Yet another person outraged by the HubDub prediction markets on deaths and assassinations

No Gravatar

Here.

Outraged by that.

Previously.

16 thoughts on “Yet another person outraged by the HubDub prediction markets on deaths and assassinations

  1. Medemi said:

    “I strongly believe that HubDub should delete this awful prediction market.”

    I can’t comment on that page. I have to log in again, and when I do it says “invalid username”

    I also believe it (and its comments) doesn’t show in Google reader.

  2. Medemi said:

    I will just have to post it here then.

     

    Nigel,

     

    I believe you have to make a distinction between people dieing of old age or some disease, and assassinations. The former can’t easily be prevented while the latter is in the public interest, it concerns us all. When the price of a possible assassination reaches “critical” levels in the public’s eye then that’s a signal we want to send out. There will always be people who are offended by some market but in this case I believe openness overrules matters of privacy.

    When you’re offering markets on people dieing of some disease OTOH, it is more of a private matter, and you will find that people will turn against you. Rightfully so, IMO.

     

    HubDub should have offered that market before Obama was elected though, as I’ve pointed out earlier. Makes it less personal.

     

    As for letting your customer base decide, this is not a bloody democracy, I hope. People have the capacity of ruining everything.

  3. Medemi said:

    Pim Fortuyn was assassinated on May 6 as he was leaving a radio studio in the city of Hilversum.

    He had been expected to win the forthcoming elections on May 15. He had expressed radical views on

    subjects such as Islam, immigration, and the state of confusion the out-going Kok government had left

    behind. Due to his opinions and debating talents, he had attracted both left- and right-wing voters. A

    controversial personality, Fortuyn had also received threatening letters, bomb threats and a barrage of

    verbal assaults by e-mail.

     

    2 The assassination suspect was arrested on the same day as the killing and in

    November he confessed to the crime, saying that “he was concerned about Fortuyn’s generally

    stigmatizing political conceptions, which would have adverse consequences for certain vulnerable

    groups in society.”3

    Pim Fortuyn did not receive protection from the authorities. On the day of the murder, he was

    accompanied by a private personal bodyguard, who, however, could not prevent the murder. The Kok

    government set up an independent committee

     

    – the Van den Haak Committee – to investigate the

    matter. The committee published its report in December

     

    4 into the security situation prior to the murder,

    the activities of the governmental institutions concerned and whether Fortuyn had requested

    protection. The report concluded that Fortuyn should have been provided with protection and

    criticized the failure of the Justice and Interior Ministers to do so. According to the committee, the

    General Intelligence and Security Service had also failed in its activities because it had not carried out

    a proper security analysis, despite a request from the Minister of the Interior that it do so. The minister

    himself had assumed that the Security Service would investigate the case thoroughly and believed its

    statement that there had been no threats against Fortuyn. In addition, Fortuyn himself had disliked the

    idea of protection because he had felt it would limit his personal freedom.

    http://www.ihf-hr.org/viewbina…..oc_id=2260

    ——-

    That last line is not entirely correct. Fortuyn demanded protection from the Government, repeatedly. He did not get it, despite the fact that I felt his life could be in danger, despite the fact (IMO) that the public felt his life could be at risk. 

  4. Chris F. Masse said:

    “I can’t comment on that page.”

    You have to create an account there.

    “I also believe it (and its comments) doesn’t show in Google reader.”

    They do.

  5. Chris F. Masse said:

    “When the price of a possible assassination reaches “critical” levels in the public’s eye then that’s a signal we want to send out.”

    The problem is that there won’t be insider knowledge informing the markets.

  6. Chris F. Masse said:

    Pim Fortuyn

    Are you telling us that an assassination prediction market would have been useful in that case?

    You might be half right. Interesting.

  7. Medemi said:

    Yes. I am half right. It is interesting.

     

    Fortuyn was a special case. Many loved him, many were offended by his remarks. I was in the first camp and it still hurts today when I think about what happened, back then in 2002. Democracy died that day, for many, in the Netherlands. People took to the streets, but sadness and rationality overcame feelings of hate and revenge, and prevented a revolt.

     

    The ruling political parties saw him as a threat and were relentless in demonizing him. The media, by and large, went along with that and made him look like a racist. There were many regrets, afterwards…

     

    One of Fortuyn’s last words were (translated) “Should anything happen to me, YOU will be held responsible”, pointing to the media and the Government for creating a climate that, let’s just say, didn’t improve his life expectancy.

     

    There are many examples throughout history where someone with the ability to steal people’s hearts “has to go”. Obama, albeit a different situation, could fall into that category. Well, most of us don’t really know him, yet.

     

    I think you made a fair judgement, Chris.

