will resign on March 12th). I saw it on CNN in live coverage and to me it was absolutely and undoubtfully clear that the governor has resigned, and the right answer must be 'yes'. So, I made the first (I think) settlement request after the anouncement.
Namely, in response of my request the editor made a 'clarification' putted in the Settlement details, as in the comments.
And that clarification stated also clearly and undoubtfully that the settlement would be firmly 'no'.
So, instead of protesting and raising another lenghty discussion on such obvious matter, I decided to 'protest' in some other way. I cashed in my bet on the 'yes' answer (with a loss of the amount of H$ 1081) and immediately made a bet on the 'no' answer, with very good gain, which I thought, after the 'presettlement', was sure.
And what is going now?
If the question is voided, I stay with my loss of 1081. If it will be settled as 'yes', I register another biiig loss, as my not so small bet on 'no' is wrong.
In this situation, I think the only right thing to do, is the 'no' settlement. Only because the editor clearly said that this will be the settlement, and he left the predictions open after he in fact made a preliminary settlement ('presettlement').
It is obvious, I think, that in every other case I'll get a loss not because I was wrong, but because the administration of the site putted me in that position and forced me to do that.
*
In the same time, this sort of interpretation can serve for a classic example for the college students in the legal schools for how NOT TO interprete a legal text, law etc.
There is a simple and very ansient rule on how to interprete and understand somewhat unclear sentences. You must always base your interpretation on the simple common sense, the reason and the intent.
In our case it's more than obvious that the question asked when and will the governor make a public and official anouncement of his resignation. That is the 'uncertainity', on which one can bet will it happen or not, that is the news wich are expected and previously unknown. Every other interpretation is taking 'ad absurdum', because there is no more uncertainity. "Will he resign" means synonymously "will he made public and official anouncement'.
In the other case, now we can post a question will he resign on Mon, March 17th, but there is absolute certainity, there is no news in that, everyone knows the answer and we all can make a good amount of H$, which is not the sense of all that.
Finally: an editor NEVER, NEVER, NEVER in any sircumstances should make a preliminary settlement. This must be the foundation and the philosophy of this site and his rules.

So, the answer should be 'NO", but the principle should be not.

Sorry for my boring thaughts.

He has resigned from office 3-12-08, he did. He's done. Thats it.
Any other outcome is ill form in the question. If that happens.
I quit Hubdub, I will be sad and disappointed in Hubdub.
I started over from $0 once before, I won't do it again.
sgall

the problem with users deciding on questions are many although in theory it may be a good idea-1-if any of the users or all of them make money there will be accusations of collusion-2-i think there are way too many questions for there to be 5 users to go through all of them-3-they are not being taken at face value but rather more analyzed than i would think-4-the real deciders on settlement may not see it as the 5 users do when it comes on settling so whats the point?..i cashed out but at this point im sure there are plenty of people who cashed out for the 16th and placed money on the 23rd hoping to recoup some of their losses..they realistically cant go back to the 16th now because then people have double losses and there will be more anger...there is no way this questions should have been left open after the opinion of the hd crew was given..it should have been settled as the 23rd then and discussed afterwards..y say its the 23rd and leave it open..if it wasnt the 23rd then it could have been reopened..whatever this is just my opinion

The question now is settled as "NO".

Why then for me it is voided?
I made my prediction BEFORE the suspend date.
I think, this should be fixed.

They voided it. A wimply way to end this and I am vastly disappointed. I may move to another better prediction site.

I posting comments here that I made earlier today in the market comments thread, as I believe folks should come out of this spitzer whole:

So the people who lost out will get their funds back.

How does this affect users, such as AnAverageAmerican, and likely scores of other users who cashed out yesterday at a significant loss, based on how you said you would settle the market.

In a voided market, their positions won't be there to return their funds -- or will they?

Ryan responded:

If people have cashed out of the market, they are out of the market, I don't really think that much can be done for those who cashed out early. I know we can't please everyone with this solution, and I'm sorry for all the confusion the "Spitzer incident" has caused. But hopefully since this has happened we can move on so something like this doesn't blow up again.

If you have a stake in option # 2 you win that stake. If were on the wrong side you get your money back via the void.

Ryan
Hubdub US Politics Content Editor

I replied to Ryan:

If people have cashed out of the market, they are out of the market, I don't really think that much can be done for those who cashed out early.

These loyal users cashed out of the market -- at a significant loss -- based on how YOU said the market was going to be settled. Indeed, they didn't "cash out early" ... they responded to what you said.

Now you change your position (which is fine) -- however, in your attempts to "make people whole", you do need to include those who acted based on what you said.

To say "if they stayed in" with their (worthless) original stake in option #1, they would have their original stake returned ... is not, IMNHO, a clear view of the situation.

