, posts: 3, latest: kenneth1
I placed this somewhere else in reply because i didn't knw
how to start a discussion, so i hope this works.
CICI found a problem with a hurricane ? because there was a chance of an event not covered...
This kind of problem could be handled generically, by a general choice of an nth option-
"OPTION n: other or generally otherwise; none of the above; not by settlement date, or
more than one of the above, etc."

This extra chance, got some of my questions prohibited, when questioned,
despite that i found other examples of similar
questions getting through, with similar logic. Thus one
might have
1) A
2) B
3) C
n) other or generally otherwise; none of the above; not by settlement date, or
more than one of the above, etc.

Such an nth option allows for cases when the previous options are not yet clarified,
for example,or the 1 option, the 2 option, etc.. do not fully fill the logic space, so
the n th option does this..... and if that option has little to no probability, then people won';t bet on it,
so no harm done....


Sometimes, though, the "other" option is not applicable. When options 1, 2 and 3 are clear and well described, and would cover every aspect, an "other" option would only be confusing. Why should there be an "other" on "Who will win?" or on the daily index market questions, or on simple "yes"/"no" ones?

So, in any case the question creator must decide whether or not an "other" option is applicable. And in case of unexpected circumstances (like "twitter" closing on the Obama twitter follower question), a market void is not a problem at all. In fact, you can post question like "If Palin runs for president, will she win the republican nomination?" with "yes"/"no" answers. It would simply be voided in case she doesn't run.

A void is not a negative outcome, and is not tracked or calculated as a ratio (as it has been on Hubdub).

Sure, there may be cases where a number of options WILL become clear.... Nevertheless, IMO, an "other" option can include things, as often happens, that NO news is available, or the results for some reason are not included in the A, B, C, etc.... The main purpose would be to prevent the voiding option, but i can see how people would rather have their money back, and that does makes sense... IF that is understood, then that is great... am happy with that... (i just was thinking about the question having all the cases covered... and that is a way to cover that empty space)..But sure voiding the question is fine with me...

generally, a void is an action which might be taken whenever something unexpected happens which renders the question useless.

an "other" option is useful, but only for those questions which actually do not become bogus with one. many questions can be constructed very well without. also, one should always try to define the most likely options to get a coverage of say at least 80%.

"none of the above" and "not by settlement date" are perfectly fine options, each. you even might consider to make two out of them. on the other hand, you could consider to specify the suspend date to be editable to meet the occurrence of the event. "more than the above" most likely is not a valid option, since it makes the option ambiguous.