Loading Profile...
Recent activity
Subscribe to this feed
Nigel Eccles replied on February 28, 2008 20:53 to the question "Escalation: Should we void these questions?" in Hubdub:
Hi Rob,
I really appreciate the full and frank feedback. I had actually wanted to follow up to know how we compared with News Futures and Intrade so very interesting to hear your views.
I thought it was John Kerry who was the one that made the unfortunate quips. Either way, point well made.
Thanks for the article.
Nigel-
Nigel Eccles replied on February 28, 2008 17:56 to the question "Escalation: Should we void these questions?" in Hubdub:
OK, my use of humor wasn't appreciated. I'll try harder to answer the questions:
Will I un-void the alien question?
No, I can't. Unfortunately, I can't change that until we put in that functionality. I admit it was a mistake to void it.
Will we void the child question?
No. It was created before the rules went into place and the consensus is it causing anyone any problems so leave it.
Are the team being above board?
100%. Yes, it can be challenging running a live site. Also everyone on the team is pretty new to this but we are striving for it to be as good as possible. You'll note that one of the companies we listed on the 'About Us' page is Innocent Drinks (www.innocentdrinks.co.uk). Their customer service is legendary and that is who we aspire to emulate. -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 28, 2008 16:16 to the question "Escalation: Should we void these questions?" in Hubdub:
I literally cannot un-void it. (I can send you a screen shot of a greyed out button if you like!). Ryan may have unsuspended a question but there is no way he could have unvoided a question.
Trust me, life is much more fun now Hubdub is a live product with users than it was as a paper prototype with no users! -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 28, 2008 08:49 to the idea "Why don't you allow users to void their own questions incase they have mistaken something??" in Hubdub:
The details haven't been finalised but I expect it will be based on users having a certain number of successfully settled or non-voided questions. For example, it might be if you have managed to create 5 questions that have not been voided then you get power user status.
Power users should have the ability to send back questions for re-editing. -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 28, 2008 08:46 to the question "Escalation: Got some rock to sell on eBay?" in Hubdub:
-
Nigel Eccles replied on February 27, 2008 22:27 to the question "Escalation: Got some rock to sell on eBay?" in Hubdub:
I see your point and I realise that adding the requirement that it must reported significantly changes the question.
I will revert to the original definition however if the eBay submission looks suspicious I think we have to be open to voiding the question... -
Nigel Eccles shared an idea in Hubdub on February 27, 2008 15:57:
Proposed rule amendmentsSince we published the rules on February 14th there has been a few gaps and inconsistencies have come to light. Therefore I am proposing we make the following amendments to the rules. Let me know what you think.
Current rules are here: http://www.hubdub.com/public/goodques...
Proposed amendments and additions:
2.2.1 Subject to change
• Changes to the rules will only be made in consultation with users [Added]
• These rules will change over time. In the event of a rule change the changes will be notified on the Hubdub notice board. [Unchanged]
• Any rule change may be applied retrospectively on a case-by-case basis [Added]
2.2.5 Types of question
• Questions which refer to the number of times a certain person says a certain phrase or word in a specific speech or debate are not allowed unless there is a recognised news organization that has stated it will or a Hubdub category editor has agreed to maintain a count. [Moved from 2.3.1 Political Category and amended]
2.2.10 Creating questions
• The term ‘by’ will be considered to be inclusive of the date referenced. E.g. ‘Will the satellite hit earth by March 25th?’ will be settled as a ‘Yes’ if it hits on March 25th or on any date prior. [Added]
• The terms ‘at’ or ‘on’ in reference to dates will be considered to only include the point in time referred to. [Added]
2.3.4 Business category
• Questions can be made about the major indexes (Dow Jones Industrial Average, NASDAQ Composite Index, FTSE 100, DAX, BSE, Nikkei and Hang Seng) but should not be made about the performance of individual stocks [BSE, Nikkei and Hang Seng have been added]
2.3.5 Hubdub category
• Self-referential questions which can be gamed easily like “Will this question get on the homepage?” or “Will this question get H$100,000 in predictions?” are not allowed and will be voided [Amended]
• Self-referential questions that cannot be settled to all outcomes (e.g. ‘Will this question be voided?’) are also not allowed and will be voided [Added]
2.3.6.1 Weather
• Questions regarding the weather for a specific area must be clearly defined and listed in NOAA (http://www.noaa.gov/wx.html) or other reputable online weather sources that issue frequently updated weather reports (i.e. http://www.weather.com). In countries outside the USA, an equivalent organization or online news source will determine settlement. [Amended]
• Questions should be specific and clearly worded. For example, "Will the temperature in Washington, DC, exceed 50 degrees Fahrenheit on Tuesday, <month>, <day>, <year>?” [Added]
</year></day></month> -
Nigel Eccles asked a question in Hubdub on February 27, 2008 14:24:
Escalation: Got some rock to sell on eBay?Hi All
The question below refers to a piece of the US satellite turning up for sale on eBay. Many users pointed out in the comments that this would be easy to game - simply take a photo of a bit of rock and post it on ebay. (Settlement details just demand a link to the auction).
