Hrm, I improperly resolved this market -- I didn't see the "Show More" option and then left out a bunch of the answers.

@Austin If only we could undo market resolutions!

@IsaacKing Yeah, I would really really love to have that too...

When do you plan to resolve this?

👀

I have no idea who got them, but it looks like a first round of check marks have been given… however, are they really blue?? To my untrained eye, they’re lookin’ kinda purple!

@JoshuaB They use the trademark Manifold purple, like the shield icons. The initial list is here: https://github.com/manifoldmarkets/manifold/pull/1302/files#diff-9f6845ba07fcd3c43a019198c9d5aafeb2e748dfe283085024a5f79aef6651e9

@Austin Matt P's username incorrectly has a space, so his doesn't show up

My argument for @acc getting a checkmark is that in the description, it says "The official Manifold house trading bot," and what is the checkmark supposed to signify if not officiality.

Don't know why I didn't think of this before

@LivInTheLookingGlass Shouldn't you have to actively use the site to get a blue check? Haven't seen Aella around here in months, though her reputation may be enough.

would be pretty surprised if i don't get a blue check tbh

I already have a blue check

@Yev Doesn't look very blue to me

@IsaacKing

@Austin arguments in my favor:

• I create more markets than any other user;

• I resolve those markets honorably;

• I am deeply engaged on my markets and everyone else's as (probably) one of the top few commenters on the site;

• I tip more than anyone else on the site (this is just a guess, but I tip A LOT);

• if someone feels like my resolution was unfair or the wording of my question was unclear I ALWAYS make it good by generously compensating them via tips.

• Oh, and I have 148 referrals so far.

The blue checks on the core team are a bit weird if we think of them as identity verification. Eg, Austin is"verified" to be... really named Austin? But Austin isn't like Cher, there are other notable Austins. He's not "the Austin".

Maybe he's lightweight-verified to not be a bot or spammer? But in that case anyone who's bought mana should get a blue check. Which would be a fine choice, but not the way this market is looking at.

@MartinRandall The core team shield-checks are to verify "this in fact is a person who works on Manifold full-time".

The blue check verification thing for notable/good users would be another symbol!

@NcyRocks My argument for why:

• I've never resolved a market incorrectly (though if I'm wrong there, someone please point out)

• People apparently trust my judgment of honorable resolution well enough to have made a few markets where I'm the arbiter of such

• Pip boy avatar, what's not to like?

@MattP I had to buy myself at least as high as you bought yourself!!

@cos now my chances are nonzero

I still think the best solution to this is some sort of eBay-style feedback system, where bettors can mark correct or incorrect resolutions. Has the advantages of being automatic and scaling better

Another question is whether you'd give it to well-known traders who barely create any markets, like @jbeshir.

I don't want it to be an external-status thing, I want it to be an internal-status thing. Blue checks to people who make lots of markets and resolve them correctly.

if someone impersonates another person, but is a good enough market creator to get a blue check, well if i was the impersonee i'd be flattered

If the idea is to do something similar to what Twitter used to do, then being an external status thing makes sense. "This is the real Eliezer Yudkowsky, so you can bet with your knowledge of that person."

(As opposed to people doing something like this.)

@noumena That's a good perspective, thanks! I think practically speaking it'll be a mix of both -- to try and encourage external-status people to create good markets, and also to award some external-status to internal-status creators via association.