electroaffinity's dashboard

electroaffinity marked one of 4d's replies in Hubdub as useful. 4d replied to the problem "How does the system work?".

electroaffinity replied on February 14, 2008 22:29 to the question "Have we become too concerned about gaming ?" in Hubdub:

Nice to see calm discussions prevailing. A very mature bunch on Hubdub.

I have to agree with tarheelv that integrity is key. Gamers must be stopped or at least a serious attempt made to do so! The power users and other ideas should help, time will tell.

No matter what protective systems are put in place Obvious gamers to the system should be quickly brought to justice by the Hubdub team. It is crucial to the integrity of the game to punish obvious cheaters quickly and harshly.

I have never received a clear answer as to why the Hubdub team will not drop the hammer on cheaters, is it a legal question? I doubt this site will ever be allowed to use real money, with real payouts so legal issues should not matter. Is it an ethical question? Is it a disagreement between Hubdubs creators?

Maybe we will never know.

Although I have helped to conceive some of the new rules that have been put in place and I am constantly "challenging" the system, I think it is important to Hubdub that we do not get to bogged down with rules etcetera. As I have stated before the Hubdub team needs to worry most about how to make money or this site will not last.

electroaffinity replied on February 14, 2008 20:45 to the problem "How does the system work?" in Hubdub:

I agree infernal or the Hubdub team could just do the right thing and reset the "gamers".

electroaffinity replied on February 14, 2008 18:32 to the idea "Would it be beneficial to be able to have the ability to set automatic "buy and sell" orders?" in Hubdub:

The DOW and other indices are news, so how and when do you "discriminate" against news stories? It is not local or of interest to a few people only. Also it is one of the few questions that you don't have to wait days or weeks to reach a conclusion.

electroaffinity marked one of anaverageamerican's replies in Hubdub as useful. anaverageamerican replied to the idea "Product development: Power user vetting and leaderboards".

electroaffinity replied on February 13, 2008 03:42 to the idea "Product development: Power user vetting and leaderboards" in Hubdub:

"I think all predictions should be confidential until they have settled. After settlement they should become public so users who suspect cheating can have access to the evidence."

As I stated earlier anaverageamericans idea is excellent. Transparency is the key, but I think I have said that before. LOL

electroaffinity replied on February 13, 2008 03:21 to the idea "Product development: Power user vetting and leaderboards" in Hubdub:

Unfortunately I doubt anyone will want to continue to play when the cheaters spoil the fun for other players. Hubdub will not last if some effort is not made to thwart cheaters.

Vegas spends 100's of Millions of dollars in security and fraud prevention. I do not think that Hubdub needs to waste an inordinate amount of time with people "gaming the system. It takes away from more pressing issues like growing the site, making it fun for users and generating revenue for the Hubdub team.

The solution is quite simple, it is not to difficult to figure out who is gaming the system if you can see everything the users are doing. Devote someone on the staff who's responsibility it is for fraud prevention. When you find someone cheating give them a warning and if they do it again boot them the #$#% out of the game.

Of course if the system was completely transparent to the community the users would quickly spot the gamers and...well you get the idea...

electroaffinity marked one of anaverageamerican's replies in Hubdub as useful. anaverageamerican replied to the idea "Product development: Power user vetting and leaderboards".

electroaffinity marked one of Golwar's replies in Hubdub as useful. Golwar replied to the idea "Would it be beneficial to be able to have the ability to set automatic "buy and sell" orders?".

electroaffinity marked one of anaverageamerican's replies in Hubdub as useful. anaverageamerican replied to the idea "Would it be beneficial to be able to have the ability to set automatic "buy and sell" orders?".

electroaffinity marked one of InfernalMachine's replies in Hubdub as useful. InfernalMachine replied to the idea "Proposed product fix: Claw-back of winnings on void".

electroaffinity marked one of InfernalMachine's replies in Hubdub as useful. InfernalMachine replied to the idea "Proposed product fix: Claw-back of winnings on void".

electroaffinity replied on February 11, 2008 19:45 to the idea "Proposed product fix: Claw-back of winnings on void" in Hubdub:

"Or put a little info bar to each question which signs the level of set flags. When many claim a question and its odds as doubtful, it would be a clear warning to everyone that the question is about to be being voided. Options might be to automatically prevent cash ins on very high alert levels, or to offer the gamers the option that they just receive their bet money back."

