Chris Masses InterPol file

No Gravatar

Chris Masse .com:

Chris F. Masse is NOT a Fraud

But come on, would saying he is really be libel? Seems like a rather subjective statement to me in the first place. What is the metric for &#8220-fraud-ship&#8221-, anyway?

Chris F. Masse

Chris F. Masse, of chrisfmasse.com &amp- midasoracle.org, is NOT a fraud. (But he is slightly overweight, and often stinks of elderberries and old coffee.) Styling himself as &#8220-the most forward thinker in the field of prediction markets,&#8221- Chris daily attempts to offer commentary on prediction markets, economics, and related subjects, from his blog, Midas Oracle.

However, as even a casual reader can glean from Mr. Masse&#8217-s writing, he certainly has an axe to grind. Never mind questions as to whether the man might be bi-polar, or why his posts attract so few comments and engender so little discussion&#8230-no, let us concentrate on what Mr. Masse is saying. From the get-go, Chris attempts to drill into the mind of every reader exactly what a prediction market is, and what its uses are. In a few paragraphs located at the top of his blog&#8217-s main page, Mr. Masse attempts to distill his particular views on the utility of prediction markets while simultaneously dissuading any ideas to the contrary, as though all other writing and actual research in the field is a moot point. Only Chris&#8217-s opinions matter, but they must be taken on faith.

And what are Mr. Masse&#8217-s qualifications to make such claims as are replete throughout his writings? He never provides them, conveniently, but this does not stop Chris from criticizing others who have verifiable experience in the &#8220-nitty-gritty&#8221- of prediction markets. Robin Hanson, the &#8220-father of prediction markets&#8221-, is a particular punching-bag favorite, although Chris apparently has a strong aversion to responding to Robin&#8217-s comments when he posts.

Chris, always a master of logic, claims to take conversation seriously, and in a recent post entitled &#8220-It is not about Midas Oracle&#8230- It is about taking part of the conversation about (enterprise) prediction markets on the Web.&#8221- wrote:

  1. If you are an economist, and have nothing to say about the current banking, financial and economic crisis (the worst in our generation), then you don&#8217-t matter anymore.
  2. If you are a prediction market consultant, and have nothing to say about the negative piece from The Economist, then you don&#8217-t matter anymore.

Mr. Masse seems to be a master of the arbitrary, as he has synthesized rationale for obsoleteness based upon reactions to a very short Economist story that did nothing less than report the facts. And obsoleteness according to whom? Mr. Masse, of course.

But perhaps Mr. Masse missed the critical point that the story had nothing negative to state about prediction markets themselves, simply some observations on their adoption. In conclusion, actually, the story contains these two lines:

Yet many pilot projects run so far have shown that junior staff can often be surprisingly good forecasters. Perhaps the best way to find out when prediction markets will finally take off is to ask your employees—using a prediction market.

Chris, that sounds pro-prediction market to me. Or did you perhaps simply need an excuse to take pot-shots at &#8220-economists&#8221- and &#8220-prediction market consultants&#8221- because &#8220-they&#8221- did not share your reaction against fabricated story content that is not there?

Chris Masse gets a vote of no confidence from me. Any further evidence required to diagnose Mr. Masse&#8217-s ineptness in providing a factual discussion of prediction markets can be found at his blog, Midas Oracle, which you can read for yourself. Mr. Masse is obviously working to overcome something, I am just not sure what. Perhaps you could inform us, Chris?

Previously:

Enterprise prediction markets… the next big thing —not.

Opacity versus Openness

NEXT: Who did it?

No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)

Enterprise prediction markets… the next big thing -not.

No Gravatar

Niall O&#8217-Connor:

A previous Economist article, that I have archived, spoke of how Napster was revolutionising the music industry. Another one, called Betfair a radical upstart. A recent article on Hulu discussed how it was “online videos new model.” By anybody&#8217-s standards, these technologies have unleashed the forces of disintermediation, and affected a paradigmatic shift in the industries in which they operate.

By way of contrast, the Economist article on Prediction Markets states that Koch, one of the biggest users of Prediction markets, asserted that they are a compliment to other forecasting techniques and not a substitute to them. The article aslo raises the issue of cultural barriers that are inhibiting the take up of said Prediction Markets – not least, inertia (etc..).

One can take from the article that Prediction markets are not ground break, not radical, not revolutionising- they are not unleashing the forces of disintermediation. Accordingly, on the evidence presented (”much remains to be done to convince sceptical managers of their value”) the battle is an uphill one. Moreover, one can ask, if the battle was not won during the good times, what is the real chance that it will be won during a recession, when company’s are always more resistent to change.

You guys are all speaking from a position of being laden down with prediction market baggage. Your views are not objective, and one can only hope that you are not collectively suffering from disaster myopia. […]

Niall O&#8217-Connor&#8217-s website

Mechanical Turk grades The Economists news article on enterprise prediction markets

No Gravatar

Panos Ipeirotis:

economist-survey

Well, the average was a 5.8/10, meaning that the average detected sentiment was pretty much neutral with some hints on positivity.

I acknowledge this result, brought to us by research scientist and university professor Panos Ipeirotis&#8230- who, 5 minutes ago, was alerting us on the hard fact that Mechanical Turk is not so much of a reliable tool&#8230-

Previously: Enterprise prediction markets… the next big thing —not.

John Stewart unloads on CNBC… and Jim Cramer.