  8. Are prediction markets on deaths and assassinations SOMETIMES acceptable? | Midas Oracle .ORG said:

    […] decide that prediction markets on deaths and assassinations are disgusting and unacceptable, then they should be pruned. We need goodwill towards the prediction markets if we want the real-money prediction markets to be […]

  9. Medemi said:

    “I strongly believe that HubDub should delete this awful prediction market.”

    I can’t comment on that page. I have to log in again, and when I do it says “invalid username”

    I also believe it (and its comments) doesn’t show in Google reader.

  10. Medemi said:

    I will just have to post it here then.

     

    Nigel,

     

    I believe you have to make a distinction between people dieing of old age or some disease, and assassinations. The former can’t easily be prevented while the latter is in the public interest, it concerns us all. When the price of a possible assassination reaches “critical” levels in the public’s eye then that’s a signal we want to send out. There will always be people who are offended by some market but in this case I believe openness overrules matters of privacy.

    When you’re offering markets on people dieing of some disease OTOH, it is more of a private matter, and you will find that people will turn against you. Rightfully so, IMO.

     

    HubDub should have offered that market before Obama was elected though, as I’ve pointed out earlier. Makes it less personal.

     

    As for letting your customer base decide, this is not a bloody democracy, I hope. People have the capacity of ruining everything.

  11. Medemi said:

    Pim Fortuyn was assassinated on May 6 as he was leaving a radio studio in the city of Hilversum.

    He had been expected to win the forthcoming elections on May 15. He had expressed radical views on

    subjects such as Islam, immigration, and the state of confusion the out-going Kok government had left

    behind. Due to his opinions and debating talents, he had attracted both left- and right-wing voters. A

    controversial personality, Fortuyn had also received threatening letters, bomb threats and a barrage of

    verbal assaults by e-mail.

     

    2 The assassination suspect was arrested on the same day as the killing and in

    November he confessed to the crime, saying that “he was concerned about Fortuyn’s generally

    stigmatizing political conceptions, which would have adverse consequences for certain vulnerable

    groups in society.”3

    Pim Fortuyn did not receive protection from the authorities. On the day of the murder, he was

    accompanied by a private personal bodyguard, who, however, could not prevent the murder. The Kok

    government set up an independent committee

     

    – the Van den Haak Committee – to investigate the

    matter. The committee published its report in December

     

    4 into the security situation prior to the murder,

    the activities of the governmental institutions concerned and whether Fortuyn had requested

    protection. The report concluded that Fortuyn should have been provided with protection and

    criticized the failure of the Justice and Interior Ministers to do so. According to the committee, the

    General Intelligence and Security Service had also failed in its activities because it had not carried out

    a proper security analysis, despite a request from the Minister of the Interior that it do so. The minister

    himself had assumed that the Security Service would investigate the case thoroughly and believed its

    statement that there had been no threats against Fortuyn. In addition, Fortuyn himself had disliked the

    idea of protection because he had felt it would limit his personal freedom.

    http://www.ihf-hr.org/viewbina…..oc_id=2260

    ——-

    That last line is not entirely correct. Fortuyn demanded protection from the Government, repeatedly. He did not get it, despite the fact that I felt his life could be in danger, despite the fact (IMO) that the public felt his life could be at risk. 

  12. Chris F. Masse said:

    “I can’t comment on that page.”

    You have to create an account there.

    “I also believe it (and its comments) doesn’t show in Google reader.”

    They do.

  13. Chris F. Masse said:

    “When the price of a possible assassination reaches “critical” levels in the public’s eye then that’s a signal we want to send out.”

    The problem is that there won’t be insider knowledge informing the markets.

  14. Chris F. Masse said:

    Pim Fortuyn

    Are you telling us that an assassination prediction market would have been useful in that case?

    You might be half right. Interesting.

  15. Medemi said:

    Yes. I am half right. It is interesting.

     

    Fortuyn was a special case. Many loved him, many were offended by his remarks. I was in the first camp and it still hurts today when I think about what happened, back then in 2002. Democracy died that day, for many, in the Netherlands. People took to the streets, but sadness and rationality overcame feelings of hate and revenge, and prevented a revolt.

     

    The ruling political parties saw him as a threat and were relentless in demonizing him. The media, by and large, went along with that and made him look like a racist. There were many regrets, afterwards…

     

    One of Fortuyn’s last words were (translated) “Should anything happen to me, YOU will be held responsible”, pointing to the media and the Government for creating a climate that, let’s just say, didn’t improve his life expectancy.

     

    There are many examples throughout history where someone with the ability to steal people’s hearts “has to go”. Obama, albeit a different situation, could fall into that category. Well, most of us don’t really know him, yet.

     

    I think you made a fair judgement, Chris.

  16. Are prediction markets on deaths and assassinations SOMETIMES acceptable? | Midas Oracle .ORG said:

    […] decide that prediction markets on deaths and assassinations are disgusting and unacceptable, then they should be pruned. We need goodwill towards the prediction markets if we want the real-money prediction markets to be […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *