@swigswoog You bought all your shares after the final clarification, you have no reason to be complaining lol

I will say though, Apencer should at least change the close date to the real close date

@Gen the time it's taking to resolve is definitely a valid reason to complain. I got alimony due

@swigswoog seems like youre using an alt account, lol to that

@swigswoog Ohh you actually think this is going to resolve YES 💀

@AutomaticOsprey 🐸?

@memestock ur downbad

@memestock There was another market, same title, with the description, “resolves NO if destiny ignores the article completely”

I bought YES there. It already resolved yes.

Please read the description or seek clarification earlier, rather than complaining later. It isn’t fair on the maker who did a reasonably good job conveying their criteria as it adapted over time

Nobody clarifying the criteria is as mad as you are, they’re trying to have fun (and succeeding) and trying to understand or seek clarification to make markets as interesting as possible. Insulting people and market makers is infinitely worse for the website than crying scam when you don’t get your way

@Gen Please turn your brain on for one comment. Answer honestly and in good faith: Do you think my complaint is about the mana or something else?

I haven't bet on anything on this website in the past month because other dogshit markets like this ruined the website for me (ones I didn't even bet in either). I haven't bothered to try to "earn" mana because it's a waste of time when what can it be used on? To bet on other markets that are supposed to be fun but in the end get ruined by retards just like this one.

I did read the market and the description. It said "Will Destiny cover the Mr. Girl Manifesto on stream?" and the description was "Within two weeks of release. Market resolves "No" if there is no manifesto by the end of 2023." The answer to those conditions is YES. The "manifesto" has been covered on stream. It's been updated after the fact to clarify it into minutiae so the market maker can justify resolving NO for whatever reason.

I'm mad because the people "clarifying the criteria" as you put it are the people who ruined this website for me. I do not intend to use this website beyond arguing with people about how the format of this website. I will not bet in any markets until something is changed and it will not be changed so my use of this website is effectively over. The admins unwillingness to do a thing is what will ultimately let this website die in obscurity. When the former owners are wondering why their experiment died in 3 years they can point to markets like these.

@memestock

@getkan I wouldn't mind selling my NO positions right now at a loss, just so that you guys don't all think I'm biased when I say, "there are reasonable interpretations for resolving YES or NO."

There are way too many people in these comments losing their minds over something that could easily be interpreted either way.

We have seen Chud cover the manifesto. We have seen Euradite (spelling, whatever), cover the manifesto. Both uploaded full-length responses on their channels.

Destiny hasn't uploaded anything relating to the Manifesto. He briefly listened to a section that Chud covered, and gave 0 engagement with any content during that time, beyond a, "based," or "TRRRRRRUE."

I'm only bringing these up to say your YES position is not as cut-and-dry as you think it should be. Not to say it should resolve NO.

There is still time for Destiny to give YES voters a more solid/inarguable position by actually responding to or engaging with "the breadth of the article."

@PersonMan0326 Also, we have all seen Destiny "cover" drama manifestos multiple times in the past.

We all know and have a pretty decent understanding of what a Destiny response to a drama manifesto looks like.

I think you'd have a hard time comparing this article response, to the Bob7 article response for example, and say that both had a "discussion that responded to the breadth of the article." The Bob7 response was a response. This hasn't been much of anything at all, yet.

@PersonMan0326 That's the fault of @Apencer for not specifying earlier on. Had he included the stipulation of "breadth" from the start, much fewer people would've said yes and he knows it. I'd also argue it's still not specific enough. If Destiny reads 25% of the article by covering all main accusations, is that equivalent to covering "the breadth"?

Just look at johnleoks market versus this one and ask yourself what the difference in chance stems from.

@LoginAccount I don't disagree at all. Ambiguity in the market is almost always down to the uncertainty caused by the market maker, and amplified by the investors who think they know what the market maker meant.

But the point remains that there is ambiguity. I wouldn't come into the comments saying "This clearly should have already resolved you fucking scammer."

I wouldn't say that because there is ambiguity.

@PersonMan0326 You disagree with my main point then. That's fine. I'm going the step beyond you saying it's an ambiguous woupsie and saying it's probably malicious.

@LoginAccount The ambiguity is in the word "cover". It begs clarification (which we were granted) as the word in this context means to analyse a series of events whereas many saw it as "if he mentions it once, he's covered it". It's hard to imagine that's malicious, given the depth of clarification he offered. I always saw this market as "if it's not obviously yes, it's obviously no" after that clarification, but I can see (after some comments here of alternative readings) how you could still believe that a little attention is sufficient. I see this is primarily because of people saying that the article can be summarised easily, and because it is so bad, you don't need to address it fully - which is also subjective.

The suspense is crazy cause he went away, we are forced to wait to see if Destiny covers it properly once he returns, as if he does, there won't even be an issue. I don't even know if it's possible for him to comprehensively address the article without reading it (or listening to the entire thing) on stream, purely because it's so drawn out and discursive that if you address the framing of any events it'll always result in accusations of cherry picking - this came up when he spoke to Whick, who essentially said, "well you could just be pointing out those factual inaccuracies because everything else is true and you want to discredit it" [paraphrased].

It sucks because weeks ago we were discussing in these comments our own interpretations and expectations, and people (like John and myself) outlined that the main reason for our bets were because of the length of the article, and the expectation that it would be incohesive, extremely personal, and difficult/painful to rebut. Those discussions lead to the clarification in the description which made this market MUCH more active as everyone seemed to "agree" on a definition. Since then, that has obviously changed, but I hope nobody sees it as malicious as it really isn't.

// Sorry for the long comment // my main point is that even though we're campaigning to yoink from each other, most of us want everyone to have fun too. Even when I thought we had won (when Destiny said on release day he wouldn't review it) my first comment here was to contact me for free mana if you were new to the site and this resolves NO.

@getkan ur downbad

@Gen He’s doing Change my Mind. I’m sure there will be a minifesto in response when he gets back

@SirSalty We may end up needing an admin resolve here. Is your weekend booked?

@MichaelWheatley Why would we need an admin resolve? YES people are down so bad they actually will do anything to force a premature resolution. OP is still active & will resolve this, they haven't engaged with any comments even when they modified the description.

Let the dude come to a decision, at the appropriate time (2 weeks after release)

@MichaelWheatley -5k

@Gen OP hasn't used the site in a month The joke is that in two weeks time a Manifold admin is going to have to wade neck-deep in streamer drama to resolve this.

@MichaelWheatley The OP last updated this thread on March13. They are active on Manifold, and aware of this market.

@Gen Hadn't noticed that. I just looked at the bet and comment history.

@johnleoks You aren't the Market owner. How are you making rules for the market? To be pedantic, it says "on stream." It does not clarify that he needs to do the analysis on his stream.

@Malas If you are desperate to include every crumb of manifesto related content on other people's streams, it says something about the strength of the YES position. You should be confident that he's going to review it! It's free content !!! Of course he will!! He's going to actually respond to it, not just listen to a random 20% of it (excluding intro, conclusions) with no engagement!! Come on guys believe!

@HeatingTesseract When did he do that? Lmao

@Gen You are acting like he didn't get the overall understanding of the article. Anyone listening would understand that the article was a huge ramble and rant about Destiny's story. Do you really expect an art judge to judge a 4-year-old's drawing with extreme analysis? Also, how are you supposed to counter misinfo?

He didn't lol, he read it off stream, said he didn't want to talk about it yet and then he let chuds stream (which was already 10% in) talk through about 1/5th of the article.

@Gen You're acting as if this was an actual coherent Manifesto. It should be clear to anyone who is in DGG that this lacked much substance. If you were listening to him listen to Chud, you would understand that the main point is Destiny is abusive to his orbiters with some of the weakest/misconstrued evidence. It is clear and evident that there isn't much for him to comment on to cover his manifesto. It is an obvious yes:

• "...an engagement which involves skimming through the entire article, or skipping sections he finds irrelevant or uninteresting will still count towards YES." +

• "He does not need to respond to every point in the article, nor does he have to finish it, but if he engages with the larger revelations and analysis the market will resolve YES" +

• "Extensive discussion of the article will only count towards YES if that discussion encompasses a breadth of the article's content." + (This point will probably continue through the next week as he bought a laptop to stream on during his traveling)

You guys are idiots if you couldn't see the writing on the wall for 7+ fucking hours. You are too deep in and just don't want to lose your Ṁ. Be a man and take the L

@Malas Copy pasting my response to the "omg look he spent 7 hours sitting there in autopilot droning through Chud's stream" argument.

