Who Will John Edwards Endorse, After Dropping Out?

All of you folks buying Obama, you do realize this market ends tomorrow?

What if he doesn't endorse anyone before time runs out?

I am assuming, based on the wording of the question, that the winner would be "Other/No Endorsement"

I don't think that's correct. Doesn't it just mean the betting stops then, but it could be settled anytime later?
For example, you could stop the betting on a football game before the game starts. It wouldn't be settled until the end of the game.

From what I've read, the thing being predicted has to happen by the close date. If the author wanted to cover endorsements through the convention, he could've set a later close date, but the one picked is consistent with the verbiage of "After Dropping Out": if Edwards doesn't endorse anyone within a week of dropping out, then Other/No Endorsement is the winning answer.

The question merely says "after dropping out" the settlement terms are merely "The question will be suspended from further predictions at this point"

The question was not, a set number of days after he drops out, nor was the question to be Settled and determined at this point. Obviously we would wait until he endorses a candidate.

For example I have a question about a smash brother's review score, I have the end date set to the day before the launch of the game, but I have the settlement terms be a month later. This is an open ended question, it should be settled when one of the conditions are met, or none get met by the time the election is over.

After Dropping out should imply "When He Drops Out" Additional Time Was Added To Allow For A Post Debate Endorsement, Any Endorsement After Feb. 5th is unlikely Since it would Thus Be Meaningless.

however it should be noted he did not drop out yet only "suspended" his Campaign! (a technical Definition)

ok so since the question has been suspended, does this mean that it is moving to a settlement or that our money is tied up for an undisclosed amount of time until someone decides enough time has passed? Obviously at some point before Novemember he will endorse whomever the Democratic candidate is, but based on the closing date of this market, I as well as others assumed that when the market closed a settlement would be determined based on the news at that time.

Why is this market suspended? The time's not up, yet, so shouldn't it continue?

"based on the closing date of this market, I as well as others assumed that when the market closed a settlement would be determined based on the news at that time."

When The Question Was Created That Was The Intention, It Is A Surprise To Me Too.

The Rules Concerning "End Time" Need To be Further Clarified In My Opinion Because If I Had Known This Was Going To Occur I Would Have Phrased The Question Differently, I Understand The Site Is A Work In Progress, But If An End Time Is Specified The Question Should Not Simply Be Suspended Indefinately ! I Mean Lets Be Real He Could Wait Several years, Up To His Time Of Death To Endorse Even If The Election Has Been Over For Years!!!!

Perhaps Moderaters Should Just Take Question Suggestions And Write Them On Their Own In The Future (with clear rules) So These Things Don't Just Waste Our Time

I agree with all but point 13, its better for us to write the questions, even if it does create a bit of chaos.

But my understanding of settlement is that is the date and time when the question and bets on it are 'settled'. Not when betting ends. You need to consider the opportunity cost when betting on something and I'm sure we've all looked at questions we like the odds for but are of the form "by the end of 2008" and either not bet or put less money. Settlement should be settlement, if people set the end time wrong then thats part of the game and the knack of creating good questions that end at the appropriate time. See the string of Dow Jones questions for similar discussion.

But I'm willing to let these hiccups go for now, hubdub's gotta figure out what its about.
And if they pick wrong, well, we'll just stop using it...no pressure :)

Well to be honest, I had my money on "other/no endorsement" because I thought maybe he would endorse someone else, like Chelsea Clinton in the 2020 election, thus placing my money on "other". ;) Not sure how anyone could have interpreted your question to end today and then be put on hold indefinately.

"Not sure how anyone could have interpreted your question to end today"
By Checking The End Date.
And I Have Nothing To Do With This Decision To Suspened.
Not Having Clear "End Date" Rules Which Can Apply To Every Question Is Why I Suggest That They Review The Questions, At The Very Least, Before Allowing Them To Publish, Though Perhaps They Will Decide To Void The Question Entirely, Which Make Me Consider Far Too Many Questions (and perhaps the whole site idea) A Waste Of My Time.

We are on the same side here, my comment was sarcastic. I understand that you meant it to end and settle today, I thought that was crystal clear by how you dated the question. What i said was that I coold NOT understand how some folks think that it should end today but not settle until some date in the future.