Excellent! Power to the people for coming up with good ideas.

electroaffinity marked one of Golwar's replies in Hubdub as useful. Golwar replied to the idea "Proposed product fix: Claw-back of winnings on void".

electroaffinity replied on February 11, 2008 16:35 to the idea "Proposed product fix: Claw-back of winnings on void" in Hubdub:

I cannot think of an easy solution. Again I would suggest not having questions go live immediately, they need to be vetted first. I do realize how problematic vetting will become when there are tens of thousands of players.

How would you and the lawyers handle the scenario if this were a real gambling site, with real risk? The player would presumably owe Hubdub the negative amount. This would have to be clearly covered in your TOS.
Although I think players would be inclined to litigate if they lost a huge amount of money in this manner. Especially if you void the question after it has closed out.

Realistically you are treading on dangerous ground voiding a question after it goes live. If I put $20,000 in question and cash out with a $40,000 dollar profit before the question closes and then you void it I think It is safe to think that I would expect to keep my winnings. Not a problem if its play money, but it would be a serious one if it was cash coming out of the house.

I think if you void a question after it closes the house would have to "eat it" on a real gambling site. The same goes for people who cash out before the question closes, the house loses. Quite possibly the person in charge of 'vetting" questions in that category would be fired and or have their legs broken by the mob bosses.

Do the booking houses in Vegas ever Void a "question"? Their clients would quickly find a new bookie if the bets were constantly being voided.

I can think of more scenarios where voiding a question will bite you in the ass.

Voiding questions after predictions have been made should be avoided at all costs. But of course theres the rub!

Hey but this is just for fun right.

electroaffinity replied on February 11, 2008 15:27 to the idea "Proposed product fix: Claw-back of winnings on void" in Hubdub:

Great Idea!

You might want to display some kind of alert on the question page that explains to players whose earnings are in the red why it has occurred. Or a link to an explanation page. This should reducing complaint emails.

electroaffinity started following the idea "Proposed product fix: Claw-back of winnings on void" in Hubdub.

electroaffinity replied on February 11, 2008 02:39 to the question "Should Hubdub players be allowed to "hide" their predictions by making them private? What is the rational for this feature?" in Hubdub:

Well the question now becomes why make them public at all. It might be nice to have a "global" button to keep all bets private.

My concern is for transparency, I could care less on using the functionality to "copycat" other peoples bets. My concern is to be able to monitor for fraud. And we know it is happening.

If you work for Yahoo and your "betting" against your employer it might be wise to refrain. In that regard I doubt the SEC or a stock brokers employer would be very happy to know that people regulated and licensed by the US government are trading against the DOW or NASDAQ, even if it is only for fun. Brokers and their ilk are usually not even allowed to have private email accounts or take a pee without permission while at work etcetera.

The game needs to be as open as possible to prevent Uncle Sam from sticking his nose in, when and if you come up with a reward based system. You risk a serious smack down from the Feds, or local Attorney's General if the game is not completely transparent.

Humphrey v. Viacom has so far helped to keep fantasy leagues afloat but caution ye who tread in dangerous waters. The debate is far from over no matter what the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act of 2006 says, Hubdub does not to my knowledge fall under that act as a "Fantasy Sports League".

I am not a bottom feeding lawyer, I have however had occasion to put them on retainer, Preferably at arms length, as they bite really hard and have very tender ego's.

Just my two cents.

electroaffinity replied on February 10, 2008 18:00 to the idea "Would it be beneficial to be able to have the ability to set automatic "buy and sell" orders?" in Hubdub:

Awesome! You can watch this thread, why not do the same for a question?

electroaffinity replied on February 10, 2008 15:58 to the question "Help: Rules and common (mis)understandings" in Hubdub:

Huh?

But let me say that although I am in favor of a reward system for question creators, I think the progress being made with power users is a good one.

I do not think a reward system will evolve anytime soon, if ever, my point is that we need to try very hard to keep the game as fair and honest as possible.

The game is a little over a week old and it is littered with "cheaters". This speaks more to the state of our world than Hubdub itself.