Recent activity
Subscribe to this feed
Destry replied on June 22, 2008 20:13 to the idea "In Play markets" in Hubdub:
First I think these are great markets. Second I hope that Donal will approve them. I suspended them until Donal can approve. The labeling of them IN PLAY was the only point where I didn't want Hubdub users to get confused. I have asked that Donal approve all these markets for the IN Play status. He is currently on vacation and Brian who is filling in will run these by him in the following days. I am sure once he gets back he will address the IN play markets. I know in another thread he mentioned some basics, hopefully we can now get further details.
Destry shared an idea in Hubdub on June 22, 2008 19:53:
In Play marketsAll In-Play markets which can roughly be defined as sports markets in which the suspend time is set for after the event begins. These markets need to be approved by the Category Editor before being created.
If someone wants to create a market and have it labeled "In Play" then they should either first contact the Category Editor and get pre-approval, or create the question and set suspend date in accordance with current rules, then request that the market be designated In Play and suspend date moved.
Destry replied on June 20, 2008 00:13 to the question "How do I "appeal" if I feel a question was settled wrong?" in Hubdub:
You have did exactly what is needed. Now that the question has been asked here, all the admins and super users have received an email notification. While I am not completely sure about the market you have an issue with, I do remember some conversation about it. I am sure that Donal or another admin will address it shortly on here.-
Destry started following the idea "Super Users now on Hubdub's GetSatisfaction Site" in Hubdub.
Destry started a conversation in Hubdub on June 18, 2008 04:58:
In Play NBA Final market feedbackI am starting this thread to provide a place for everyone to discuss what they liked and what they disliked about the NBA Finals in play markets. I have some ideas for future in play markets, and think we should keep them limited in quantity and reserved for major events.
I would love to see some of the following events open for in game play. The Major golf tournaments, the MLB playoffs (or just World Series), NFL football (Sunday night game and Monday night game as a minimum), College Football (just the major matchups between top rated teams, and the BCS bowl games), Tennis (just the grand slam events), NASCAR (Daytona 500, a few of the other important events), NHL (stanley cup), WNBA (finals), and I am sure some of you will find others I can't think of.
I propose the following, sports markets close at set times depending on sport. Lets start with Football, suspend any questions about the results of the first quarter before the game
starts (ie.. which team scores more points in first quarter), suspend questions about the results of the first half at the end of the first quarter of play, to carry this all the way out, 3rd quarter markets would suspend at half time, and questions about the final outcome would suspend at end of 3rd quarter. With baseball playoffs, we should suspend games at the 7th inning stretch. Nascar races should suspend with they are within 10% of the final number of laps, if it is 500 lap race, it would suspend when there was only 50 laps to go. I think we can all come up with interesting ways to make these markets exciting, while preventing people from wagering on events that are most likely known. With the other sports we can work out suspension times that provide excitement but don't allow wagering on events when outcome not likely to change.
Destry replied on June 15, 2008 17:10 to the question "No more DJIA, the moron's approach to climbing the leaderboard" in Hubdub:
Destry replied on June 14, 2008 04:17 to the question "No more DJIA, the moron's approach to climbing the leaderboard" in Hubdub:
I fought to get the in play markets for the NBA Finals. So after seeing them run, I can say I have formed some solid opinions. First and foremost, I think in play markets benefit those users who can dedicate the time to it. Is it fair for everyone absolutely not. I believe that the Dow questions should suspend at the opening of the market. I believe that sports questions should suspend at the beginning of them too. Until the Dow questions are changed, I think we should allow in play sports questions.
The essence of this issue is how much predicting and how much following of the news is required to be successful. With regards to the dow, it is no different than a baseball game, it has a beginning and ending, events occur during those two points which determine the outcome. A major report is released, causing market to move rapidly, in sports a player might get injured causing the outcome to be in doubt. What do we say to baseball fans that are penalized because they their wagers suspended at the beginning of the game, while we let the Dow players, go til the final pitch. There are those that say because we don't know what time the baseball game will end, we have to suspend it early. Well what we need to work on is a way to void all wagers made after the game is final. When we can void wagers which were even cashed out after that point, then we could allow those games to run til the end. Do I think this will make Hubdub better... absolutely not. I think it would make it fairer for most of the users. I believe if we want to make Hubdub better then we should treat all questions equally, and suspend all questions about a scheduled event before the event begins.
How do we deal with the major events in the world, we should follow the example of Vegas, allow "prop" bets, but suspend them before the game begins. If you want to wager on the over under in second half of football game you have to do it before it begins.
Destry replied on June 09, 2008 15:56 to the idea "Question Creation Leaderboard" in Hubdub:
Destry replied on June 08, 2008 03:46 to the idea "Question Creation Leaderboard" in Hubdub:
I think the last thing we need is more leaderboards. I feel like we are taking this politically correct everyone is a winner theory a bit too far. There are winners and losers, if a person cant find a reason to be motivated then that is their problem. Some of the things I do, is try to move up a particular leaderboard, I pick a user and try to beat them for a given period. The last thing I want is more leaderboards.
Destry replied on June 05, 2008 22:10 to the problem "A Hubdub representative (super user Mork) not being a good role model for Hubdub?" in Hubdub:
Destry replied on June 04, 2008 23:22 to the problem "A Hubdub representative (super user Mork) not being a good role model for Hubdub?" in Hubdub:
Destry replied on June 04, 2008 20:12 to the problem "A Hubdub representative (super user Mork) not being a good role model for Hubdub?" in Hubdub:
I can't speak for another super user. I can say that this question seemed very specific and given the limited background should have been settled as a NO. Common sense would lead me to believe that if a dollar amount is given in us dollars and the fine isn't that amount, then it is a NO. Were the starting odds off, maybe. I think what we had is a question that should have been voided before settlement.
Destry replied on June 04, 2008 13:59 to the problem "Cannot create a question suspending in 2029!" in Hubdub:
Destry replied on June 04, 2008 00:51 to the discussion "Username editing?" in Hubdub:
Destry replied on June 02, 2008 04:41 to the idea "Hubdub Question Reminder Tool" in Hubdub:
Destry replied on June 01, 2008 23:06 to the problem "Duplicate Market?" in Hubdub:
Destry replied on May 31, 2008 21:55 to the idea "Hubdub Hall Of Fame" in Hubdub:
Destry replied on May 31, 2008 07:45 to the discussion "New Rule Proposal for US Presidential Elections" in Hubdub:
My only point is this, for 48 of the 50 states, if we ask the question "which candidate wins state X", whether we use the popular or electors the results are exactly the same, since one leads to another. But for the two states in which the electors are decided based on the popular vote by congressional district, it would be possible for one candidate to have more popular votes but end up with less electors. So if the question is "which candidate will win Maine (or Nebraska)", we are going to determine winner based on who has more electors for electoral college and not the popular vote... is this correct? The only downside I see for using the electors is that hypothetically those electors are not forced to vote for a particular candidate, and we could be forced to delay settlement until the electoral college meets.
Destry replied on May 31, 2008 03:50 to the problem ""Question suspends in" clock is off by an hour" in Hubdub:
Destry replied on May 30, 2008 17:38 to the discussion "Business Indices Questions - Restrictions have become Necessary" in Hubdub:
I am hoping we see in the phase 2 rollout of the super user functions a situation in which all questions are in a suspend status until they can be reviewed. I hope that would help stop some of these problems from occurring. I also think we should spend more time working with new users on creating good markets.
| next » « previous |
Loading Profile...
