Destry's dashboard

Destry started a conversation in Hubdub on March 01, 2008 08:33:

What happened to PICS4D?

Pics4d what happened to you. I started to get worried as I saw you falling down the leaderboard so fast. I had come to rely on you to dominate the leaderboard, and keep helping me win wagers. I hope everything is okay. Us Hubdubaholics have to stay together.

Destry replied on March 01, 2008 08:17 to the question "Escalation: Got some rock to sell on eBay?" in Hubdub:

How about we make it a policy that we don't allow Ebay questions. This is a news forecasting site and 99% of ebay questions are not news related. Simply voiding the question returns everyones original wagers, no winners, no losers.

Destry replied on February 29, 2008 19:45 to the problem "New leaderboard question settlement dispute" in Hubdub:

I also didn't have any money on this wager. But I do agree that the new friends leaderboard doesn't constitute that question being settled. I think TruthWrangler summed it up perfectly.

Destry replied on February 28, 2008 06:45 to the discussion "hubdub addiction" in Hubdub:

Hi Steph. Welcome. You are among other dubaholics. I just love reviewing a list of websites I have visited in the last 24 hours. I have reviewed weather in Angola, read up on russian presidential elections, tried to figure out who was favored to win a cricket game (I know it is not played with real crickets), and am hoping that Derek Anderson will accept $20 million dollars before March 1st is over. I am anxious to February to be over so I can win some wagers. The worse part is that I thought about starting an Ebay auction claiming to sell a piece of the satellite, so I could win a wager.
I think the best part about being a hubdubaholic is watching the new hubdubbies grow up to become hubdubbers. A gentle warning to those that are not full addicts yet, you know you are addicted when you know what the DAX is and what time the Nikkei index closes.

Destry replied on February 26, 2008 23:38 to the discussion "hubdub addiction" in Hubdub:

Lesley you are right on the money. I think the fact that I stayed up til 3:00 am EST waiting for it to rain in Denver shows a sign of addiction. I almost considered watching MTV Roadies for insights into those questions, and read forum boards til I was dizzy on the tv show the wire.
Then there is the opening and closing bell of the DOW, I feel like Pavlovs dog, I drool when I hear the bell wondering which of my wagers I won.
Today was horrible day, I woke up to a power outage, my head hurt trying to process first whether I had wagered on the power going out, then wondering if I had gas for the generator to power up the computer.
As far as the leaderboard goes, I believe no matter where you are on it (or not on it) you are wanting to creep up just a little higher. And then worry about those below you catching you. I have to admit I have looked at the profiles of those on the leaderboard and looked over the hundreds of positions they have, wondering if they are good positions for me to get in and then thinking, but if I wager on them they will have even more money. What is a person to do.
I am waiting on the term for those of us addicted to Hubdub, are we "hubdubites, hubdubbies, hubdubalohics, or just hubdubazoids.

Destry replied on February 25, 2008 06:38 to the discussion "hubdub addiction" in Hubdub:

I have Hubdub as one of the several homepages my browser starts. I read more news now than ever before, just tonight I checked the weather forecast for Angola. I find myself reading news all the time. I see something on TV and think do I have a wager on that?
I am glad to see others out there addicted as I am.

Destry replied on February 25, 2008 06:34 to the question "Escalation: Should we void these questions?" in Hubdub:

I agree with you 4d. I think the child question which can be verified by a news source that is unbias is acceptable. I think the Jesus question should be voided. I think the reasons we impose rules, is to rectify a problem, so it should be applied retroactively. Especially since we are very limited with the amount of rules that we want placed on us. Questions being voided don't hurt anyone, at worse it puts the original amount of your wager back in your account. I think we should void questions as soon as we see there is no clear settlement. If there is a potential problem, the default position should be to void the question and re-post after corrections were made if possible. Prime example is the CNN question about predicting the results on March 4th.

Destry replied on February 24, 2008 18:02 to the problem "Question was edited which changed conditions of question." in Hubdub:

Hey Ryan,
So there is a great chance that if this contest is decided between 10:01 pm EST and 1:00 am EST (10pm PST), then the question will be voided and my money which is tied up until then will be returned. I bet on this question because I felt there was no way CNN would take til 10pm PST. I wagered 9000k. I would not have wagered this amount if question would have stated 10pm EST. I asked for clarification and was told PST would be used, then that changed AFTER I wagered my money.
Why can't we simply void original question, start new question with the terms that the question has now, and moves peoples wagers that choose to wager on this question with the NEW terms. I do not want 9000k tied up until this with a good possibility of the money just being voided.
Shouldn't we void questions in general that have a likelihood of becoming voided. If a question can't be settled and we know it in advance then void.

