Then, maybe it would be great to have a vocabulary that distinguishes between decision markets (strong form — decision-making tool) and decision markets (weak form — decision-aid tool).

“Care to offer a bet on your claim that no one will *ever* delegate any decision making power to a conditional market?”

No. You are not faithful to the spirit of your claim and mine. Your claim is that decision markets (in their capacity of decision making) can be used in all kind of business applications. In each of your talks, you cite half a dozen instances —at Confab, one instance was a decision market making the choice of which marketing agency to select. My claim is that business executives will never consider decision markets (strong form) as a replacement for human business decisions. It will never be taught at business schools.

My argument is based on the fact that you forget one factor: the self-satisfaction derived from making decisions and applying them throughout an organization. There’s great satisfaction in acting like a little dictator (whether you run a group blog, a corporation, or a government). No way a person in power will delegate decisions to a machine or a mechanism. (Note that I thought of an exception, in a previous blog post: when technical decisions are not made by executives, but by lower level employees.)

You would win the bet if you were able to provide just *ONE* instance. I agree that you stick with my verbalization in the blog post above, but that’s not the spirit of my claim. One can always cite one exception for anything. I can dig the aviation archives and find one instance of a pilot high on LSD who made a successful landing. I was thinking of the decision markets (in their strong form) being commonly accepted as a business decision tool by the management science experts and the business community.

Any play-money prediction market along this line would be interesting. And I have no problem publishing on the frontpage that I was damn wrong, if it were the case one day.