This is truly a fantastic use of Web 2.0 technology, but I would not be the contrarian I am, unless I interjected with the obvious critique: I would guess people tend to record their wishes more than their predictions – this is especially true when they are not being asked to pony up any real money.
However, the Darwinian selection mechanism that QA’s markets (i.e. bad predictors get driven out) still works here, as long as people can’t log back in once they go broke. So, over time, the “wish-predictors” can be flushed, then the predictions become more reliable.
Graham Stull ,
Ronan,
This is truly a fantastic use of Web 2.0 technology, but I would not be the contrarian I am, unless I interjected with the obvious critique: I would guess people tend to record their wishes more than their predictions – this is especially true when they are not being asked to pony up any real money.
However, the Darwinian selection mechanism that QA’s markets (i.e. bad predictors get driven out) still works here, as long as people can’t log back in once they go broke. So, over time, the “wish-predictors” can be flushed, then the predictions become more reliable.