I like forecasting and want to make it easy for people to do it. I spend 2-5 hours a week on here anyway and I think I could happily look over and moderate questions in that time. I run a weekly collaborative forecasting call on the discord.
We reserve the right to remove any content from Substack at any time, for any reason (including, but not limited to, if someone alleges you contributed that content in violation of these Terms), in our sole discretion, and without notice.
— edited by Aithir
@kievalet The problem is that the question resolved much much earlier than expected: it was only open for 2% of the original lifetime of the question, so only 2% of the question's points were made available. This is necessary to ensure that the scoring rules remain proper (that is, that they incentivize you to predict your true belief), but it's admittedly kind of unsatisfying in cases like this. We're working on a scoring rule update to fix it. Stay tuned!
@johnnycaffeine Not trying to start an argument, but I was one of the people who downvoted you, and I didn't do so because you had a different opinion, but for labeling the alternative opinion a "rules cuck." I think that's the kind of language that makes it hard to have a civil discussion of alternative readings of the resolution criteria. Part of what makes this place so great is that it's several steps above the PredictIt comment level. Just my opinion!
By the way:
We | now | have ---|-----|----- markdown | tables | and I | think | we can | all | agree that | is | pretty cool | ! |
@Sylvain I only got 26 points for 99% - possibly not retroactively closed?
Hereby pre-committing to analyse the results at a total of 3,500 combined predictions.
I find it ironic in the extreme that rootclaim makes repeated reference to the overconfidence of experts, but that their challenge requires you to "win a debate", meaning that if you think they are overconfident but not directionally wrong (e.g. assigning 90% to something which you think should be assigned a 60% probability) there is no way for you to win the bet.
In tournament registration fields, the academic degree one forces me to pick an option, or "Other". I don't have any and never went to university. I know this hobby selects for an academic crowd but you should probably have a None field so blue-collar or non-academic people don't feel alienated.
Just putting this short video here for the sake of Biden's prediction track record.
Will there be an option to continue using the old design once the new one is rolled out, like how you can still use old reddit? I'm not a big fan of how narrow the new design is on desktop, but to be honest I think I just hate change.
I’m sorry. I don’t mean to guilt anybody. But as a favor to me, a former naval officer, can we not comment on this thread for 24 hours. It was a bad day.
@kievalet I got 0 points as well for a final prediction of 99% yes, having been above the median for the lifetime of the question; I think the question was due to be open for about five years, but ended up resolving after just a few weeks, so presumably even people who had 99% for the whole lifetime of the question will only have won 1-5 points.
Is there a way to view the old version? I got so used to it and can't make heads or tails of this new one
This is even faster than south Vietnam