When The Question Was Created I Assumed This Question Would Actually Be Finished By Now(Damn John Edwards), I Must Also Say This Question Was A Resubmission, The First Question I Created Was Voided (due to the fact hubdub, was not current on the news the following was received before i resubmitted the question "I have to apologize for the void I gave you on your question. I didn't check the news today, until after I did my void check. This is completely my fault, I'll make sure in the future to do a news check. Again sorry for this,Regards,Ryan") In My Haste To Resubmit This Question I Worded It Slightly Different, I Will Be Certain To Never Leave An Open Problem In Any Question I Create In The Future! I Do Apologize To All Voters For The Confusion.

I Still Recommend Hubdub Review ALL questions for Any Possible inaccuracies before allowing them to publish, I Will Request Settlement On The Question, So Perhaps It Will Simply Be Voided For This Reason.

My take? The term "after dropping out" implies that there is no end date for events that meet the question criteria, but vote submissions can only occur before the date that you specified in the settlement details. Plus, Edwards is just going to hold out until there is a clear front-runner for the democratic nod. No use in endorsing himself out of a job!

I'd give anything to have Mr. Head Hubdub activate the "Cash In" button on this thing!!!!

Regardless it does not explain why the question has been prematurly suspended!
my opinion is that means the question must be voided immediately or reopened until the end time which is almost 9 hours away!

I agree.

NEW RULE SUGGESTION

Hubdub admins must post the reasons for all questions suspensions. Something like "settlement decision pending" or "question is too vague" or "we are pulling a 'Florida Governor' on this democratic process..."

Something!!!

Since the end date was clear, I do not see how voiding the question makes sense. Let it play out.

I Agree History Teacher But I Also See The Point In Regards To the Settlement Being Vague, I Do Apologize For That As I Said Before, At This Time Though They Must Void It Or Reopen It, Because The End time has NOT occured.

The market is suspended and will be settled at its end date. If at 11:59 PST he has not endorsed anyone the other/no endorsement will win. The end date does not just mean you can't predict anymore but that the question is settled at that date. I suspended the question as I heard a rumor he was doing something but turned out to be false. Market opened until end date.

TheDoctor Can You Clearly Define whether you are a moderator or a participant, because this very situation shows how a conflict of interest can be infered here!

funny how you have so much control yet your name appears in the list of leaders!

i have withdrawn my money and request the attention of a site administrator.

thedoctor ... why would you suspend based on a rumour of something that might happen? Markets should end when something official happens. There shouldn't be any issues with speculation until the last minute.

thedoctor should not have influence over the actions AND be allowed to participate what a joke!

Guys,

I've now had a chance to review this. I think there is a lot of justifiable confusion between users as to how this question will be settled. The guide to resolution should primarily the question and secondly the settlement rules. The end date should not be a guide as it is often incorrectly entered and needs amended. However, that isn't yet clearly stated on the site. Therefore I propose the following:
(1) This question is voided
(2) Another question with no close date is created
(3) Put together a Big Book of Settlement Rules (which in this instance would state that the End date should be extended)

Let me know what you think.

BTW All our category editors play in the markets, as I do myself. We love the product so barring ourselves from using it would be too hard. Also, if you don't eat your own dog food you will never know what it tastes like! However, we settle every question as objectively as we possibly can. Additionally, we do review each others decisions so there is really no opportunity to fraudulently benefit ourselves.

i request the question voided do to the improper influence which forced me to withdraw my funds clearly simply rebetting will not provide me with the same result being paid out additionally if this were a real gambling site you would hold yourselves to NOT VOTE or be prosecuted for fraud!

I bet the question based on the WORDING of the question. It had an end date. All candidates that drop out eventually endorse another. The question asked would he endorse a candidate by that ending date. So, had to pull my money out at a loss when I should have cleaned up. If you are going to do this by the wording of the question, stick with that. If you don't, we have NOTHING to rely on.

