NewsWrangler's dashboard

A comment on the question "Dashboard- is there a way to keep recent comments more visible?" in Hubdub:

thanks it's nice to know that is being worked on – letmewinplees, on September 11, 2008 14:04

NewsWrangler started following the question "Dashboard- is there a way to keep recent comments more visible?" in Hubdub.

NewsWrangler started following the idea "Clarifications now made clearer" in Hubdub.

A comment on the question "How do we encourage good question creation?" in Hubdub:

This is an interesting idea. – InfernalMachine, on September 06, 2008 15:24

fijis replied on September 06, 2008 08:03 to the question "How do we encourage good question creation?" in Hubdub:

I don't think we can base question quality on users or H$ alone. For example, some questions have awful suspend/settlement times which makes it easy to gain a little dough if you time it right. For example: "Will company X's stock reach $50/share by the end of the month? Suspends: last day @ 11:59pm". We've all done it - it's after (the real live) market closing so you dump loads of change into the question. The return isn't good but it's safe and pays out in a couple of hours. Those questions have tons of users and tons of H$ but they're not really quality questions.

I was thinking about this some and came up with an off-the -wall solution that defeats this problem. Ready? Base the quality on users or H$ bet on the wrong answer(s). Crazy. Hear me out. If the market settles at 99% that's a bad question with a bunch of people obviously gaming the system. In that case the 1% voting on the wrong answer would tip you off and the quality reward should stink appropriately. However if the market closes at 60% that's a pretty good question and the 40% multiplied by users and/or H$ should reward accordingly.

This would reward people for creating popular, quality questions.

NewsWrangler replied on September 04, 2008 18:23 to the question "Here is the problem with category editors make decisions on questions they have heavily wagered on" in Hubdub:

MRaleigh -- FWIW, I absolutely agree that emails ought not be used as a settlement source.

That said, in the past, when there has been "no news" on a question at the "Suspend Date", I have, on a couple of occasions, contacted organizations to try to find out if there was "mainstream news" available anywhere that would settle a question. However, even when the result of that contact (email, etc.) resulted in an "answer to the question", I've never submitted that as a basis for a settlement... and only used it as a "clue" as to where to look.

You were right to bring your concerns to this forum, and I hope you were satisfied with the recent settlement.

Disclosure: I had one prediction in this market that I cashed out more than three months ago.

NewsWrangler started following the question "How do we encourage good question creation?" in Hubdub.

kruijs replied on August 12, 2008 19:03 to the idea "A lesson in converting odds to percentages" in Hubdub:

can we make a permalink to this thread so it is one of those always available to new users?

InfernalMachine replied on August 12, 2008 11:00 to the idea "A lesson in converting odds to percentages" in Hubdub:

I have noticed, though, that you often can only get odds-reports on games that day and tomorrow. So questions that are created earlier than 2 days before the game might not have sufficient information to use this method.

Bayoubear replied on August 12, 2008 00:43 to the idea "A lesson in converting odds to percentages" in Hubdub:

Thanks so much for this info....sports is one area where we definitely have a way in which to truly determine odds at the start.....glad to see a way to convert some of them.

NewsWrangler started following the idea "A lesson in converting odds to percentages" in Hubdub.

A comment on the question "Will new rules apply for markets suspending daily?" in Hubdub:

i agree with the voluntary deal. hubdub's "motto" we don't like rules is a good one imho. i run (my very limited questions) by an admin via email before i make-publish them. i choose to do that. making it mandatory would be a step backwards imho. i'm gonna try to be more active in creating questions. kinda feel guilty only wagering. from my very little experience of creating questions, i know it can be a hard thing to do. to spend time researching, typing, making the odds (hardest part) then to have it unpublished is very discouraging. have a nice day. – dieseldoggg, on August 09, 2008 17:30

A comment on the question "Will new rules apply for markets suspending daily?" in Hubdub:

One challenge for us we only have a three person development team so we can't do everything we would like to. However what things are you looking for? – Nigel Eccles, on August 08, 2008 22:28

taternutz5 replied on August 08, 2008 18:52 to the question "Will new rules apply for markets suspending daily?" in Hubdub:

As a hubdub user i was wondering why when anyone suggests things, they can never just get a answer its always " its being considered or discussed seems to be the motto for this site.

A comment on the question "Will new rules apply for markets suspending daily?" in Hubdub:

Glad to hear something like this is being considered (thanks Nigel) and thank you IM for your comment. I really think everyone would benefit from it. As a creator, I would feel more confident knowing my question could be double checked by the admin team. I would be less apprehensive about creating them knowing there was a greater chance of my question not being "unpublished"(voided), flagged, suspended, etc. If I choose, my question could be placed in a review "bucket" and then returned to me with suggestions from the "Hubdub reviewing team". For those questions that I feel more confident in, I could just opt for it to go straight to publication. I think this could also help lighten the load for the staff. – letmewinplees, on August 08, 2008 18:33

A comment on the question "Will new rules apply for markets suspending daily?" in Hubdub:

We are reviewing question creation in the next couple of weeks and this is something we are considering. – Nigel Eccles, on August 08, 2008 15:34

A comment on the question "Will new rules apply for markets suspending daily?" in Hubdub:

This is a very good idea. I've felt that way too. You have a good question, but you're not sure about the initial odds, or how clear your question will be to other players. What I really like is that what you're suggesting is a voluntary thing, No-one makes you ask for inspection. You only choose to if you want. If the question settles very soon, you might not do this. The only thing I would add is that it might be even better if it was sent to a superuser (or a Category Editor). They are really good at inspecting questions too. Other great thing about your idea is that it might be a whole lot easier to set up. Thanks for this. I will pass it on. – InfernalMachine, on August 08, 2008 15:31

letmewinplees replied on August 08, 2008 14:59 to the question "Will new rules apply for markets suspending daily?" in Hubdub:

I was just creating a new question and as I was about to push "publish question" or whatever that button is right before your question "goes live", something dawned on me. I was thinking about how I would really like someone to review it before I publish it. Why not have that as an option? Instead of all questions going live immediately, have an option for cat editor's review. If a question creator would like their question reviewed allow them to send it directly to the editors. Once reviewed, the creator can be alerted "changes have been made to your question" or "no necessary changes noted by editor" and the creator can then publish it. With this option, the creator can decide for themself if they would like their question to go in to "holding"
ANYONE LIKE THIS IDEA?
IS THIS OPTION POSSIBLE?

A comment on the question "Will new rules apply for markets suspending daily?" in Hubdub:

But the idea is to have less bad questions, not less good ones. Obviously people who have shown they almost always create good questions would not have their questions held up. But "bad" questions use up a huge amount of staff and superuser time, and also often end up creating anger among the people who bet on these questions before they are "fixed". That's the reason for even suggesting holding questions to check them. – InfernalMachine, on August 08, 2008 05:31

A comment on the question "Will new rules apply for markets suspending daily?" in Hubdub:

imho its works ok now. is there a fool proof way to handle it? i would say no. making the question making process longer will cause more problems than it does good. i make very view, and when i do and hit publish its gratifing to see it get submitted. i would suggest asking serval of the people who create alot of questions if they want them them held up. imho it will cause less questions. – dieseldoggg, on August 08, 2008 02:35