Resolves YES if Steven Kenneth Bonnell II (Destiny) is unbanned by Twitter before the end of 2022.

https://www.metaculus.com/questions/10860/who-will-twitter-unban-before-2023/

 for full resolution criteria - this will resolve the same way.

With Elon Musk moving closer to buying Twitter, will some people who were previously banned be unbanned?

Destiny.gg

https://polymarket.com/market/will-realdonaldtrump-tweet-in-2022

Twitter permanently banned former president of the USA, Donald Trump, from the platform in January 2021 during the final days of his term. His handle @realDonaldTrump had over 88.9 million followers.

This market will resolve to "Yes" if Donald J. Trump's verified Twitter account (@realDonaldTrump) tweets at least once after October 27, 2022, and by December 31, 2022, (11:59:59 PM ET). Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".

The resolution source for this market will be Donald J. Trump's verified Twitter account: 

Please note, only the @realDonaldTrump verified Twitter account counts for this market, regardless of the URL for this profile. If Donald J. Trump tweets from another account, it has no bearing on the resolution of this market.

Donald Trump

MAGA-land

Musk Mania

Entertainment and Pop Culture

Twitter

Polymarket



Close date updated to 2024-08-02 12:59 am

US Politics

2024 US Presidential Election

The Life of Biden

Politics

If any non-bot participant placs one or more bets on YES that total more than Ṁ50, I reserve the right to resolve the market to either N/A or to NO, in whatever way best punishes the user(s) who placed those invalid bets.

All my markets of this type with various maximum mana investments:

Free Money

In case you missed it, there've been some fascinating experiments with self-resolving markets on Manifold lately. The idea of a self-resolving market is that sometimes it's hard or impossible to pin down unambiguous resolution criteria for a prediction. In that case resolving to the consensus of the market participants may make sense. And from a prediction market perspective, the obvious way to define "the consensus of the participants" is the market price. See also Keynesian beauty contests. It's weirdly self-referential but maybe there are conditions in which we expect it to work?

https://manifold.markets/jack/will-biden-be-president-on-915-reso

 -- in which an exciting tug-o-war was waged that had little connection to what the market was purportedly predicting.

But I conjecture that that was mostly about the hard(ish) end date. In setting up the experiment we knew that a known end date opens the market up to price manipulation at the last second and we tried to mitigate that with a random close time, but it was a random close time within a small window. It was still possible to temporarily manipulate the price for profit.

So this is an experiment to see how close we get to the truth if the market self-resolves as follows:

Point 3 might be silly and unscalable, I'm not sure. It's an experiment. But if it did make sense, one can imagine ways to make it scale to larger markets. The answer might be to stick to a strict definition of quiescence and traders can just use trading bots or limit orders while they're away. (Or we could just say that checking in every other business day isn't that onerous, suck it up.)

Point 4 may open up an unfortunate loophole in that a participant can force the price to oscillate if they don't like the outcome. I think liquidity fees could solve that (which may be important anyway, since it's a very valuable property of markets that liquidity increases with trading volume!) because then it would get more and more expensive to keep the price oscillating. For this experiment, we'll just take the risk that that happens. Since everyone gets their money back in that case, the risk is arguably not so bad.

UPDATE: From the comments, pinning down the criteria for quiescence:

If the market price stays the same or oscillates between consecutive integer percents from noon pacific to noon pacific two business days later (so at least 48 hours, longer over weekends and holidays) then that counts as the market quiescing. I plan to add comments warning us as we approach the end of the window and plan to say yes to requests to temporarily lengthen the window (assuming they're based on real-world reasons like vacations).

PS: The official Schelling Point is 95%. Or oscillating between 94% and 95%.

Self-resolving

Experimental

if any nuclear weapon is detonated anywhere in the world after October 3, 2022 and before January 1, 2023. Otherwise 

https://manifold.markets/post/nuclear-risk-forecasting

 for a dashboard of other nuclear risk questions along with commentary and analysis.

Edited title to help readers more easily distinguish it (nothing about the resolution criteria changed, it was already explicily stated): 

Will a nuclear weapon be detonated in 2022?

 → Will a nuclear weapon be detonated in 2022? (tests included)

Nuclear Risk

Market will be resolved to YES if Germany makes it to the round of 16 in the 2022 FIFA World Cup.

Football

Soccer

Sports

2022 FIFA World Cup

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin/

Global Macro

Crypto Prices

Cryptocurrency

Bitcoin

There are worries that monkeypox is a racist and/or misleading name. Before August 2023, will the 

 refer to monkeypox primarily by another name in their front page articles?  "Foopox, also known as monkeypox" would count.

Aug 7, 4:09pm: If a site uses "the Monkeypox virus (MPV)" and then uses MPV elsewhere, including the headline, this would not be sufficient for resolution;  "MPV, also known as Monkeypox" would count for a YES resolution.

Monkeypox

Science

If any human participant placed bets over 20Ṁ in this specific market, I reserve the right to resolve the market to a No and compensate all other participant via tip. (You are free to place more bets on other markets of the same name)