@nigeleccles: That sounds like a good solution to me. Perhaps instead of having the generic "flag for review," you could have several different ways to flag, so that we can simply click "Request amend settlement date." If a settlement date is amended, give all buyers a short window (say, two days) in which they can cash out at the rate they bought in at.

wow the people who run this site are voting in this? makes me wonder why i wanna waste my time either, doesn't seem fair to everybody else here!

we are not eating dog food here but we seem to be served bullshit

I bet this question clearly reading the end date as today. So the question was would Edwards, after dropping out, endorse someone by tonight. I bet on this Wednesday morning. At the time of the suspension it was at 73, now when I check back the suspension is lifted and my position is at 31? Lost 1/3 of net worth due to the suspension and reinterpretation. If you guys aren't going to go by the end date, then whats the point?

Regarding the proposal to put this question back with no end date and how illogical that is. At some point either Clinton or Obama will win the nomination, Edwards will endorse the winner if he hasn't endorsed someone already. By putting no end date on it, all you are saying is bet this question based on who you think the Democratic nominee is. The question was supposed to be about Edwards and his short term decision making process. Using this logic you can put a question up about any Republican politician that hasn't endorsed a candidate, leave off an enddate, and everyone that guesses they will endorse McCain will eventually win.

in the FAQ under predictions#3 it reads Settlement occurs whenever it becomes public knowledge that the question can be conclusively answered. This may be because an event has occurred or because an event has failed to occur and the stated question period has run out. the last sentence leads me to believe that if he doesn't endorse by end date, the question will be settled based on the news at that time. i withdrew a wager about congress passing the rebates based on this rule cause the question was ending yesterday and they hadn't passed it yet.

people are taking this all very seriously, its supposed to be fun. Thats the impression I get from the various category editors. They are trying to be relaxed about it and hope that the community policies fuzzy or scamming questions while they accept a bit of vagueness on some good questions. Since they aren't making real money off the H$ hopefully they aren't too impartial. If your being paid by this company you wouldn't try to piss off all your users by fraudulently deciding questions just so you can get points. Clearly they're ahead at this early stage because, by definition, category editors play a lot.

Having said all that...I think the nature of the editing system needs to be explained a bit more. We need to know who the editors are, there should be a flag or soemthing beside the id telling us which category they are responsible for. This may make the leaderboard look a bit tilted but it should also give normal users a better sense of achievement, if you're beating the sports editor on sport topics thats pretty good!

@ nigeleccles

The Doctor comes in (comment #25) and says "Market opened until end date."

You guys need to "talk amongst yourselves" and decide what you are going to do. Or jump-ball it to yet another moderator... but it is not OK to continually change positions.

You asked "Let me know what you think. " Does that presume a majority of participants are going to read the comments, and weigh in?

I think you need to let this question run it's course, as per "Comment #25" ... and move forward with clearer information, settlement terms and end dates.

The question was clear. It seemed equally clear that the settlement and end dates for this question are one/the same.

As a note: I don't have any money in this.

"The question will be suspended from further predictions at this point. If an event that determines the question outcome happens before this time, predictions made after that event will be voided."

I think is pretty clear that you can very well have a vote be suspended for something that will happen After suspension, since happening before suspension is "an event" happening after should just be the norm, you want people to stop voting on "who will win the superbowl" before the superbowl begins, and settlement happens 4 hours after. Extrapolate that more and this question has no end date the entire question is "after he drops out" not within a week after he drops out. In that regard voting for nobody would be silly, since it is highly unlikely he would not endorse the DNC nominee, and everyone who voted for nobody should have their money refunded.

As a suggestion to the developers:

You have a suspension date, add a mandatory field of Settlement date, with options like a certain date, a certain hour, and an "OR" statement with things like things like "within a week of the event" or "by the election" and a Whichever is Sooner/Later

So you could say Will X happen? with a suspension date of next week, and a resolution date of april first, with an OR of when the spy satelite hits the earth. Whichever is earlier.

If there is no resolution by the time either condition happened, the question would be voided, unless of course if No resolution was an option.

Hmm. The question stated will he (John Edwards) endorse someone after he drops out of the race. It's an open ended question until such time as he endorses someone, or someone is elected without his endorsement. Anyway, that's how I see it. A date that is not included in the question is arbitrary.

