Self-referential questions, why aren't they allowed?

but what about a question "Will this answer be settled as 'no'?" there is no way you could game that question... is there?

I thought the "Will this question settle as No?" was pretty clever actually, though I understand why it could not be allowed. It was much better than the "Which Hubdub admin will settle this question?", which obviously cannot be settled.

Of course it can be settled, and has been settled

== I'm sorry I had to explain this to you twice 8^) ==

Asking questions more than once can be a 'good thing' ...
(except, maybe, the proverbial 5-year-old repeating "why" to *everything*)

For the sake of argument let me rephrase the question:
"At the suspend date will the 'no' percentage be higher than the 'yes' percentage?" - I feel that that is settlable (if that's a word, meaning 'able to be settled')

Skipper -- The question may be able to be settled, with, as you said, one percentage higher than the other -- however I think the first part of Nigel's answer is the applicable portion.

He said, "Self-referential questions are generally either very easy to game or impossible to settle."

In this instance, that the question is so easy to game is why it's disallowed.

how is 'Will the 'no' percentage be higher than the 'yes' percentage at suspend date' easy to game? If you put money on 'no' you think 'yes' will be higher, but yes goes down; if you put money on 'yes' you think 'no' will be higher, but 'no' goes down. It is a paradox...

Maybe changing the words might help in explaining it ... if the question had two answers, but instead of "yes" and "no", the terms were "Apple" and "Orange", the question would be:

"Will the 'Apples' percentage be higher than the 'Oranges' percentage at the suspend date?" (And the two answer choices, instead of "Yes" and "No", were "Apples" and "Oranges".)

Now, suppose at a minute before the suspend date and time, the percentage for Apples is 55% and the percentage for Oranges is 49%. At this moment in time "Apples" is/will be the "winner".

With a minute to go, and say H$ 5,000 of activity in the market, I place a H$ 100,000 prediction on "Oranges".

Bang! "Oranges" wins, and I get an amazing return! -- (assuming no other predictions are made after mine ;-) ... and I have successfully gamed the system.

The same would hold true with the "Yes" / "No" choices:

"Will the 'Yes' percentage be higher than the 'No' percentage at suspend date?" -- and, at a minute before the suspend date and time, the percentage for YES is 55% and the percentage for NO is 49%. At this moment in time "Yes" is/will be the "winner".

With a minute to go, and the same H$ 5,000 of activity in the market, I place a H$ 100,000 prediction on "NO". Bang! I win. (In doing this, BTW, my thinking is that "NO" will win.)

I could also have placed the same amount of H$ on "Yes" -- and, in this example, I would also win -- just a little bit less ;-)

I win because I controlled the outcome of the question.

TruthWrangler, it doesn't work for "Will 'yes' percentage be higher than 'no'?" but it does work for "Will 'no' percentage be higher than 'yes'?" because by putting on 'no' you bet against yourself.
Secondly, how can you have 55% and 49%... they equal 104%...

Ummm ... sorry -- I see that I changed the order of the specific question you asked, which was:

Will the 'no' percentage be higher than the 'yes' percentage at suspend date'?

Using the same example information as before, suppose that, at a minute before the suspend date and time, the percentage for NO is 55% and the percentage for YES is 49%. The two answers are "Yes" and "No".

At this moment in time, the way the question is worded, "No" is the percentage-winner (55-49%), and "Yes" is/will be the "winning" prediction that pays H$.

With a minute to go, and the same H$ 5,000 of activity in the market, I place a H$ 100,000 prediction on "YES". Bang! I win -- the result is that the "No" percentage is not higher than the "Yes" percentage at the suspend date. (In doing this, BTW, my thinking is that "YES" will win the percentage gain, with the result that "NO" will win me the big H$.)

Because the person settling the question would have to go through all of that, and because it would likely cause a good deal of user confusion, and because anyone with enough H$ could control the outcome of the question, questions like this (which are very, very clever!) aren't allowed.

(A less-clever question would have a "negative" in it -- like "Will Barack Obama not be elected as President? Politicians sometimes word legislative bills in that manner, so that the legislator has to vote "no" in order for the bill to "pass" -- then the politician has to try to "explain to the public" why s/he voted "no" on a bill they were in favor of!)

Secondly, how can you have 55% and 49%... they equal 104%...

"I knew that ... I was testing you ... "

NOT!

Well ... I missed that one!

Skipper -- on second third fourth thought, I think you're right about your question: "Will the 'no' percentage be higher than the 'yes' percentage at suspend date' easy to game?"

It can't be successfully gamed, and I think my answer goes way beyond the constraints of the Hubdub board.

After all this my head hurts, but I think this brings up an important question. I'm glad however to see a discussion on a forum that didn't become a flame war (I'm even gladder (more glad?) that I was part of this question)

Yeah, but he's not your kid 8^)

It might have been settled, but I don't think it should have been. I've left comments on the question explaining my reasoning.

http://www.hubdub.com/e/Market/Which_...

Consider: If your scenario is taken, the final correct answer is "No" since the question has more on Yes [thus, the question "will the no option be more" is false]. So, in effect, the $20,000 is lost.

Oh, I'm not gonna touch this..too dangerous

Nigel, rohan just described to you what I have been trying to do all thread :D
I'm glad this got sorted out, reminds me of a book I'm reading _Catch-22_
Glad it's all figured out :D

You have to get past the first couple of chapters of Catch-22 before any of it starts to make sense. I never thought I completely understood it, but it definitely was highly confusing at the beginning.