Loading Profile...
Recent activity
Subscribe to this feed
Destry replied on April 05, 2008 04:22 to the discussion "Proposed new procedure for dealing with gaming" in Hubdub:
He has been fined before, that did nothing to stop him. If anything it made him do it more. Enough is enough. A complete ban, and any other users that want to game can see that this site will not put up with it. This isn't a simple matter of gaming one question here or there, but a mass amount of gaming, throwing it in the face of all the good and honest users, and the only way to deal with it is to completely get rid of it.-
Destry replied on April 05, 2008 03:01 to the discussion "Proposed new procedure for dealing with gaming" in Hubdub:
Jenni I think you have amazing ideas. I think in regards to this particular issue, his actions are not because of the situation, the situation is because of his actions. We were all here the first time, and warned admins regularly about the ongoing problem. It was only after it wasn't being stopped at all, and our complaints were being ignored, that the users finally got past the point of no return.
The admins now have a choice, determine the direction they wish to take thier site. -
Destry replied on April 05, 2008 02:47 to the problem "I am on STRIKE" in Hubdub:
Yeah even more interesting is that as the site gets away from focusing on ways to improve the news side of the site and goes after making the site look more slick and adds social networking features, the site is not attracting as many users. I think what they are seeing is that people want a news forecasting website, we have enough of the other sites, and since they didn't ask the community what improvement we wanted, they introduced a bunch of things that no one seems to care about and took time away from doing what they could to make the site run better. I still miss the original home screen, it was all about news, not all these pictures and graphics. -
Destry replied on April 05, 2008 02:19 to the problem "I am on STRIKE" in Hubdub:
Good point. But the important part is whether the site will have that mentality in which honest users will see what the site is about. This is a time for the admins at hubdub to decide in which direction that wish to go. Do they want a large number of users which can game and cheat the site, use all the cool social networking features, or do they want to appeal to the honest users, who found this site refreshing, a news forecasting site that allowed highly intelligent people a forum to share thier addiction of news with others. I believe if enough high profile people stand up and say, we don't want gamers on this site, they will not say so what, but will respond by giving our site back to us. -
Destry replied on April 05, 2008 01:20 to the problem "I am on STRIKE" in Hubdub:
Thank you crudsy. Well so far that is 2 of the top 5 users. Lets see who else decides to join in. I wonder how far Hubdub is willing to go to protect an obvious gamer. My problem is that they pretend they didn't know he was gaming. I personall talked to 3 different category admins they all claimed they knew about this user and were watching. -
Destry reported a problem in Hubdub on April 05, 2008 01:04:
I am on STRIKEI will not pariticipate in a website that promotes gaming, rewards gamers, and penalizes the average user who is trying to make it to the top following the rules.
I am asking others to join my strike, I will not wager another dollar until Hubdub deletes his account and bans any other accounts he attempts to use. Nigel and the admins can decide for the better of Hubdub whether they want to keep gamers or real users. People who try to benefit the community or others who mock its rules. I am not going to cash in any positions to affect any markets. I will continue to comment where appropriate, and watch markets movement. I will still notify Hubdub of markets in which gaming is detected (although they won't do anything about it), and request settlement in markets that need settled. -
Destry replied on April 05, 2008 00:48 to the discussion "Proposed new procedure for dealing with gaming" in Hubdub:
This is ridiculous. Simply put, the rules need to be strict and fair. First time someone is caught gaming the site, there should be public notice, ability to create questions suspended for 30 days, and account reset to $1,000. Second time someone games the site their account should be banned, thier IP address banned and thier positions in all markets not created by them to be taken over by Hubdub so not to create wild swings in markets.
I think gaming is the worse thing to happen. If I go from $1k to $100k and you take 50%, woo hoo, i still made 49K. Then I do it again, it is likely you won't ever find out, unless the entire site stands up and throws a fit, then if you do, oh no, i am back to 1k, please these rules will do nothing to stop gaming. Show the community that we don't allow gaming, BAN this user and lets move on.