Wow. After reading more of the comments, I can't believe how seriously people are about this! Maybe we should all be required to agree to something like "I will not curse the hands that provide my news entertainment". Or "I swear not to behave like a lawyer at anytime, ever".

I agree this one should be voided and the issue clarified.

should let this one run till the end of the day on feb. 5th

i think you should void the question and let this be a lesson as to why the people running the boards cannot both participate and moderate at the same time!
it does make people feel cheated. i don't know why someone did not see a conflict of interest coming here! sure it's supposed to be just for fun but without someone who people can have confidence in being unbiased to moderate the whole idea of this site is useless! i guess the reason you can get away with this is because you don't have advertisers who would clearly impose this obvious rule upon you, but i also think if you don't do something to fix this you will see a clear drop in site traffic. the rules being so unclear is one thing hey thats why we need UNBIASED moderaters, but voting in the game and playing referee is unheard of!

furthermore i am awaiting a statement to the effect that the moderators will no longer participate before i place ANY more bets on ANY questions whatsoever, if i don't see that i will simple not participate any more!

yeah...i just closed out all my bets and am waiting for them to void my question so i can delete my acct...these people are assholes making up rules as they go and contradicting rules they've already set in place just to satisfy their buddies bets

i haven't closed any bets yet or placed any more either and i won't whats the point but they do have to stop participating if i am to keep visiting this site.
it should be obvious that it's improper what they are doing!

u know...this is going to turn out just like another one...they're going to declare whichever one they want as the winner thereby giving themselves a bunch of h$ then void the question after people complain and end up keeping the loot, because one of the rules is that they don't take away h$ after they've handed them out...just watch

exactly lack of confidence in the moderators will be the ruin of this site, did you ever see a boxer also act as the referee, or a baseball player from one team as the ump? come on it's just common sense!

OK, no real consensus on this but there definitely is a distinct majority which agrees that voiding in this instance is the best solution. The end date should not be used as guide to the question settlement but we obviously need to make that clearer. By the end of Monday we should have page up with common understandings and conventions so that should make this clearer.

With regards to category editors playing in the markets; while category editors have been totally objective in settling markets, I can see that some users perceive that might be otherwise. Therefore I am going to place that under review. I'll put up a question on the Get Satisfaction notice board and you can comment there if you feel strongly one way or the other.

i simply cannot participate anymore unless this playing field is leveled!
again lack of confidence, personally i don't care about end dates or voiding questions, what i want is to know the person who decides those things is not benifiting even with a name in the scoreboard, these decisions being made are useless without makin it clear you WILL NOT participate Immediately until i see that i will no longer bet in any manner whatsoever and if it is not clearly stated within a few days on the log in page or somewhere very noticable i just won't be here ever again!

Seriously people, if the admins want more Hubdub fake money... They can make it... they could give themselves fifteen bajillion dollars and there is nothing you could do about it.

Abstain from playing? Why would they do that, they are entitled to enjoy the fruits of their labors More than you do. I don't even see advertisements on this site, what makes you feel so entitled to own the administrators?

The distinction of suspension and settlement times need to be made clearer, but if you are really worried someone in rigging the fake gambling for fake money you need to get a life.

I don't understand why this is being voided, he dropped out without endorsing anyone. He may change his mind later but unlike Guliani who endorsed McCain when he dropped out, John Edwards did not endorse anyone. IT should be Other/No Endorsement.

Voiding this was wrong.
Sayanora to this web site forever.

No time constraint was given in the actual question. ie, "Who will Edwards endorse by <<suspension date>>". Lesson learned.

To most of us the time constraint was clear, the end date in the settlement details. If thats not what it means, than this makes no sense.

Hubdub is broken. They should have agreed on proper rules before going public. I'm dropping out of Hubdub.

I kinda agree with the people who are talking about dropping out. Obviously the site is not to be taken seriously, and it's supposed to be fun, but games are only fun when there are rules and they make sense. Edwards didn't endorse anyone, and there was an "end time" on the question. Clearly the result of this question is "other/no endorsement". If the rules of the game are so arbitrary, then the game's no fun. I'm interested in this site as a concept, and I'll probably stick around a little bit longer, but if this happens again, I'll go back to playing Calvinball. At least there's fresh air involved in that one.

--d