No Gravatar

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM – Th 11p / 10cCNBC Gives Financial Advice

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things With Demetri MartinPolitical Humor
Joke of the Day

Video via Felix Salmon

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM – Th 11p / 10cJim Cramer Unedited Interview Pt. 1

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri MartinPolitical Humor
Jim Cramer

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM – Th 11p / 10cJim Cramer Unedited Interview Pt. 2

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri MartinPolitical Humor
Jim Cramer

The Daily Show With Jon StewartM – Th 11p / 10cJim Cramer Unedited Interview Pt. 3

Daily Show Full Episodes
Important Things w/ Demetri MartinPolitical Humor
Jim Cramer

UPDATE: Jim Cramer on John Stewart

Opacity versus Openness

No Gravatar

There is much lying going on in the field of EPM software vendors.

– They lie about the people they hire &#8212-many of the new employees are in fact part-time (at best).

– They lie about their customers &#8212-some of the names you see on their &#8220-clients&#8221- webpages are in fact companies that have abandoned the experiment long ago. By keeping old customers in their listing and adding some brand-new prospects, they create artificially a cumulative effect so as to impress the gullible prospects that they try to hook up at those pitiful $400-a-seat vendor conferences.

– They lie about the benefits of prediction markets. Since (enterprise) prediction markets are just information aggregation mechanisms that can&#8217-t reach omniscience by essence, the only value of (E)PMs comes from the weaknesses of the competitive forecasting tools. Those weaknesses are not that numerous &#8212-hence, the applications of (E)PMs are probably limited.

– They lie about the successes that their customers got. There isn&#8217-t a single detailed business case published about EPMs.

– They lie about the real age of the prediction markets &#8212-they make it like PMs are in childhood, whereas the reality check is that PMs are in adulthood. The first batch of contemporary PMs popped up in 1988 &#8212-that&#8217-s 21 years ago, folks. The starting point of the PM hype was in 2003&#8211-2004 &#8212-that&#8217-s 6 years ago, now. It is not true to say that (E)PMs are a novelty. By now, we should be able to pause, assess their benefits, and tell the world where exactly they can make an impact (if any).

Because the lying is still going on, I have decided to downgrade the prediction market people and the prediction market organizations who are opaque &#8212-and to upgrade the ones who are open. I hope that my tougher stance will incite everyone to be more truthful.

ADDENDUM

An uncertain future – A novel way of generating forecasts has yet to take off. – by The Economist – 2009-02-26

The prediction market consultants who matter -and the others who dont

No Gravatar

Who are the prediction market consultants who took part of the conversation prompted by the publication of the devastating story by The Economist?

Adam Siegel of Inkling Markets

Mat Fogarty of CrowdCast

George Tziralis of AskMarkets

Jed Christiansen of Mercury

Notably absent from the conversation:

– David Perry of Consensus Point

– &#8220-Chief Scientist&#8221- Robin Hanson of Consensus Point

– Emile Servan-Schreiber of NewsFutures

– Chris Hibbert of Zocalo

– The HSX people

– The academic canaries who are over-quoted by the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal

Taking all this into account, I am updating my &#8220-Consultants&#8221- listing published at CFM. I am putting the consultants who participate in web conversations ahead of the others, and in bold, so as to signal to my numerous readers who they should contact first &#8212-should they have any inquiry about enterprise prediction markets. And I will consider doing the same for the other Midas Oracle listings.

Starting today, there will be retaliations of measured and graduated amplitude against any prediction market people or prediction market company who snobs the important conversations about prediction markets &#8212-which take place on Midas Oracle or elsewhere.

You can&#8217-t be bragging everywhere that you are a &#8220-prediction market expert&#8221- and be absent from important conversations. If you don&#8217-t converse with us, then you are not such a good expert &#8212-&#8221-you&#8217-re the weakest link, bye bye.&#8221-

NEXT: It is not about Midas Oracle&#8230- It is about taking part of the conversation about (enterprise) prediction markets on the Web.

Google rewards those who take part in web conversations about (enterprise) prediction markets.

No Gravatar

Scanning the results for the query on &#8220-prediction markets&#8221-, I see that, focusing on the software vendors and prediction market consultants incorporated after the 2003&#8211-2004 starting point (hence, excluding pioneer NewsFutures), Inkling Markets is ranked much higher than Consensus Point.

  1. No need to wonder why. Adam Siegel (the Inkling Markets CEO) is an active participant in the discussion &#8212-thru his blog, thru comments on Midas Oracle, and thru private e-mails. (I told many times Dave to catch up. Pissing in a violin in order to compose a symphony would have been more fruitful.)
  2. Having a prestigious &#8220-Chief Scientist&#8221- is not such a determinant. It only impresses a few young, inexperienced and gullible spotty collegians. What makes the difference on the Web is your openness &#8212-more exactly, how much high-quality information you are willing to publish, free of charge, free of advertising, and free of copyright. Take a look at Inkling Markets. Adam Siegel has made the hell of an effort to make available many explainers and case studies on enterprise prediction markets. I don&#8217-t agree with everything he says, but I reckon that he is the only one to make the effort to reach out to web readers.

In the end, whether the judge is Google or Chris Masse, the passing of time is important. It allows us to see thru prediction market people. There are those who matter &#8212-and those who don&#8217-t.

UPDATE:

Google PageRank:

Inkling Markets: 6 / 10
Consensus Point: 5 / 10

It is not about Midas Oracle… It is about taking part of the conversation about (enterprise) prediction markets on the Web.

No Gravatar

As an addendum of my recent post, let me clarify something. I was not talking about posting or commenting on Midas Oracle. I was talking, more generally, about prediction market consultants issuing statements (posted anywhere on the Web, and linked to from Midas Oracle) about the current state of the field and industry of prediction markets.

  1. If you are an economist, and have nothing to say about the current banking, financial and economic crisis (the worst in our generation), then you don&#8217-t matter anymore.
  2. If you are a prediction market consultant, and have nothing to say about the negative piece from The Economist, then you don&#8217-t matter anymore.

It is a tough reality&#8230- get used to it, folks.

No TweetBacks yet. (Be the first to Tweet this post)