And lets not try to pretend that your category admins didn't know about his gaming. I personally let 3 different ones know and each stated they knew, and were watching. -
Destry replied on April 03, 2008 16:05 to the question "Am I gaming the system?" in Hubdub:
I would agree completely that youare just successfully playing the markets. And just because it seems obvious to you, doesn't mean that everyone does it. Some people aren't comfortable trading that much, I love to trade a postion. A person can make alot of money by wagering on a position that don't think will be the outcome if they can get in at low enough of a percentage and get out before question is settled. I would say on a majority of the sports questions I try to get in and out of a market before the event. If I can wager $100 and get 40 or 50 bucks in profit, I will take that even if I could win a few hundred, because i could lose the original 100. So I like to make the guaranteed money.
I know for me gaming of the site is defined as purposely creating a question with lower odds than common sense would suggest, then wagering on that position to guarantee those profits. For example you take a question in which the odds should be 90-10 like will a certain baseball team score 3 runs in the first inning, but you set the odds at 60-40. Then you wager on the question, when the market forces move the question to a reasonable level of 90-10 or 95-5, then they cash in, profiting from incorrect starting odds. It is easier to do when you pick a sport that isn't as well known. It would be like starting the odds at 50-50 that the Patriots would beat the Dolphins last year. Obviously one team should be favored more like 90-10. -
Destry replied on April 03, 2008 09:11 to the discussion "Participation declining?" in Hubdub:
Let those questions on the front page be questions that are selected by the category admins. They are most familar with thier categories, and would be best suited for selecting questions. Leave them up for 24 hours, then select new questions. -
Destry replied on April 03, 2008 05:56 to the discussion "Brand New Leaderboards Live!" in Hubdub:
Well if a user isn't on a leaderboard now that is pretty sad, what are there 50 new leaderboards. I would like a leaderboard for people whose name start with the letter "D" and were born on Tuesday. I am sure as not to hurt anyone elses feelings, all letters and days of the week should be included.
I wish this amount of time and effort went into creating power users, negotiating settlement rules, clariifying questions, and addressing real concerns. Hubdub is starting to feel like Myspace or Facebook, I got plenty of social networking sites, I would like a news forecasting website. What is next music I can listen to, backgrounds, funny fonts, how about a clear set of rules, clear and concise questions, quicker settlement times, and getting rid of questions in which wager is more than 90% in one direction from the homepage. -
Destry replied on April 03, 2008 03:24 to the problem "Suspend v Settlement Times" in Hubdub:
I think it is up to the question creator when and what type of question they want to create. It is up to the person wagering on the event if they want to be in a market that has a short or long term between suspend and settlement.
It seems that a ton of time and effort is going into solving problems that are created by allowing questions to go live immediately. If all questions were held in suspend until they were approved by category editors, who would then look at starting odds, wording of questions, settlement details, and other factors, then if the question met the standards it would be made live immediately and there would be no need to have the 12 hour rule for wagering or cashing in the predictions. I see 10 different admins listed on the site, it seems that one admin could be assigned a set time period to filter new questions. I know selecting a few power users to also help in filtering new questions is in the works.
I personally select questions in which the suspend time and settlement time are very close together, I do not like having my money "locked" up for long periods of time. I like to play the market movements more than playing the outcome of events. I think it is personal preference, and seems to be a waste of the category editors time and energy since users can see when a question will suspend before they decide to wager on it. It is always going to be hard to deal with markets in which an event occurs before a known time, I think that is where having people dedicated to looking at flagged questions, settlement requests and new questions would make any potential conflicts be minimized. -
Destry replied on April 03, 2008 03:15 to the problem "Suspend v Settlement Times" in Hubdub:
I think it is up to the question creator when and what type of question they want to create. It is up to the person wagering on the event if they want to be in a market that has a short or long term between suspend and settlement.
It seems that a ton of time and effort is going into solving problems that are created by allowing questions to go live immediately. If all questions were held in suspend until they were approved by category editors, who would then look at starting odds, wording of questions, settlement details, and other factors, then if the question met the standards it would be made live immediately and there would be no need to have the 12 hour rule for wagering or cashing in the predictions. I see 10 different admins listed on the site, it seems that one admin could be assigned a set time period to filter new questions. I know selecting a few power users to also help in filtering new questions is in the works.
I personally select questions in which the suspend time and settlement time are very close together, I do not like having my money "locked" up for long periods of time. I like to play the market movements more than playing the outcome of events. I think it is personal preference, and seems to be a waste of the category editors time and energy since users can see when a question will suspend before they decide to wager on it. It is always going to be hard to deal with markets in which an event occurs before a known time, I think that is where having people dedicated to looking at flagged questions, settlement requests and new questions would make any potential conflicts be minimized. -
Destry replied on April 02, 2008 21:53 to the problem "DialIdol and other horrible internet applications" in Hubdub:
I think shows in which the outcome is not known, such as Dancing and American Idol, should be allowed to wagered on up til the broadcast of the results. The websites like Dial Idol simply attempt to predict the results, and sometimes they are wrong, so users use them at thier own risk. It is different when dealing with pre-recorded shows in which the outcome is certain.
I don't like the idea of suspending a question before the show airs, would make it super hard to predict who is going home based on the thier performance. A person could suspend the question after the show airs and before the voting takes place. I do have an issue with questions about who will Ryan touch, or who will be seated safe first, those are not newsworthy. The person voted off is reported by news agencies, but the first person to be safe isn't. -
Destry replied on April 02, 2008 05:28 to the question "Proposed rule amendments" in Hubdub:
How about we make it clear that questions should read "on or before" if they mean to include the date referenced, and those that should occur before a set period of time should say "before". I just think we are going to see some confusion of the new people who read a question that references a larger time period than a simple day, such as a season or a year. I wish I would of had these rules when my mom use to say be home by dark, then I could have shown up anytime it was dark and things would have been good. I think a common sense reading would lead people to believe that if I ask will the stock market close under 10,000 by 2009, that is shouldn't include the entire year of 2009. I have seen several recent comments of people looking to clarify this point, and I figured while the floor was open to rule amendments, we could fix this rule which I think goes against common sense. -
Destry replied on April 01, 2008 21:14 to the question "Proposed rule amendments" in Hubdub:
I would like to see Hubdub redefine the meaning of the word "by". Currently if a question says will "x" occur by "Y", then "y" is included in the date. For example will Brittney Spears go into hospital by March 31, 2008, means that March 31, 2008 is part of the wager. I have suggested that we use the term "on or before" as a way around this, but I also think that the term by in a question should exclude the date. If I pose a question that says will Brittney Spears break her leg by 2009, under Hubdub rules the question wouldn't be settled until January 1, 2010. I believe that 2009 shouldn't be part of the question. We have heard in the past the explanation is based on the IRS saying taxes are due April 15 and that includes those mailed that day. I would suggest that your taxes are due "ON" april 15, so that is different than if they said they were due "BY" April 15. -
Destry started following the discussion "Suggestions/Thoughts on creating well formed MLB game specific questions." in Hubdub.
-
Destry started a conversation in Hubdub on April 01, 2008 08:17:
Participation declining?I was curious as to how much people seem to be participating. I wonder if Hubdub can update us on how many hits the site is getting on a daily basis, how much hubdub cash is being wagered. I know I seem to be struggling to find questions to wager on. It seems 90% of the new questions are sports related, and I am sports fan, but don't think how many points a team scores in a particular quarter is really news worthy. It is easy to wager on, there is definite outcome, which I think is one reason so many seem to be wanting to wager on questions where the outcome can be measured and is not subjective.
I brought up a question in one of the comments about what is Hubdub. Is it a news forecasting site, or a site to wager on outcome of events. Now on first read they would seem one in the same, but as a person who has seen alot of controversy on this site about questions and settling markets, I believe there is a distinct difference. I think some input about this from the admins would be greatly appreciated. Lets take a simple quesiton and use as an example, the question is Will Hillary drop out of race before April 30th. Now if we are a news forecasting site, then we should be wagering on what will the news report. So if CNN, MSNBC, FOX, the official campaign announces, and other major media outlets report she is not dropping out of race before the convention, then shouldn't that trigger a settlement? The question has in its settlement details, as reported by a main stream news agency. However if Hubdub is about predicting the outcome of events, then we would leave the question open, and then after the date has passed settle market based on actual events. In which case, the settlement details should say something about regardless of what news media reports, this will not be settled before the listed date. Now many of you have seen how questions get ripped apart and each word is defined in its own context. As of now, John Edwards is still in the race, and so is Mitt Romney, as they both suspended thier campaigns, so couldn't it be argued, and won't it be, that they didn't drop out of race.