Destry reported a problem in Hubdub on February 23, 2008 18:29:

Question was edited which changed conditions of question.

This question was published which asked about CNN making a prediction on the Ohio. A time was given as 10pm. There was no time zone indicated, so I asked for varification on time zone. Assuming all time zones unless otherwise stated are PST. I was told PST was time zone, so I wagered money on this question, then noticed the question kept getting edited more to cause confusion. Then this morning the question is edited to read EST, this is a 3 hour difference in time and greatly impacts the outcome of this question. Can we please get the question voided. I agree it is a good question, but people need to wager on a question with a certain set of circumstances and feel comfortable that thier question isn't going to change dramatically. I might still wager on the question but not to the points I did with the original terms of the question.
I hope this can lead to a distinct policy that questions in which editing requires changing potential results will be voided and re-submitted.
Link to question: http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_C...
Read the comments to see how clarification has been sought all along.

Destry replied on February 23, 2008 02:20 to the idea "Would it be beneficial to be able to have the ability to set automatic "buy and sell" orders?" in Hubdub:

First I would like to say goodbye to Golwar, sorry to see you go. I like the open questions on the markets, I like the fluidity, the ability to participate and see movements. I would think that a site in which you simply place a bet then waited for an outcome would quickly become unpopular. I think that is why you see such huge activity in markets that close sooner rather than later. Tying up money in long term questions while might be a certain way to get a particular return (ie. Will Bush serve out his term) might be safe and reliable, it won't move you up the leaderboard. I would like to see the site become more able to include breaking newstories. Today for example a plane was having issues with its landing gear, I would have enjoyed a question about whether the plane would land safely, however, I am not creating the question because I can't vote for 12 hours and event will be over by then. I have stated here and elsewhere I disagree with questions on television shows that have already been filmed. These shows often get thier results leaked, and therefore the wager is not a prediction, just putting money on a known outcome.
I love the HUBDUB site, think the administrators are doing an amazing job of keeping the site fresh and exciting, the new tools are incredible, and the response to thier users is impressive.

Destry replied on February 22, 2008 09:28 to the problem "What is the "value" of a prediction?" in Hubdub:

This is a problem I am noticing as well. I have placed several large bets on the question who will be highest on leaderboard, and I am being undervalued in those positions now.
pics4d
*WAGER at % If I am right amount Amount Currently worth
9,000 at 85.26% 10,556 4,863 at 46.07%

3,439 at 91.21% 3,770 2,828 at 75.00%

10,000 at 96.64% 10,348 4,844 at 46.81%

10,000 at 96.00% 10,416 4,851 at 46.57%

Currently the question is showing pics4d at 87%. Shouldn't my wagers be currenlty worth value of 87%. Or shouldn't there be a column for current worth and column for cash in value. The current worth should be what is used on leaderboard. The cash in value is a price you pay for taking money out, knowing that that size of wager will move the market down to that percentage.
As you can see from these 4 wagers I will only earn $2651 on my investment of 32,439. However when these are settled my profits will jump up by 17701 dollars. I know at the end of the day it will settled out correctly. But in a marketplace I would like to be able to close out of positions before they are settled at a fair value.

Is there a way to fix it or is this one of those problems that only the people with alot of money have to worry about. I rarely make a wager less than 1000k, (speaking of which can you add a button for a 1000k wager with a percentage). Is there anyway to get the 10k limited lifted as well.

Destry replied on February 17, 2008 06:36 to the question "How can we improve My Hubdub?" in Hubdub:

I am going to start by saying that the new percentage movements in the market seem to be slowing down the amount of money that can be made. Having a large cash position, it is very touch to wager and get any good odds on questions, unless they are sports book questions (which aren't news stories). I think we are going to see smaller movements in the leaderboards unless someone makes huge wagers on long shots trying to win them all. I had $50k in cash at one point today and would need to wager $1000 on 50 different topics, and usually by the time I wager a 1000 on a market it moves the percentages to where I might make 300 dollars. I do this with 50 bets and I can make 15k. That is going to take alot of great wagering in order to slowly make up for those who have much higher bank accounts.
I am proposing offering my services to HUBDUB, I think the fun in this site now is seeing if I can help make it better. Keeping the questions relevant, easy to settled, not duplicate, and fairer to wager on. I don't want power to settle questions (leave that to category editors) just power to suspend questions whose events have been determined, and power to void questions that are obviously no good HUBDUB questions. Please use me any way you need to I am open to making my account completely transparent for others to see my open and closed positions, settled questions, and cashed in postions.
Let me know. I have the time to spend on the computer, I live on the East Coast of Florida when most events are occuring.

