Destry's dashboard

I think that with the fluidity of markets "catching" the markets on the move is essential. I just caught the will obama drop out of race market at an opportune time and got great odds.
I think suspending and unsuspending markets would be nice to have an automatic email generated.

Just wanted to pop in and first clear up that I am a male. I am looking forward to when all that information is on our profiles.
I don't seem the harm in unsuspending a market without notice. What is the downside, maybe I am just missing it. I hope one of the improvements on the horizon is that we can look at our open predictions by category or status.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23697622/

Note the following quote from that link: Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s hopes of ending the primaries with game-changing victories from new contests in Florida and Michigan grew dim on Tuesday as Florida officially scuttled plans for a new vote and Michigan lawmakers appeared far from a deal.

I think that the potential vetting system I have suggested would be ideal for fixing this problem. Not letting questions go live until they are reviewed, will take away some of the gaming potential. In the meantime is it possible to restrict new accounts from creating questions for 7 days, that would prevent users from creating multiple accounts just to create questions, and if they are dedicated enough to do 7 days in advance, then hopefully we can stop them another way.
I don't know about other users, but I look at the new questions frequently. I flag them as soon as I can if I see a problem, and am anxious to see changes come to prevent users from gaming the system.

Here is what you asked: Will Florida hold another democratic contest to seat their delegates by June 2008.
By Florida one could only ascertain that by Florida you meant the Florida DNC who is the only governing body that could hold a democratic contest to seat "thier" delegates.
The Florida DNC is the sole authority on holding a contest to seat "thier" delegates. All the National DNC can do is choose out to deal with delegates that were chosen with previous contest. There is no arguement for delaying settling this question. All the major news sources have reported that there will be NO other contest, primary or caucus in Florida. That is what the question asked, the settlement details were clear.
We are getting into the arguement of what is possible versus what is probable. There is nothing that is impossible. Will the world explode, the internet cease to exist, all is possible, any of it probable no. It is "possible" that the NFL will learn some new evidence that the Giants cheated and take away the super bowl victory, so should we not have settled the super bowl questions. How absurd do we want to get. Let common sense rule the day. Let us set a precedent that questions will be settled quickly, fairly, and according to the sources provided.

I am so confused. If a question asks will a plane fall out of the sky by August. And then all the major news sources report a plane fell out of the sky, shouldn't the question be settled. Well it seems the new procedure would be to post that the editor is thinking about settling the question, then someone else would say, did it fall or was it shot out of the sky, then the question would be suspended and a long drawn out conversation would take place, in which definitions of the word fall and shot down would be quoted, all because common sense doesn't seem to apply. Then someone would say well lets wait til August before settling.
Can we please get back to the basics. A question is asked, wagers are placed, a news agency reports on the specific question that was asked, a question is settlled and we move on.
I am waiting for someone to argue whether the boston celtics won or the houston rockets lost, that way the question could never be settled. When did common sense, basic rules get thrown out. I know mistakes have been made settling markets, but get back on the damn horse and start settling questions again.

Hubdub says the following:
What is Hubdub? Hubdub is all about letting you actively participate in the day’s news, following today’s events, predicting their outcomes and competing with other users to find out who the real news junkies are!

Hubdub is not here for news organizations to use as polling data. It is here for the users. The outcome of the questions should be settled by news sources, not what a majority of people on getsatisfaction say. Talk about being able to game a question. The problem Hubdub is experiencing these last few weeks, it that questions are being argued and not settled using common sense or what a news media is reporting. While we may disagree with a news story that still doesn't mean a news story isn't being reported a certain way.
It is ridiculous to think questions should be started at 50/50, ideally questions would be vetted and odds adjusted if not accurate. A person wishing to publish a question should do the necessary research to get the correct starting odds. I spend 20 minutes researching the odds of this weeks golf tournament so I could post two questions.
When a person creates a question they are given choices of other questions that are similar and they can then decide if it is repeatitive. As Hubdub moves forward with new improved procedures I am sure less and less gaming will be able to be done.

