Will HUBDUB advise Hubdubbers regarding Hubdub's position on Death Pools, by 1800PST March 14, 2008?

Tell HUBDUB what you think about Death Pools!

I did:
http://getsatisfaction.com/hubdub/topics/contentious_questions_part_3

Without the aim of offending you: I just put 0.5K on your "NO" option.
Reason: I just don't think there will be a decision made that soon. It does say nothing about my opinion wether a decision (in either way) should be made or not.

I hope you understand my point of view.

I totally understand kruijs. In fact, I'm placing bets on both sides, just to increase this question visibility, without hampering the market's flucuation. To me, this is not a money-maker. This is symbolic, and will prove to the hubdub world that the hubdubbers have a say in hubdub.com's future.

It is good for both the hubdub community and hubdub.com

win win
yes no

to me it does not matter how you vote, as long as the money and especially the comments flow in.

thanks to all
now make it your issue!

however, i can not place bets on this question until it is 12 hours old.
then, i plan to make quite a contribution to this cause.

1. jersjusttrolling, ty for ur service.
2. i also find such questions distasteful (well, those regarding coalition service members anyway - i couldnt care less about celebrities). however, one of the ideals for which jersjusttrolling served to protect was free speech. and, as one who believes whole-heartedly in the general concept, if i find a particular question to be offensive i simply refuse to contribute to it. problem solved.
3. kudos to jersjusttrolling and anyone else raising awareness about markets involving coalition service member deaths. if ur a loyal citizen of a coalition member country and are participating in such markets, shame on u.

<rant>and if ur a citizen of a civilized, but non-coalition member country, wtf is ur government waiting for??? america is badly strained and the world isnt gonna save itself! what will u all do when an economic collapse or the modern day isolationist (anti-war) movement causes the US to pull back to only the barest of essentials, leaving u all to deal with ur problems yourselves?</rant>

ty dan.
i believe in free speech. i defended and projected it.
i also believe that a dead pool that listed dan_the_omniscient or kruijs or nigel or chris or any of the many hubdubbers throughout the world and at the server farms of hubdub.com would not be welcomed.

oh, I'll bet H$10,000 that Nigel will have a massive coronary before April 30th. Can't you see where this will lead. Not to more and more first admendment abuses. But to a more civilized, open, informed society.

Freedom of speech, which we are fortunate to have on hubdub, is one thing; death pools is another. I am still totally appalled at the question that allowed counting American corpses in Iraq in February. The question that allowed counting dead Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan was equally disgusting. Our armed forces do not usually choose HOW or WHY they serve in a particular country: they follow orders and commands, which is the essence of military existance. Whether or not we approve of the politics that got them to a particular location, our soldiers deserve the utmost respect and admiration for their part in attempting to provide some security for the free world, and risking their lives to it. They don't deserve to be picked over like carrion, while well-meaning hubdubbers place roulette bets on their lives. There is a limit SOMEWHERE, and we ask our respected hubdub editors to respond to this with some reasonable limitations on death pools.

Are famous people perhaps exempt from limitation by their very public nature? The question about the Iran leader in Iraq was a good one: he was obviously under US protection to make certain that absolutely nothing happened to him. The Pope and Queen Elizabeth are not likely to die in 2008. Perhaps Andrew did stick his neck out and could be a target, and yes, that could be news. I think everyone is pulling for Patrick Swayze and the idea that Hollywood has over-reacted. We admire his spirit and want him to live. Famous stars who are suicidal deserve our pity and serious medical treatment; they are the victims of the soap opera that made them famous. Since they took the soap rewards, they might have to pay the soap opera price, and we might have to put up with more pop magazine type ghoulish questions on hubdub. (sigh). I guess what I am saying is that we might have to put up with these questions on public figures.

BUT, there is no reason to count corpses in Iraq, Afghanistan, Serbia, Kosovo, Israel, Lebanon, the United States, etc, whether they be dedicated military on either side of a conflict or the good honest people of these countries that come into the cross-fire.

I think that hubdub editors will definitely CLARIFY their thinking by March 14th (if in no other way, by pulling off the "death pool" questions about Nigel Eccles). Actually there is only one possible settlement answer to THIS QUESTION, and that is YES. If the death pool questions about Nigel Eccles are pulled off, it will be a DEFINITE STATEMENT OF LIMITATION. If no official comment is made at all, I think we can take it that NO STATEMENT IS A STATEMENT. Either way, the editors have reacted and we have a yes settlement.