My point I am hoping to get others to comment on is rather this has led to a decline in participation on the website, maybe there is no decline, but it just seems that I get a feeling there is. Maybe it is something else, I would love to hear what others think. I know for me when I read a question, my first thought before wagering on it, is can this question be settled, and how many people will try to rip it apart and attempt to get it voided. -
Destry replied on March 25, 2008 07:38 to the problem "Incorrect settlement of Tiger Woods at Doral question." in Hubdub:
Wow. Every day on this site I am amazed at how people read into the questions. I am the question creator and purposely put in this line: "A round is official after all golfers have finished that particular round. At the end of each round if Tiger is in the lead or shares the lead that will count. It does not count if he was the leader during the round but not at the end of the round. " in order to avoid someone trying to find a way to get this question voided or settled inappropriately. Tiger did not lead or share the lead in any rounds at thier completion.
I think we have to use the common sense reading of this question, and should use that to settle all the questions on Hubdub. When looking at golf leaderboards, it is not considered leading a round, if the golfer with the lowest score for that round is not at top of leaderboard. I can understand your point of view if the question would have read "will Tiger shoot the lowest score in a round, if so how many." or something to that effect. The key component is leading the tournament.
This is one reason I don't write many more questions, I feel like I need a team of lawyers to read over them before posting them and that just takes some of the fun away. -
Destry replied on March 25, 2008 04:50 to the question "New category" in Hubdub:
Well I think it is because the majority of users have never heard of the IPL or ICL. The ICL is what a couple years old, has only a few teams, and the sports you are comparing it to have international appeal. Any sporting event could have tons of questions created about it, during the super bowl there were close to 100 hundred "prop" bets. Lets take baseball, a question could be created about who wins, who scores first, will "x" number of runs be scored, who will winning pitcher be, how many home runs will be hit, how many singles, double, and on and on. You look at the number of Major League Baseball games everyday and the site could be flooded with markets. I think the important thing is to create questions and see how the response to them is. How much was gambled, were there more than 1 or 2 people moving a market. I wish Hubdub could show the number of participants in a market, that would help the question creators, know which markets were popular and which weren't.
I have no problem with the ICL or IPL questions, I don't know enough about them to wager money on them, so I don't. But if they are created with fair starting odds, then I think there is a place for them. Hopefully as the tagging system is rolled out, we will be able to only see questions we are interested in, and that would help plowing through the hundreds of new questions.
I created a couple questions about the March Madness and wish I could get statistics on it so I could know whether to spend the time creating more or not. -
Destry replied on March 24, 2008 02:49 to the discussion "The Golden Rules for successfully playing the HUBDUB" in Hubdub:
I think the first thing to understand is that there is no magic rule, or trick to making money. What a person notices who sees those moving up and down the leaderboards, is that those who spend time on the site, looking at questions, researching news, and making predictions based on informed knowledge tend to do better. As was said above, watching markets move to get a feel of the flow can really help. Remember as more and more people read these posts and move a market the same way, the less likely it will be to make money using those methods.
I do agree with meanderingsearch, I usually put predictions public that I want others to wager on the same direction I am to push the market in that direction. Sometimes I will show a prediction to settle a dispute about putting money where opinion is, but for the most part I keep my predictions hidden.
I like to keep a watch on new questions, usually can get good odds on a new market. Only downside is waiting the 12 hours before being able to cash out. I also like to watch questions in which alot of action is moving the markets, there ususally is chance to either make some quick cash profits, or get in a good long term position.
I agree with those above that playing long term markets (those lasting more than 3 months) are generally a big waste of cash. While you might get decent odds, the position will slowly move and your money be tied up too long.
My closing point is to have fun. Comment on questions, get involved and then regardless of profit or loss you will at least get a feeling of satisfaction..
| next » « previous |
