corky

Hubdub did something TERRIFIC today, and I ask that they do a second terrific thing. The terrific thing that Hubdub did today is they removed the question I posed about whether a video or tape would surface in which Cindy McCain uses the term 'blackey.' Hubdub was correct and admirable to do this, because there is NO EVIDENCE supporting that smear. I now ask that Hubdub do a second terrific thing, and remove this Michelle Obama 'blame whitey' question, because there is NO EVIDENCE that such a video or tape exists. In fact, Hubdub administrator Jenniandtheboys characterized the allegation of the existence of such a video or tape as a 'smear.' Everyone here knows that there exists at least one link supporting most any hateful allegation one can make, because there is no shortage of hate sites on the internet. Again, I BEG Hubdub to prevent such hateful smears to be advanced on this site. Neither I, NOR Chatarra, nor anyone else on this site, should be allowed to use this site for rank, putrid political smears. Thank you for your attention to this matter.

I just reworded the McCain analog question to be more specific, in accordance with Hubdub's counsel, and also put the opening odds where Hubdub suggested they be put for the Obama analog question. That should make everyone happy.

I have a question for hubub. I posted an IDENTICAL question, merely substituting the words 'Cindy McCain' for the words 'Michelle Obama', and it was voided on the grounds that the question was too ambiguous. So the obvious question is, why is this question still posted by Hubdub, when my question was voided?

Thank you all for your consideration of this issue.

I have a question for the Hubdub administrators. Is there any limit to the kind of incendiary question about the political candidates and their families.that can be posted? For example, can someone post a question of the form, "Will Candidate X be charged with murder before the election?" It appears to me that the main function of such questions, like the "blame whitey" question, is more to invoke a feeling about a candidate, rather than to create a market for predicting the news. And allowing that sort of question, in my view, would move this site from being a news prediction site to simply a bottom-dwelling political advocacy site.

The material has to be all new, no remakes. By the way, Owl, if they remake 'Feelings', I predict that triangles will adopt a fourth side shortly thereafter....

As one of the top Washington Nationals fans on this site, let me just say that this question reminds me of my daily pain, lol. May My Beloved Nats start healing, and bring the 'None' to fruition on this proposition.

Glad the question was voided. As for your comment, cancelledbysbc, I wish you would leave your political views for another forum, and leave the comments section for this question for COMMENTS ABOUT THIS QUESTION.

Thank you, Destry. Let me assure you that I will be contacting them if they do not fix this. If the users of this site cannot be confident that the meaning of their wagers will remain constant, interest in this site will plummet.

To the administrators of this site, PLEASE cancel my wager as if it never occurred. This is nothing short of ridiculous.

This is not fair in any way, shape, or form. My wager was based on the same interpretation as that of the AUTHOR of the question, and now the value of my wager has decreased dramatically because of this change in the question. I thought it was plain that both the author's and my interpretation were correct, and I feel that value has simply been taken from my wager, unfairly.

Things they have not recorded before.