NewsWrangler's dashboard

I'm adding a variant on this to this same bug report.

The "main" HB page is pulling in VOIDED questions ... displaying them as Featured Questions.

This was from 30 seconds ago:

Featured Questions
When will New York Governor Elliot Spitzer resign as a result of his involvement in a prostitution ring scandal?
Hubdub users say: Spitzer will resign by Sunday, March 23, 2008 (100% chance)
More State questions...

And to emphasize what you are saying ... "Void" does not show in the Settlement Details ...

There were several actions performed:
1. Settled as 'No' Today 2:47am PST
2. Previous action withdrawn Today 2:48am PST
3. Settled as 'No' Today 2:48am PST

but the final action of "Void" is not displayed.

Orlin, I also had a (H$ 100) prediction in that market -- and I predicted "No".

It appears in my Voided Questions as:
Will Governor Elliot Spitzer resign from office on 3/12/08?
Yes hd$100 hd$100 hd$0

I don't know why the listed answer is "Yes".

That's a good catch! -- and I would also second AnAverageAmerican's suggestion to begin a new Question in this forum, pointing that out as a bug report.

Here's a definitive answer from The Grey Lady, the venerable New York Times, on "About headline language: Did Governor Spitzer really “resign” on Wednesday?"

Yesterday, during the height of the Spitzer brouhaha, I popped off a question to The New York Times on their use of "resign" and "resigned".

The Times published the question today in their "Top Ten Spitzer Scandal Questions" (there were hundreds of them submitted).

Q. About headline language: Did Governor Spitzer really “resign” on Wednesday?

A.“This is likely an obscure question, but it’s generating a great deal of controversy within our group of 100 or so folks,” a reader asked. “How does (or should) The New York Times parse the term ‘resign’ as it applies to ‘announcing a resignation to take place on Monday’? In short, has Governor Spitzer resigned? I’ve seen ‘announced resignation’ and ‘resigned’ used within the same paragraph. Any suggestions on either ideal or accurate use of the word are very much appreciated.”

We asked Philip B. Corbett, deputy news editor, who oversees language issues for The Times. His reply: “Clarity and common sense favored the simple use of ‘resign’ in the headlines and lead paragraphs of our coverage on Wednesday and Thursday. While legally Spitzer’s role as governor will end at noon on Monday, I don’t think it was necessary to write a headline like ‘Spitzer Will Resign’ or ‘Spitzer Says He Will Resign.’ That might have led readers to think that he had not yet taken any formal action — that we were reporting on something that was expected to happen, rather than on something that had already taken place.

“In fact, he submitted a letter of resignation and made a formal announcement on Wednesday. The resignation takes effect on Monday — as we reported quickly and clearly in our articles — but I think ‘Spitzer Resigns’ conveyed the essence of the news most effectively. "

<http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/200...>

Thanks, Infernal Machine and An Average American -- I had no desire to settle this market by anything but official, verifiable, sources -- which is what I submitted. Unfortunately, apparently there was no one available to look at the settlement link in a timely manner.

I offered up the formula only as a way to try to reverse engineer a solution to the admitted problem that this market was incorrectly voided. (Interesting that all the debate about parsing words in this market were moot -- as there wasn't 10" of snow.)

There is no question that any formula is not a substitute for the actual measurement of snow ...

The reason I asked "is there a next step on this?" was because I inferred a willingness, or perhaps an opening, to somehow come to an agreement on settling this, from Leslie's comment:

Finally, and unfortunately, no matter how we agree to resolve this, ...

and just wanted to follow-up on that.

For the written rule amendments, I propose a definition of what resigning will be.

Resignation Market: The deciding factor for settlement will be when the intent to resign is announced.

* If as in the Larry Craig case that intent turns out to be false the market is resettled.

<snip>

How does this sound to everyone?</snip>

I (can) support that amendment. I would support an amendment either way.

I posting comments here that I made earlier today in the market comments thread, as I believe folks should come out of this spitzer whole:

So the people who lost out will get their funds back.

How does this affect users, such as AnAverageAmerican, and likely scores of other users who cashed out yesterday at a significant loss, based on how you said you would settle the market.

In a voided market, their positions won't be there to return their funds -- or will they?

Ryan responded:

If people have cashed out of the market, they are out of the market, I don't really think that much can be done for those who cashed out early. I know we can't please everyone with this solution, and I'm sorry for all the confusion the "Spitzer incident" has caused. But hopefully since this has happened we can move on so something like this doesn't blow up again.

If you have a stake in option # 2 you win that stake. If were on the wrong side you get your money back via the void.

Ryan
Hubdub US Politics Content Editor

I replied to Ryan:

If people have cashed out of the market, they are out of the market, I don't really think that much can be done for those who cashed out early.

These loyal users cashed out of the market -- at a significant loss -- based on how YOU said the market was going to be settled. Indeed, they didn't "cash out early" ... they responded to what you said.

Now you change your position (which is fine) -- however, in your attempts to "make people whole", you do need to include those who acted based on what you said.

To say "if they stayed in" with their (worthless) original stake in option #1, they would have their original stake returned ... is not, IMNHO, a clear view of the situation.

[Disclosure: I also cashed out of option 1, at a heavy loss -- but with extreme luck I was subsequently able to take a position in option 2, only due to the wildly fluctuating market. I came out "ahead" with option 2, but not by as much if I had won on option 1. These comments are made with those in mind who were totally screwed by acting on the HD information of how the market would be settled -- and weren't as "extremely lucky" as I was.]

AAA - I agree that the market's are going to respond (or not) based on clarification made by a Content Editor/Admin.

