
Will the candidate going into the convention with the most PLEDGED delegates win the nomination (Democrat)?
This is a follow-up question to http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Will_Hillary_Clinton_or_Barack_Obama_have_the_most_PLEDGED_delegates_going_into_the_convention_4180/view
Settlement details:
As reported by a major mainstream news source.
Settled
|
|
Yes |
|
||
|
|
No |
|
Suspend date: Sun 24th Aug 12:59am PDT Settlement date: Thu 28th Aug 1:55pm PDTPrediction cut-off: Predictions on this question after Sun 24th Aug 12:59am PDT have been voided because they were made after the question could be settled
Initial likelihoods: Yes: 75%
Action history:
Obama had more Pledged delegates going into the convention.
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/scorecard/
Suspend date: Sun 24th Aug 12:59am PDT Settlement date: Thu 28th Aug 1:55pm PDTPrediction cut-off: Predictions on this question after Sun 24th Aug 12:59am PDT have been voided because they were made after the question could be settled
more info...
Predictions (71)
71 predictions
Comments (1)
What is Hubdub?
Hubdub makes news more exciting by letting you stake virtual dollars on the outcomes of real running news stories.
Join now or learn more



http://getsatisfaction.com/hubdub/topics/proposed_new_procedure_for_dealing_with_gaming?
This ongoing problem stems from this:
http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Why_is_it_that_Satyaki_keeps_creating_Lahore_Badshahs_vs_xyz_team_questions_yet_Donal_doent_void_them_5294/view#newcomment
Here is the LATEST proposal from hubdub admins that they desire our say on:
Admins want a 4 strikes and your out process:
Proposed new procedure for dealing with gaming
Hubdub Representative
To date we have dealt with gaming on a case by case basis. However it has become clear that we need to have a defined process for dealing with individuals that game. Therefore this is our proposed procedure:
1. First identified instance/set of instances: Email warning
2. Second identified instance/set of instances: Email warning, user placed on public watch list (for 2 weeks) and fined 50% of worth
3. Third instance/set of instances: Email warning, user placed on public watch list (for 2 weeks) and fined down to H$1,000
4. Any subsequent instance will result in their ability to create questions removed and potentially suspension of their account.
We propose to apply this procedure for all new instances of gaming however some users are on their first warning and one user is on their second warning.
HOWEVER, several of us users are calling for a MUCH stiffer penalty process and this is our overall latest proposal back to the admins:
We want a 3 strikes you're out process:
1. First identified instance/set of instances: Email warning, user placed on public watch list (for 2 weeks) and fined 50% of worth.
2. Second instance/set of instances: Email warning, user placed on public watch list (for 2 weeks to 30 days) and fined down to H$1,000. AND removal of the gamers' right to create question for a period of time.
3. Any subsequent instance will result in definite, permanent suspension of their account, their IP and all other accounts by the gamer.
Have your say and please add your input at the area the admins have set up for this purpose:
http://getsatisfaction.com/hubdub/topics/proposed_new_procedure_for_dealing_with_gaming?
lucidstates (This user: Is On Strike)
Please log in or join to add a comment