The hubdub editors should realize that we are all strong hubdub SUPPORTERS. We have been with hubdub almost from the beginning. But just as there are rules about "abuse", "swearing", "pornography" and other such issues, we need to see a clarification about death pools. And we appreciate their assistance in taking this seriously.

Tasteless or not, there is good reason to count corpses in Iraq, Afghanistan etc. If for instance, there were ZERO military deaths in Iraq in say April, do you not think this would be reported, even trumpeted?

Randburg, Thank you.
As Nigel knows, i'm a robust supporter of Hubdub. This is not the first time i've raised my hand to ask a question about the direction of the site.
I'll readily admit to the death pool questions regarding Nigel. I was trying to give him a more personal sense of he impact of these types of questions. I'm also glad he or another editor took them down. They we're tasteless! Especially the one about Nigel contracting pancreatic cancer by 12/31/08.

From a business perspective, I believe Hubdub will survive any 'first amendment challenges' if they deny any and all death pool questions.

I agree that this market was settled when hubdub pulled the death pool questions regarding Nigel.

Now, we await the 'clarification'.

No, this question has not been settled.

Nigel either dying or contracting pancreatic cancer is not newsworthy (I hope he doesn't mind me saying that) in the sense that it would not be reported by a major mainstream news source. The number of military personnel in Iraq who lose their life over a given period or the accuracy of the prognosis reported as being given to a prominent Hollywood actor, by virtue of being reported by a major mainstream news source are newsworthy.

is not newsworthy ...

so are questions concerning who will be the #1 Hubdubber by cob, blah, blah, blah
so are questions where you pick the 3rd digit of the dows closing price.

who is making the decisions whether or not something is newsworthy? seems to me that that issue is not clear as well.

is Hubdub primarily a news forecasting site, or a betting site. I thought it was a news forecasting site that used an economic model to drive the forecasting. I certainly did not sign up to participate in any form of death pool or other obnoxious, immoral, tasteless and in-the-gutter conversations.

How does this 'solution' fit with those whose opinion is opposite of mine?

Create a separate market segment for death pools and other 'non-news' criminal activities, with it's own leaderboard. This would satisfy me, in that, i could ignore that entire market segment.

i remember the dead nigel question. and i so hoped that it wouldnt be pulled (not that i had any h$ riding on it). despite his doing so on perfectly justifiable grounds in accordance with hd's rules, i wonder if nigel now regrets its voiding? thats the thing with censorship: its a pandora's box. im reminded of something i read/heard some time ago: if words can cause problems, then it is not thru less words that we may solve them, but more.

That solution strikes me as worse than the current situation that you are so against.

Right now, we don't actively condone or condemn so called "death pools" that concern newsworthy items such as the number of US Military deaths in Iraq or prominent figures such as Patrick Swayze or Mrs Thatcher who are suffering from illness. We leave creation of and participation in these questions to the (moral) judgment of hubdub users.

If we were to have a separate "death pool" section, then we would be actively condoning and inviting these sorts of questions. As an employee, I think that would be a lot more distasteful than the current situation.

You didn't sign up to participate in "death pools", but by making so much noise about them and creating those ridiculous questions about Nigel's potential death, you've given these questions more attention than they warrant and will probably ensure that they remain and become even more popular.

donal,
I do not agree with your argumentation. See, HUBDUB is beta. It's still finding it's final shape. So "you've given these questions more attention than they warrant and will probably ensure that they remain and become even more popular" is true and it leads to discussions which contribute to the shapefinding process. It is very important to do this right now and not later on - you should know that, and this is exactly what jersjusttrolling wants to achieve.
But I agree with you in rejecting the suggestion of the "death pool section".

Please read a newer post on getsatisfaction.com
There, I suggested a 'Tabloid Media' section where 'death pools' would not necesarily be promoted. Heck they wouldn't even be a sub-category. But that's the section where they would be placed, by users or hubdub admin.
That section would include questions like:

Will Hillary become pregnant before ...
(does not belong in politics)
Will Britney Spears re-enter a treatment center on or before ...
(is this really entertainment?)
Will an Alien Spaceship return to earth and snatch up all hubdubbers who haven't been thoroughly probed yet?
(that was a tough one, not sure where that q would go, makes sense to put it in Tabloid media though, doesn't it?)

I think that having at least some way to distinguish between real and tabloid news is important.

I do not think that Hubdub wants their overall leaderboard filled with hubdubbers who made fortunes on the tabloids. Kind of smells bad, if you know what i mean.

Newsworthy items have to deal with reality and questions that are of real importance to the world. Not necessarily what the viewers want to hear (like Fox News).