Destry

Destry replied on February 15, 2008 22:58 to the problem "Incorrect Settlement" in Hubdub:

Blueseamiami quotes - I submit that if the question is based on settlement from a non-reputable news source and the truth can be proven from a MORE reputable source, at the very least, both sides should be declared winners.***
Both sides win. Now where in the definition of logic does that make sense. You are starting with the presumption that Wunderground is not a reputable source, which I feel is completely incorrect, so therefore any other statements are meaningless. If Tom Brady passes for 210 yards as reported by NFL.com, and fred.com (not reliable source) says 201 I would say that the default position is that you go with a reliable source. If the question stated according to freds.com how many yards will tom brady pass, then the question should be voided based on the fact that a reputable source wasn't used for settlement. And you in all your incredible intelligence should NOT wager on it.
I feel you should prove that Wunderground isn't a reliable source. Are they using unqualified people to report the weather, are there faulty devices recording the temperature, without anything other than your saying so, this is a reliable source. They use meterologist, NOAA equipment, and are unbiased.
I think that HUBDUB should have a standard default for answering questions. In the event a non reliable source is used for settlement then question should be voided and NOT wagered on by those who claim to be able to use LOGIC.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic

Destry replied on February 15, 2008 22:11 to the problem "Incorrect Settlement" in Hubdub:

This question had a website that would be used to settle this question. End of sentence. If there was debate on the website being a weather website or a bias site, then that is one thing, but we are discussing a major website with Wunderground. Each weather site uses different points in a city for temperature readings, in my local market there are often times that different news channels report different readings for the same "city". That is why this is such a non issue, a website was provided for settlement, it is a major website that is not biased, if you feel a question is not using a site you feel comfortable with then don't wager on that question.

Destry replied on February 15, 2008 21:49 to the problem "Incorrect Settlement" in Hubdub:

You knew the site that was going to be used before making the wager. You weren't forced to wager on this bet. Seems you are just trying to recover your losses by complaining after the fact. Here is a link to information on Wunderground, and they are reputable, just because you loss doesn't make them any less reputable. http://www.wunderground.com/about/bac...
Seeing how this is your second controversy with weather related questions, you might choose to wager your money elsewhere.

Destry replied on February 15, 2008 05:34 to the idea "Question settlement escalation" in Hubdub:

I also feel the staff at hubdub is doing an amazing job. I think the standard default position is that if a question is in doubt and there is no clear way to settle, just void question and return wagers. I don't wager on questions that I don't feel can be settled clearly. I think if more people read settlement details, and questions were voided if there was a potential question then that would force people making questions to be clearer. I think if a question is flagged and then suspended until it can be reviewed that would help with settlement issue.
I would volunteer to review questions that were flagged and agree not to wager on those questions I reviewed. That has been my suggestion for a group of power users that had ability to review questions, suspend questions, and send those that were still questionable to the category editors, not only could we build a better community, we each would feel more comfortable wagering on questions.
We even could have all new questions in a suspend status until the power users could review and a consensus could be reached to open question to wagering.

Destry replied on February 15, 2008 01:28 to the idea "Question settlement escalation" in Hubdub:

Questions that do not have a clear settlement should be voided. There should be no question as to the events. In the event of a question that is unclear, simply void and state reason why, maybe include idea for way question could be worded more clearly. I think questions should be cut and dry, no room for arguement, in that case just void and move forward.

Destry replied on February 14, 2008 18:36 to the question "How can we improve My Hubdub?" in Hubdub:

Id love a live chat room. Somewhere where users and admins could go and chat in realtime.

Destry replied on February 14, 2008 18:34 to the question "How can we improve My Hubdub?" in Hubdub:

I love the idea of the calculator. I would love to see what percentage my wager is going through at before I make it.
I don't like the idea of the percentage changes going on. Seems the fun of a question was finding a question that had maybe 30-40% and then wagering on it, and cashing out when it got to 50-60%,
I think the idea was to prevent so many questions from being in the 90% range and not getting alot of wagers on them. I like knowing exactly where all the money is, show me the amount of wagers on each option, that would be intersting.

Destry replied on February 14, 2008 18:28 to the problem "How does the system work?" in Hubdub:

I noticed that the markets were going wild this morning. I am guessing someone gamed the system this morning and was able to go from nothing to $300k in one morning.