Out of all the arguments from the YES buyers, the time argument is the weakest imo. If Chud spent 10 hours to go over 10% of the article and Destiny reacts to all 10 hours, would this meet the criteria of resolving YES? I mean it's 10 hours right? I think we all know the answer to that.
Clearly, time spent doesn't matter. What matters is how much of the article's content he covered.

You are so stupid. Why does someone read a whole document, when it's evident and clear what the document is trying to do? 10% of the article is enough to see the main idea in his writing. MrGirl clearly set out his thesis prior to doing his research - which is an incoherent way to write an argument. In addition, his writing is poorly organized as it fails to give decent context to the situation. To be completely pedantic, Merriam-Webster defines analyzing as identifying and examining the basic elements or parts of (something) especially for discovering interrelationships. Bruh did he not call MrGirl's motives on what he was doing with the article, why it was ineffective, and lack of clear argument? Destiny clearly Analyzes this and gets to the main point. No way you want to sit there and listen to him go through all Tiny's Drama and sniff for every little abusive thing Tiny has done. Anyone that has followed Destiny in the past year or so would agree that this article is hard r-word.

We got the fucking point there is no reason to proceed. The main idea can be encompassed in a listening of 10% of the article. You can't be this dense.

@Malas Keep up the insults. Definitely making the YES side look good.

@johnleoks as long as you keep making me money with your markets. You're good. I'm sorry if calling you to cope stupid made you feel bad. If arguing makes you feel better about your bad decision, keep it up. I would be doing the same if I put as much Ṁ as you. I wish you luck.

@Malas 10% might have been enough if it was the intro & conclusion, but he skipped both. It was a random 20% missing the start. There was no engagement on any point, and he didn't listen to what are arguably the two most compelling cases. He even said, multiple times, he didn't want to respond yet.

No need to argue anyway, Destiny is going to engage right? He's going to put together a concise response for a youtube video, and there won't be any issues. I just hope this market doesn't resolve so that in >2weeks from release when Destiny does his real review/response/discussions etc. everyone can see the stark difference between his normal thorough engagement and what we saw the other day.

@destiny "Clearly" is working graveyard shift here lol. There's good arguments for both sides, considering the corrections/amendments in OP's market. No one is walking away happy at this point lmao

@NdymBzyd People will walk away happy if destiny actually covers it properly. The only reason it has room to be disputed is because YESSERs are coping and pretending the description doesn’t exist. There’s another identical market but the only condition was “if he ignores it, resolves NO” -> This was not that market.

This market is more “if it’s not obviously yes, it’s obviously no”, or at least that’s how everyone agreed to interpret it weeks ago. OP did a fine job clarifying and they’ll do a fine job resolving too.

Destiny explains how Max fails to build a foundation of his worldview within the doc. Citing the DDoS kid as an example, and explains how Destiny himself would try to build some basic arguments out first before building up to the main claim.

"He needed an editor [...] needed to figure out wtf he wanted to argue [...] once he identified that he needed to hone in on 2-4 stories of furthering that abuse"

1:48:00 Destiny explains how he could have used the DDoS kid, BlueTea, and Mia Rose in an essay format to build out the argument for Abuse. Literally building up a better essay than what Max wrote.

1:50:00 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l6PVvL2jnE4

Destiny answers whick's question on what is his biggest regret based off the things in the article.

"There's probably better ways of integrating people within my streaming ecosystem. I'm not really sure how."

1:53:00 "Out of everyone max has talked with [...] there was not a single instance of sexual misconduct except for Mia Rose [...] no streamer would ever get their life vetted like I have and come out clean "

1:58:00 "There were so many details in that article that were incorrect [...] There were a lot of little mistakes that show that he needed an editor [...] he should have reached out to other parties for comment [...] having factual inaccuracies like that make your article look like it was written in a fever dream"

"The reason why he worked so hard on the transcriptions is because Max really needs you (the audience) to strip the context from everything" = he covered his opinion on the transcriptions part of the paper

@Shah Yeah, Destiny continues to attack the writing, and MrGirl, but not actually discuss/engage with ANY of the content. Literally none.