[Disclosure: I also cashed out of option 1, at a heavy loss -- but with extreme luck I was subsequently able to take a position in option 2, only due to the wildly fluctuating market. I came out "ahead" with option 2, but not by as much if I had won on option 1. These comments are made with those in mind who were totally screwed by acting on the HD information of how the market would be settled -- and weren't as "extremely lucky" as I was.]

For the written rule amendments, I propose a definition of what resigning will be.

Resignation Market: The deciding factor for settlement will be when the intent to resign is announced.

* If as in the Larry Craig case that intent turns out to be false the market is resettled.

<snip>

How does this sound to everyone?</snip>

I (can) support that amendment. I would support an amendment either way.

I would like to raise one more time my problem, because nobody answer me, nor do anything.
On the question http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_G...
I made the prediction 'NO", way before the suspend time and before the discussions.
Now the question is settled as "NO", but in My Hubdub the result appears in "My void questions" section and with a wrong answer (yes instead of no). No gain of course is awarded.
This occur not for the first time and I hope that the problem will be fixed.

TW,

I appreciate your efforts on my, and sure lots of other users', behalf, but I was not intending to press this issue any further. I lost some H$, boo hoo, but it is just a game, we need to maintain some perspective.

In addition to rule changes, which apply to the community, perhaps we should also be collaborating on guidelines for the administrators. When to suspend a market, and what (not) to say in the comments of an open market spring immediately to mind (for some reason 8^). I'm sure the community and the admins would have lots of ideas that I have not thought of on this topic; perhaps the admins have already drafted guidelines of which we mere users are unaware.

I'm not concerned about my personal loss of H$, but I would like to see something constructive for Hubdub emerge from the "Elliot Spitzer sub-slime crisis"

If your account is showing predictions you did not make, or in opposition to those that you _did_ make, I would recommend opening a new thread as a bug report. That might elicit more of a response from Hubdub than a comment buried in this thread.

Here's a definitive answer from The Grey Lady, the venerable New York Times, on "About headline language: Did Governor Spitzer really “resign” on Wednesday?"

Yesterday, during the height of the Spitzer brouhaha, I popped off a question to The New York Times on their use of "resign" and "resigned".

The Times published the question today in their "Top Ten Spitzer Scandal Questions" (there were hundreds of them submitted).

Q. About headline language: Did Governor Spitzer really “resign” on Wednesday?

A.“This is likely an obscure question, but it’s generating a great deal of controversy within our group of 100 or so folks,” a reader asked. “How does (or should) The New York Times parse the term ‘resign’ as it applies to ‘announcing a resignation to take place on Monday’? In short, has Governor Spitzer resigned? I’ve seen ‘announced resignation’ and ‘resigned’ used within the same paragraph. Any suggestions on either ideal or accurate use of the word are very much appreciated.”

We asked Philip B. Corbett, deputy news editor, who oversees language issues for The Times. His reply: “Clarity and common sense favored the simple use of ‘resign’ in the headlines and lead paragraphs of our coverage on Wednesday and Thursday. While legally Spitzer’s role as governor will end at noon on Monday, I don’t think it was necessary to write a headline like ‘Spitzer Will Resign’ or ‘Spitzer Says He Will Resign.’ That might have led readers to think that he had not yet taken any formal action — that we were reporting on something that was expected to happen, rather than on something that had already taken place.

“In fact, he submitted a letter of resignation and made a formal announcement on Wednesday. The resignation takes effect on Monday — as we reported quickly and clearly in our articles — but I think ‘Spitzer Resigns’ conveyed the essence of the news most effectively. "

<http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/200...>

Orlin, I also had a (H$ 100) prediction in that market -- and I predicted "No".

It appears in my Voided Questions as:
Will Governor Elliot Spitzer resign from office on 3/12/08?
Yes hd$100 hd$100 hd$0

I don't know why the listed answer is "Yes".

That's a good catch! -- and I would also second AnAverageAmerican's suggestion to begin a new Question in this forum, pointing that out as a bug report.

And to emphasize what you are saying ... "Void" does not show in the Settlement Details ...

There were several actions performed:
1. Settled as 'No' Today 2:47am PST
2. Previous action withdrawn Today 2:48am PST
3. Settled as 'No' Today 2:48am PST

but the final action of "Void" is not displayed.

I started a new thread on this - http://getsatisfaction.com/hubdub/top...

Thank You AnAverageAmerican and TruthWrangler.

I comletely agree with InfernalMachine: the Spitzer questions were not poorly defined.
In reverse, they were very simple and clear - 'would he publicly and formally resign?"
And that was done. This is the simple and most common understanding.
Anything else should be described as "If he resign, when resignation will take effect?", "will he resign and effect immediately" etc.
We must search the common sense and most appropriate meaning in the speciffic circumstances and not digg into artifficial ambiguities especially when they are not.

I agree with InfernalMachine and Orlin, except I'd say we don't have to search for the common sense meaning. it should be obvious! It's when we _do_ search for the hidden meaning of a question that a Spitzer occurs.