The Tabloid Media can make up any questions they like ...

Will it rain on so-and-so's wedding?
Will b's new ring be bigger than c's?
Will Paris Hilton blah blah blah?
How long will it take for Patrick do die?

Patrick says he's been drinking a special tea to help cure his condition. Will it work by Sunday?

Whatever>?:

Is hubdub going to be considered a 'serious' media site, or are the next headlines going to read ...

" Hubdub has death pools for every taste "

kruijs
jersjusttrolling has started a discussion and I am contributing to it, not trying to stop it.

the morality and appropriateness of questions will be an ongoing issue beyond the Beta phase. No matter what is decided in terms of standards for appropriateness and taste, there are still likely to be people like jersjusttrolling who will object to certain types of questions in the post Beta Hubdub. Improving the flagging of questions and making the settlement process more transparent is one thing. Trying to come up with standards for taste and morality that will take account of all possible events and their implications for gauging the appropriateness of Hubdub questions is something completely different.

I do not believe that anyone is trying to stop this ongoing conversation. Far from it. The people are presenting their views. I'm learning a whole lot about others perspectives. It is very refreshing. Please understand that I respect all views, whether i agree or not.

That said, what kruijs said ...
"It is very important to do this right now and not later on - you should know that, and this is exactly what jersjusttrolling wants to achieve. " IS EXACTLY what my goals are in this conversation. Yes, i'm aghast at death pools, but, i'm also realistic about what can be achieved. a total ban may or may not be called for. That is our collective decision, as Hubdub.com has said throughout beta.

Thank you kruijs. Thank you Donal. Thank you all for making this issue 'an issue to be dealt with'. I've achieved what I intended to do. Now, it's time for educated minds to decide.

I somehow find this debate going on here more interesting than the question .

probably the highest word-to-$H question to date.

donal
"the morality and appropriateness of questions will be an ongoing issue beyond the Beta phase." Hey! We need it right now DURING the beta phase, and that is what this discussion is all about.

hubdub had no difficulty in setting basic standards for abuse, swearing, pornography, etc, so hubdub is NOT against providing for basic moral issues and setting a few basic limitations. Abuse, swearing, pornography, etc COULD all be possibly considered in some way as news, but limitations have been placed here on acceptable standards of common decency and good taste. And I think most of us will agree that these are GOOD standards for common decency. We applaud these fine standards, as set by our editors. Some things might still need to be added to this list: LIKE THE DEATH POOLS.

And yes, this is the RIGHT TIME and RIGHT PLACE to discuss it. If the Nigel death pools have been pulled -- as they should be -- obviously the hubdub editors have made SOME decision regarding the death pools and good taste. DO YOU MIND SHARING WITH ALL OF US WHAT THAT DECISION IS? AND HOW WE CAN DEFINE IT IN THE FUTURE?

And by the way, THINK OF EDITORS AND HUBDUBBERS PULLING TOGETHER on this one. As hubdub grows in size and stature -- as we all hope it will -- problems like this one need to be addressed and decided along the way. Was it ever really intended that hubdub would remain small and insignificant, and that individual problems could always be sorted on an individual basis without general guidelines? I AM surprised that it has taken so many prediction questions and so many discussions to try to get a guideline on this issue...It isn't going to "go away". Can we have a guideline NOW, PLEASE?

Interesting New Prediction Market:

http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_HUBDUBBERS_indicate__by_the_percentage_results_of_this_prediction__that_THEY_WANT_THE_DEATH_POOLS_and_CORPSE_COUNTS_on_Hubdub_to_STOP_4012/view#newcomment

uummm.... the only questions that jersjusttrolling has asked are about
nascar (legalized speeding)
american politics (the rest of world only cares because when americans get silly, the rest of the world pays)
the untimely death of our beloved Hubdub Staff (he hid his "deathpool")
and the best ones of all
WILL HE BE IN THE LEAD

and since i have every confidence in Hubdub to settle this matter....
i think i'm gonna see how this little block button works

There is POSTITIVE MOVEMENT to start the day! The editors ARE listening to our discussions on the death pool questions and are promising some adjustments soon. Be sure to see Nigel Eccles comments HERE on this subject:

http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_HUBDUBBERS_indicate__by_the_percentage_results_of_this_prediction__that_THEY_WANT_THE_DEATH_POOLS_and_CORPSE_COUNTS_on_Hubdub_to_STOP_4012/view

Thank you Nigel!

Proposed resolution here: http://getsatisfaction.com/hubdub/topics/contentious_questions_proposed_resolution