Hello Mrgirl your article is bad -> ignores the content

@Gen Also, from what I can tell, Destiny isn't live during this. He just dropped in.

If anything, this further supports NO resolution lmao. Just wait and hope that he actually does a proper address on stream for a youtube video, so that you don't have to stretch every molecule of mention Destiny gives the article (even off stream)

@johnleoks For the record, Destiny stopped listening to Chud at about half way around the article, not 25%. Go ctrl+f it yourself and check this vod at 5:35:43.

And no, he doesn't have to watch anyone's stream to cover the article, but that was one of the conditions that would satisfy YES in the original post of this market. Destiny clearly gave lots of commentary and aggressively pushed back against any false claims in the article.

@PunishedFurry It's definitely less than halfway and I'm taking into account the parts Destiny missed whenever he leaves his room into my rough estimate.

I've addressed the same arguments you brought up with other people already. Just let Destiny a chance to cover the rest of it, there's no need to force the market creator to resolve it now.

@johnleoks Why would we need to wait for Destiny to cover the rest when he's already fulfilled the requirements of the market to resolve to YES?

Also, I don't know why you keep harping on how much of the article was left when we both know that it was mostly bloat and transcripts of youtube videos. He has already fulfilled the following requirement:

"He does not need to respond to every point in the article, nor does he have to finish it, but if he engages with the larger revelations and analysis the market will resolve YES"

The newest things we learn in this article are the dm's between Ana and Lav which he already watched and reacted to. Everything else is old and transcripts of streams we're already aware of.

@PunishedFurry "already fulfilled the requirements". I disagree. We may know the article's content because we already read it ourselves or reacted to the rest of Chud's stream. This doesn't apply to Destiny.

"engages with the larger revelations and analysis the market". I disagree that he's met this especially since there's over half the article he hasn't go over. Also, just because he doesn't have to respond to every point in the article, doesn't mean being silent for 95% of the time meets the actively review criteria. Refer to @lnlytwn's post.

I suspect the reason why people are so eager to push for an immediate resolution instead of waiting for Destiny to cover the rest is because they know deep down, milking Chud's stream by putting him in the background while Destiny goes mute for 95% of the time, doesn't meet the criteria for a YES resolve.

@johnleoks All of the juicy bits of the article are in the first half which talks about the ddos kid, destiny's past, a list of destiny's victims, Mia Rose, DM's between Lav and Ana, and the dm's between Destiny and Lav that were never shown before.

The remaining half really has no larger revelations; it really is just bloat. It's mostly transcripts, old dm's, and for whatever fuckin reason, he posted the entirety of Lav's Patreon post which took up at least 10% of the remaining article left.

Also, you keep ascribing motives to the people arguing for YES, but we could say the same about you who is holding the most NO shares in this market lol. You have the most to gain or lose depending on the outcome of this market so one could speculate that you're trying to widen the original requirements of this market for your own self-interest :3

@PunishedFurry Agree to disagree. At the end of the day it's up to the market creator to decide which side has the better arguments. Also:

@PunishedFurry Where’s Destiny’s response to the DDOS kid stuff?

@Gen You guys are talking about how far he got into the Kick stream, but you're referencing Mia rose and Ddos kid stuff that is not even happening in that stream, Destiny read it off-stream and once he was live on kick, Chud was already a decent way in and it played as background noise without any engagement. He watched a random small chunk of it, if he's going to engage with it, there will be real engagement. It won't be disputable, you'll know.

We'll see youtube videos, comprehensive response, etc.. If he was going to cover it, it would be super obvious. Just wait and see if that happens, before trying to rush/force that crumb of engagement as "covering the article"

@PunishedFurry At the beginning of the stream, Chud is already well into the article - Destiny says "We'll talk about it later, give me like an hour" and then later says that he will think about putting together a proper response. Even he himself acknowledges his lack of interaction with the article.

Sure, he listened to it for hours, but it was

1. not from the beginning

2. like a quarter of the total article

3. totally devoid of engagement

If he engages properly, it will be obvious. He still has time to do it. It definitely does not "have to resolve YES", especially if Destiny doesn't bring it up on stream again during the specified timeframe.

