Comments on: iPredict Accuracy

By: Scorpio

Scorpio — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 19:59:33 +0000

If Judith Tizard is so damaging to their brand, why was she on their list at all, let alone high enough to have a risk of being returned as an MP? Her electorate didn’t want her…

By: Robert Black

Robert Black — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 15:59:07 +0000

Why doesn’t some non-Maori person just come out and say:

“WE DON”T LIKE YOUR HORRIBLE NEGATIVE CULTURE!”

It doesn’t have to be a Caucasian (they call us Pakeha).

Why not a nice Indian, Samoan, Tongan, Chinese person?

Just come out and say it!

If you don’t like it here fuck off back to Hawaii!

But if you want to live here in harmony then pull yoiur fucking head’s in.

Come on support Mike Law’s.

For God’s sake someone else say it!!

The country will support you!!

It is not ugly white supremacy.

It is beautiful anti- Maori supremacy!

By: Razork

Razork — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 08:12:43 +0000

I’m picking Laboour will lose Chris Carter.

By: Loco Burro

Loco Burro — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 07:59:29 +0000

DPF – “My pick is that the Labour leadership will move heaven and earth not to lose a List MP for the next two years, as a return of Tizard would damage their brand. That certainly seems to be the assumption the market is making.”

Or another interpretation might be the market is assuming Nats will be losing an MP to some scandal or another

By: Johnboy

Johnboy — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 05:40:04 +0000

“DPF – I thought I recalled a post from you some time ago acknowledging that you did have a pecuniary interest. ”

As long as you are not living in a house (that you do not own) owned by your superanuation trust fund (that you do not have a pecuniary interest in) and are not paying twice the market rent for, you should be OK David. But just be warned if you keep bringing up these embarassing facts about the Greens you better be very, very careful.—-Toad is watching you.

By: toad

toad — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 05:29:48 +0000

DPF – I thought I recalled a post from you some time ago acknowledging that you did have a pecuniary interest. But I didn’t go back to search and check it.

If you have no pecuniary interest, Mr Speaker, I withdraw and apologise.

By: toad

toad — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 05:24:14 +0000

Fair enough, PaulL. But I wouldn’t say “pretty much all”. I have seen ones from DPF here that do. I’ve also seen ones that don’t. I don’t have time to research it, but my recollection is probably a similar number each way.

By: PaulL

PaulL — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 05:19:19 +0000

Toad – pretty much all of DPF’s other posts on iPredict do have that disclaimer. If you click on the iPredict tag you can see them, it is usually in the format:

Disclosure

David’s current iPredict positions are:

BROWN.RESIGN Short, DL.KING.09 Short, FASA04.REPEAL Short, GST.UP.JULY10 Short, LEAD.GOFF.09 Short, MAYOR.BROWN Long, MIN.DEPART2.09 Short, MP.ANDERTON Short, MP.PETERS.2011 Short, NAT.MAORI.09 Short, OBAMA.DISAP.4NOV Short, OCR.INCR.APR10 Short, OCR.INCR.JAN10 Short, PETERS.LEADER Long, PM.2011.NATIONAL Long, VSM.1STREAD Long, ZIM.MUGABE Short

It looks like this time it is only an extract of his column, and omits the disclosure.

His disclosure page also says:

Media

I am a paid regular commentator for Television New Zealand, NewstalkZB and the National Business Review, and an occassional paid commentator for National Radio. Plus I have done occassional articles for the Herald on Sunday, Dominion Post and The Press.

I also write a weekly analysis for iPredict.co.nz – the online futures market.

I agree it is reasonable to point out the omission this time, but there are a hell of a lot of bloggers with far less disclosure than DPF habitually provides.

[DPF: I don't think Toad was talking about the fact I speculate at iPredict. I read his post as suggesting I had an ownership stake]

By: toad

toad — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 05:14:34 +0000

DPF, apart from the appalling formatting of the blockquote (did you copy it straight from MSWord), don’t you have a pecuniary interest in iPredict?

If so, when you blog here on iPredict, especially when you are promoting its virtues, should you not disclose that each time?

I’m not suggesting there is a legal requirement to do so – I certainly don’t want that around my neck on things I blog either. But I think it would be best for all bloggers to disclose a pecuniary interest if they have one in things they are blogging about.

I’m keen for a similar regime for Parliament, and can’t see why we shouldn’t have a voluntary code to so so here in the blogosphere as well.

Mind you, phil u would have to disclose every time he ever blogged about welfare policy, which could get a bit tiresome.

[DPF: You are wrong. I have no pecuniary interest in iPredict. I blog about iPredict because I love it. My disclosure statement discloses I get paid to write the weekly analysis for them]

By: PaulL

PaulL — Wed, 07 Oct 2009 04:50:09 +0000

Or, Labour might lose an MP but not bring Judith back. Perhaps she is no longer available? The way the stock is written seems to allow that as an outcome.