Jenni I am not picking on you, I didn't even realize it was one of your questions. I do want to say that I don't think the question writer should have any decision making in the settlement of thier question. A question writer should make the settlement details clear and specific at time of writing the question. Providing a reliable news source and going from there. I do not want to wager on what the Hubdub community think a particular news story means, I want to wager on news stories. When there is clear agreement across all the news sources as thier is here, this question should be settled and this be a non issue.
By the way jenni I love your questions.

I also want to state I think we are entering a slipper slope on posting opinions about how to decide a question. The settlement details state as reported by a major news source and 3 major news sources all report on this question directly. There should not be a settlement that reads "a major newsource and the opinion of the people on getsatisfaction".
I know we are gunshy on pulling trigger on political questions but not all of them are worhty of debate, some are clear cut.
I am wondering what is going to happen on the debate question about what is first topic, if the candidates get an opening statement are we going to rule based on what topic they bring up first, or is it up to the questioners?

The National DNC can not force the Florida DNC to hold another primary or caucus. The National DNC has already told Florida what would happen if they moved up thier primaries and florida moved them up with full knowledge, now everyone is shocked. Please. The National DNC can only now decide what to do with the delegates from the original vote, maintain the current restrictions or allow them to be seated with penalty or no vote at all. Florida DNC stated clearly it will NOT hold another primary or caucus to decide.
Settle now and free up the money. If the National DNC does something it wouldn't make this question settle differently.

I want to follow up what truthwrangler said, and make it clear that I feel these questions should be treated as any other news story. I watched the local nightly news tonight, lead story was a teacher sex scandal, followed by a home invasion in which home owners were shot, then they discussed the rise in local assaults. News is rarely pleasant, death unfortunately is news worthy. While I like some of the others here remember the baby jessica story from many years ago and how happy we were when rescued safely, unfortunately we can't only read happy news. If this site starts to protect people from the realities of the world, then maybe they shouldn't be on this site. This is a news forecasting site. If you want a site for wagering on only sports there are sites for that, but this site covers news.
Here are some interesting statistics that put things into perspective. I will preface with I believe every life is valuable, and our soldiers (at least here in America) volunteer for the service. They know beforehand that they are being trained for War, serving overseas and being in harms way is part of thier job description. Okay here are some stats:
1) During World War 2, America lost an average of 101,000 soldiers a year for the 4 year stretch.
2) During Vietnam, America lost 52,000 on average per year.
3) On the day America dropped the atomic bomb an estimated 92,000 japanese were killed. In one moment.
I believe that the roughly 4,000 lives that have been lost in the Iraq war is the price our generation pays for freedom. We lost 3,000 civilians that didn't volunteer to be put on the front lines of any war on a single day in September.
I wish we lived in a more peaceful society, but sometimes war is needed to ensure the peace.

I am so happy to see pics4d back. I don't doubt that they will soon be back on top of the leaderboard, but in meantime, I am going to enjoy my number 5 status. Now I just need crudsy to have an off day. I am looking forward to being able to chat directly with other users, I have posted my email on here for others, feel free to send a message.

I want to state what I think is a fundamental difference between what I see the value of this site and what others may. I enjoy the news, I am a news junkie, this site provides a great opportunity to use some of the knowledge I have about current events in order to move up the leaderboard, as well as learn about subjects that I may have not been aware of. I have learned a great deal about news topics I might not have been normally reading. I also found a group of people who were addicted to news like myself, were very intelligent, and that was enjoyable. Those of us that have been here for a while have seen the "gamers" come and go, we have weathered stormy questions before (ie.. wind chill).
I feel this site is great because it allows people to wager on news questions, I don't get excited about creating questions and seeing how they play out. I think most people that create questions do so in order to fill a void. Crudsy (sorry don't know your real name, nor will you add me as a friend), has been doing amazing job with sports questions, as has beezler and sdchargers. There are amazing people writing questions for the stock markets, not because they want to see how wonderful they can write a question, but becuase questions don't exist. I feel that the gaming of this site, the clarity of questions could be drastically reduced by having questions in advance of known events. We know there will be stock market questions each day. We know the major sports schedules, the entertainment shows, we can make these questions more standard and reduce some of the issues just by doing that. Secondly, vetting questions before allowing them to go live is a must. And once a question is vetted, allowing it to be fully functioning immediately. Today is good example we have a question about the market that is under the 12 hour rule and no one can cash in positions, therefore market is getting little play. I think if category editor or power user was to vett this question then it could immediately be open to wagering. I feel that power users and category editors vetting questions would make for a good win win situation. I would allow power users to wager on the questions they vetted, these people vetting them are only saying yes it is clear, no it is not clear, or it needs further analysis.
I think people would have more fun wagering on the questions that are created, knowing there were clear common sense settlement guidelines, than they do by creating questions.