@lnlytwn This took more effort than Destiny "reacting" to Chud's stream yesterday.

@SkullCandy I like how you omitted the part where it said "Destiny must actively review the manifesto on stream." which is the entire point of the discussion in the comments.

@SkullCandy If you ignore the rest of the description and only hone in on this one sentence, then sure this would be a Yes resolve. If all it takes for this to resolve Yes is Destiny simply reacting to someone watching the video, no one would have betted No. Which is why the market creator specified more conditions in the edits. In fact, the very next line after is "Destiny must actively review the manifesto on stream".

@johnleoks "Destiny makes an effort to [...] listen... an engagement which involves skimming through the entire article, or skipping sections he finds irrelevant or uninteresting will still count towards YES"

@johnleoks Also, could you stop arguing and resolve your markets? I need my money

@Malas The thing is, he didn't even skim through the article because he didn't read it. He just put Chud's stream on the background and didn't engage or give commentary 95% of the time. He was on auto pilot, even leaving the room multiple times while Chud's stream was still playing. Not to mention, he didn't even finish watching Chud's stream, who only went over 25% of the article by the time Destiny ended stream.

@johnleoks But it was pretty clear that the manifesto was very irrelevant. He pointed out numerous incidents in which MrGirl had facts blatantly wrong and messaged Chud evidence to show this. There was not much to engage in as it was just a rant about MrGirl's skewed view of Destiny's supposed abuse. Tiny spent 7 hours watching Chud and provided context to his accusations. That should be enough. Stop coping

@Malas The manifesto's relevancy isn't relevant (lol) to this market, the market creator never mentioned it. You can say Destiny "pointed out numerous incidents", that's your opinion.
What is a fact is that Destiny didn't say anything 95% of the time, 7 hours of mostly silence is 7 hours of mostly silence. The length doesn't matter, especially when he only reacted to 25% of article.
Reminder, actively reviewing the manifesto is but 1 of the criteria, the review must also encompasses a breadth of the article's content, which he obviously didn't since there's a whole 75% left.
You guys pushing so hard for the market to be resolved right now when it states that there is a 2 week window says a lot. If you guys are so confident with a Yes resolve, waiting to see if Destiny reviews the rest of the article shouldn't be a problem. Why the hurry? Hmm.

The manifesto's extremely long-winded, and covers a lot of material that's rehashed or irrelevant. I don't know why you would expect a running commentary. He spends 20m listening to a story everyone knows already and then says "yup" because he doesn't dispute the facts. When he thinks something is a lie or misrepresentation and the reader doesn't point that out himself, he says so.

Not gonna lie, I am interested to see if he covers a bit more of the manifesto later this week. You're clearly too invested. Im gonna wait till later this week.

@SlapsMcGee Genuinely asking, do you think destiny is done with it? Yes gang are really pushin for early resolve as though he won’t review it anymore.

@Gen If Destiny streams tomorrow I think there’s a good chance he watches Chud cover the final portion, yes. But it’s not required for this market to resolve yes… the original terms were not will he cover it twice. The only caveat was that reacting to short clips doesn’t count. Hours of watching Chud surely doesn’t count as a “short clip”

@SlapsMcGee But with no real engagement and only listening to a fraction, I don’t see it as clear as you - this is what we discussed weeks ago as it became less likely he would read (or listen to) the whole thing. I don’t think most people would say he has “covered it” yet, it was background noise and nowhere near completed

If the whole thing gets played it’s obviously yes, 70% is probably yes, 50% maybe? It gets fuzzier the less he sees. He’s not even at 50%

If he meaningfully engaged with the ideas/allegations it would overrule necessity for covering the whole thing, but he’s kinda lacking on that

Honestly at this point I just hope he listens to the rest so it’s super obviously YES. Otherwise it’s going to be a fairly divided decision regardless. Gotta let the maker have the final say tho, there’s still 13 days or whatever for Destiny to engage more and make the decision more obvious

@SlapsMcGee I think OP is AFK. If I'm reading his profile correctly, he hasn't posted anything in weeks.

@Gen To be clear tho there is literally no reason to discuss resolution until the 2 weeks pass. Looks like he’ll go listen to the rest and YES will be clear, but it has to be within 2 weeks of the release