Ideally, there would have been clarification last night when duckie raised the question -- I hadn't considered that outcome, and my response to duckie's comment proved to be unhelpful.

I cashed out this morning, at a huge loss, and changed positions, way before Ryan's clarification. I then left for several hours, and had no sense of how the question would be settled -- except to say that I anticipated it would be settled when I returned.

For all I knew, my "cashed out" position could have been the "winning prediction" -- and I would be a big two-time loser on the same market.

The point is, the market changed wildly long before Ryan's comment -- it *did* look like the stock exchange questions that change by 80% or more within a minutes time.

Leslie,

Is there a next step on this?

I *love it* ! A purple tie!!!

Did you notice the BBC link <http://www.bbc.co.uk/> -- the BBC site is (currently) all purple!

(I don't recall seeing the BBC with this colour scheme before!)

Anyway ... I have a hedged bet on "Blue/Navy" and "Red" -- so would win on "blue". -- But this isn't, IMNHO, blue ... it's purple! And, I'd 'vote' for a Void.

Ryan,

To answer your specific question:

"I would propose some sort of rule amendment either stating that resignations are settled once resignation takes place or once resignation is announced.

Thoughts? "

I would opt for the "once resignation takes place". That would, obviously, be consistent with this market outcome, as well as others that are currently open -- and would effectively handle the elusive Sen. Larry Craig's of the future.

I think any amendment (whichever way it is decided) ought be for all markets (e.g. world, sports) -- not just politics.

The "trick" -- so to speak -- about the purpose of this site, in my view, is to accurately predict the outcome(s) of news events -- and I've found it's wayyy tricker than I might have thought.

Hand-in-hand with that is trying to create questions that allow for "unforeseen outcomes" -- which is, also, both challenging and rewarding.

When I checked in earlier today, about 11:00 EDT, I read a news-feed reporting that Governor Spitzer would likely announce his resignation today -- and it would be effective on Monday.

I logged in to Hubdub, and cashed out my position on "Spitzer will resign by Sunday, March 16, 2008" (before 11:30am EDT), and took a net loss of $4,291 -- more than 10% of my total net-worth at the time! :-(

I then took a position on "Spitzer will resign by Sunday, March 23, 2008". If that prediction is successful, I will have a net gain of $11,474. Offsetting the earlier loss, that will result in a "net-net" gain of $7,183.

I don't recall what the exact odds were on my cashed out predictions, but I know they would have netted me far more than the position I am in now. And -- had I had a "crystal ball", and known at the time that the other position would have soared back up -- I wouldn't have taken that $4,000+ loss! (maybe ;-)

In my view, the apparent winning prediction will be "resignation as of the effective date" -- and after the oath of office has been given to the apparent new governor. I backed my opinion with my actions of cashing out, and taking a loss. (And, parenthetically, as I was cashing out, there was no way, I thought, that I would be able to take a successful HD position in the market, as the odds on the first date had dropped so fast, and the second set of dates was, when I was done, above 80%. In short, at the time, my thought was "I took a bath!".

HEADLINES

A lot of the comments in the market thread are about headlines.

Headlines aren't the story -- as many/most folks know. If they were, Thomas Dewey would have been the 34th President of the United States -- "Dewey Defeats Truman", and Elvis would still be alive ;-)

Just as the Chicago Daily Tribune changed it's headline in later editions to reflect the true winner of the 1948 election, other media outlets change theirs as well.

Currently, The New York Times, arguably the newspaper of record for New York State, reports on their website:

Spitzer to Resign Soon; Paterson Set as Successor

Gov. Eliot Spiter, reeling from revelations that he had been a client of a prostitution ring, announced his resignation today, becoming the first governor of New York to be forced from office in nearly a century.

Mr. Spitzer, appearing somber and with his wife at his side, said his resignation is to be effective Monday, and that Lt. Gov. David A. Peterson would be sworn in to replace him.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/12/nyr...>

No doubt that headline will likely change to something else -- if it hasn't already.

ANOTHER PIECE OF THE ISSUE:

User duckie "called it", last night (at approx. 10:00pm PST), in "Comment #10", when s/he asked: "is this for when he announces his resignation or when he actually steps down as acting governor? because he may announce this week that he is leaving next week and then we go voided, which isnt hip."

Unfortunately, there isn't a Category Editor/Admin available 24/7, so clarification for requests such as this get delayed. [Note to Ryan: pls email me your cell phone nbr. ;-]

Even when there is clarification -- I sometimes still have questions.

The Content Editor clarified this market some four hours ago as:

"The Governor has not stated he will resign on March 12th. He has said that his resignation will be effective next Monday. This means that no resignation has occurred on the 12th. I know some may not like this decision (looking at the odds), but the market does not state a announcement of resignation but "resign." "

... but the market wasn't suspended, -- and still hasn't been -- and that was a total mystery to me!

Until I logged on here, and read the explanation in the OP of this thread ... and then [light bulb: ON] ... it made perfect sense to me. Sure there were the comments in the market thread about "... Sen. Larry Craig announced his resignation and is still in the Senate long after it was supposed to take effect. ..." [user: peterww] -- but even after reading that, I still missed the point, relative to why the market was still open!

I understand the sentiment of the comments in the market thread, pro and con -- as well as in this thread. I've been confused by this market -- and I've learned from it. At the end of the day, my (current ;-) view is that this market is both correctly interpreted, and still open.

What mode of motion will the next new species discovery ...

Hmmm ... I read in the settlement source that the discovery occurred before the question was posted on the HB board.