I am sorry to see you go Pics4d. I completely understand your frustration. Voiding a question is a simple thing, it gives back those invested in a question thier original wager and if it is done within the 12 hours of question being submitted won't allow anyone to profit from cashing in from obvious gaming questions. I believe the priorities of this site simply need to reflect what the majority of users enjoy about the site. Most enjoy wagering on the questions not creating them, some users do an amazing job of creating questions (crudsy for one) does amazing job on sports questions. I believe that questions need vetted, this would solve 90% of the issues that arise. A person that creates question can't wager for 12 hours, a person betting on question can't cash out for those same 12 hours, so why not have a process in which questions submitted were vetted within 12 hours. We could allow questions created by category editors and certain users who have been vetted to have thier questions go live immediately. I also think we could have a wider range of pre-written questions for events we know will take place. We know the markets, we know the dates of sporting events, we know the olympics are coming up, questions could be generated and introduced as the time was appropriate.
As to how disputes should be resolved, I believe that the editors really want to do the right thing, trying to read what someone means is challenging. If a hubdub official makes a comment about clarification on a question, then that should be "official". When mistakes are made it should be fixed as soon as possible.
I have been having the same thoughts as pics4d as to leaving the site, but instead of just been participating less. I have been making far less money cause I am staying out of questions which could be controversial, just because it isn't worth the hassle.

I am behind proposition 2. I like the idea of a tagging system, but don't feel questions should be voided because they offend someone. They are not forced to wager on those questions, and can simply choose not to read them. These questions raise public awareness and if story is reported by major news site then it should be allowed.

So if you resettle a market what happens. Do those people who gained from the original settlement get money taken away from them, and then what about the profits they were able to produce with thier ill gotten (or premature) winnings. I am just asking for consistency, I made the argument with the Cleveland debate that it should be settled quickly so I could have my money to wager, and you stated clearly what I printed up above. Does this new "Spitzer" rule mean that none of the old rules are going to apply and that we are settling things in a whole new light? This philly debate is still 4 weeks away, and in politics that is an eternity.
So if Hillary drops out before election, you will resettle at that time, and I will then be returned my original investment plus my winnings, but in meantime I don't have opporturnity to do anything with those funds, not even cash out a position. If we are certain she is going to be in the debate, then why not settle the questions about her dropping out of the race, then resettle is she does. We could settle all the pledged delegate wagers, the news sources say regardless of the outcomes of the races Obama will go into convention with more pledged delegates. But no one is asking for that or expecting it, I just think we should wait for an event to occur before settling. Resettlement should be a LAST resort and not a catch all for pulling the trigger to early. When one wagers on a question that isn't expected to happen for more than a month, they are committing that money, so they weren't planning on using to have more "fun".

http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_S...

Well what if the paperword is filed on April 30, 2008, but they wait til following day to make the announcement, how will question be settled. What if they announce an upcoming announcement on thier plans to divorce in the next week. How does that get decided. I could find a million of these questions that we could parse and make unsettleable. Each of these questions seem to have a clear common sense reading, but we are not using that has a guiding light.

Here is another one to think about:
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_B...

What if they are in the mall and split up to buy food at different stores? Will TMZ report brad and angelina split up? So it must be a yes. But wait they got back together 2 minutes later. So now it is a NO, OH wait they split up so he could go get the car, YES. He picked her up in car... NO... Talk about a question that can be discested to a point where no answer will work.

Okay finding these questions are way to easy: http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_G...

are we going to use any act of violence? Or just violence caused by trying to do something in the game. What if on the release day two people get in fight over the game, is that an act of violence that will justify a yes. do they need to be charged with violence, or just have any hometow newspaper cover the story?