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_t...
So we thought a fair way to settle it would be if the auction was reported in a news site. However, several users who have staked cash on the question aren't happy with this change to the settlement rules.
This is a test case, so whatever is decided here will be used in future for questions referring to an eBay auction.
Opinions? -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 27, 2008 10:56 to the question "Escalation: Should we void these questions?" in Hubdub:
OK, here is the proposed solution:
1. We can't yet unvoid questions so unfortunately the alien question is gone (sorry!)
2. Jesus and the child (wait a second is this related?) we will leave. I have re-classified the Jesus question so that it only appears in General
3. In the next couple of weeks we hope to release power user verification of questions. This will mean that we can remove the 5-95% bar and open the site up to low probability events
4. The Apollo landings question will be settled yes if there is a photo of Apollo equipment, it doesn't require it to convince the conspiracy theorists -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 27, 2008 10:22 to the idea "Why don't you allow users to void their own questions incase they have mistaken something??" in Hubdub:
We are hoping to get power user verification of questions in within the next couple of weeks so this shouldn't be necessary. With that will be the ability to edit and re-submit voided questions. -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 26, 2008 09:34 to the problem "Please refer to the evidence provided and unvoid this question ." in Hubdub:
Unfortunately we don't yet have the ability to unvoid. However we wouldn't use it in this case anyway. It answers are not mutually exclusive. Read through them again and let me know how you would settle if the answer was two... :-) -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 25, 2008 21:57 to the question "Self-referential questions, why aren't they allowed?" in Hubdub:
BTW Great book
(Sheepishly admits) I've been told as I never made it past the first chapter... -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 25, 2008 21:53 to the question "Self-referential questions, why aren't they allowed?" in Hubdub:
It is an interesting question. I guess it has a natural equilibrium of alternating immediately above and below 50%. It is in each user's interest to move the price towards 50% but not past it. But then other users may have a position the other way and then they would be willing to sacrifice a small bet in order to win the big one... -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 25, 2008 14:53 to the question "Self-referential questions, why aren't they allowed?" in Hubdub:
OK, you have me, brain on slow.
Move to void clearly overruled through superior logic, happy trading!
(I'll be interested to see how this one turns out...) -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 25, 2008 13:06 to the question "Self-referential questions, why aren't they allowed?" in Hubdub:
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_t...
I'm afraid this question can be very easily gamed. Every time someone places a prediction it moves the price. Therefore say this question was currently trading as 40% Yes and it was 2 minutes to suspend. The one of the top users could come in and bet $20,000 on Yes. That would have the impact of moving the price to around 60% and they would have the result of guaranteeing them a riskless profit.
Move to void... -
Nigel Eccles asked a question in Hubdub on February 24, 2008 23:56:
Escalation: Should we void these questions?Our current system of voiding questions is to respond to user flags. When a question is flagged an administrator gets pinged. They then check whether the question complies with the current rules. If it doesn't then it is then voided.
However one complication is that a number of questions were created prior to the rules being introduced. Generally we have let these run their course. However, there have been three that are now getting flagged on a nearly daily basis. These are:
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_a...
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_J...
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_m...
In response to the number of flags I voided the alien question over the weekend. The creator of the question rightfully pointed out that the reasons for voiding it weren't totally clear.
So questions: Was it right to void the alien question? Should we void the other two questions? More generally, as rules are introduced should they be applied retrospectively? -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 23, 2008 09:10 to the question "Self-referential questions, why aren't they allowed?" in Hubdub:
You are right but you can't settle it as either a Yes or a No either! Self-referential questions are generally either very easy to game or impossible to settle. That's why we don't allow them. -
Nigel Eccles replied on February 23, 2008 09:05 to the problem "Suspend Date/Time Bug" in Hubdub:
I will escalate this one and get an estimated time to fix. -
Nigel Eccles asked a question in Hubdub on February 21, 2008 15:48:
A question of moralityI've just put together a blog post on where should draw the line on the morality of questions. Blog post here:
http://blog.hubdub.com/2008/02/21/a-q...
I'd be interested to know what you think. -
Nigel Eccles set one of Nigel Eccles' replies as an official response to "Seeking repeal for the 50% penalty." in Hubdub
| next » « previous |
