BRIAN, HOW COULD YOU RESOLVE N/A!!!! you must always make a decisive choice, I'm reporting you if you don't reverse this decision !!! @BTE @BTE @BTE @BTE @BTE

if you're conflicted u could resolve as N/A ig

@EntireTwix Sometimes the markets would actually be better if they used language like “will I think” so that the maker can just resolve without worrying about it.

I get the impression that if the market was worded like that, we’d have got either a yes resolution or something like PROB75. As the largest No holder (non-bot), I’m happy for BTE to resolve as he believes is accurate&fair (for expediency) but I still think there was no “obvious” flirting in the podcast and have not been shown anything that would be “obviously flirting”. As previously said, I’d think that a few lines would sufficiently capture any obvious flirt, and I haven’t seen them

@EntireTwix i'd be fine with this

@BTE

@EntireTwix I have chosen to go with N/A because I didn't do a good job wording the question and resolution criteria. I tried to get a third party to weigh in by watching it with my partner, but she kept insisting that Aella was flaming Lex the entire time and found the entire thing to be hilarious. Anyway, too ambiguous. I will do better next time.

@BTE Fun market either way, thanks!

@BTE any update?

💀 💀 💀 💀

I just sold off because @BTE seems to have made it fairly clear he’s going to resolve YES. If so, I want to register that I think this is blatantly wrong and was handled very badly.

1. BTE commented that he would take @Aella weighing in as definitive, “for sure”

2. Aella said she didn’t have the impression of flirting

3. BTE still somehow holds that the flirting was obvious - breaking his past commitment and overruling the testimony of the person who was actually there. Remember, the question was whether the flirting was obvious.

Update: I am going to hold a bit of NO shares in light of @Aella commenting again, just now, to disagree with @BTE interpretation. Won’t be engaging further however

@Rodeo it's weird, because literally anything could be flirting. However, keyword: "obvious"

link https://manifold.markets/BTE/will-lex-fridman-obviously-flirt-wi#82y6gLSf0JCkBrfwa0UF

I would expect that for any "obvious" instance, there should be a good timestamp to show it. I think that anyone who wanted to see flirting, would find it, but as someone who watched it before I found this market, I did not get any flirting vibe. No different to any other podcast really, I'd say Lex flirted more with Destiny.

@Gen I was not expecting this market to be so much fun!

@iteal @BTE thanks for the discussion btw. It's fun if it's about nothing serious and would be even better if I shouldn't be doing other things right now.
This is not irony or sarcasm.

@Milli Same to you!! The best thing about this site is the debates with the community, that’s why I create so many markets. Looking forward to the next time!!

@Milli Also I love your gif profile image!! I was actually asked to change my gif to a static image because I was such an active user it was grinding the entire site to a snails pace. LOL! Yours is cooler than mine of Elon Musk playing with Not a Flamethrower.

@Milli Same here, I was actually just giggling about the fact that I'm in an argument if someone I don't know is obviously flirting with someone I don't know lol

Let's do it like that: If the market resolves Yes, I will just donate all the M I invested and profited directly to a charity.

Also, the probability on this market is misleading. @destiny is pretty much the sole "yes" holder.

@Milli And two bots are the majority NO holders. What's your point exactly?

@iteal Aren't those two bots like always top holders of one or the other side of these markets?

@iteal I was just stating that in case someone interpreted the probability of the market as consensus for one direction. That's relevant in this case because of the use of "obviously" in the title. Excluding the bots, @BTE (who had not picked a side when I commented) and @destiny more people with more total shares are in favor of NO.
That means that there is no majority in favor of "obvious" flirting.

I would even claim that you need (near) unanimity (excluding people acting in bad faith) to pass the bar for "obvious".

@Milli

>Resolves based on my judgement

I don't think any amount of NO holders can predict the judgment on one indiviual.

@BTE Yes, I was just trying to argue, that a big YES holder doesn't sway the %, because the bots equalize it.

@Milli my experience is that a not insignificant percentage of people wouldn’t know if you were flirting with them no matter how hard you lay it down. Some people don’t read body language as well as others. I actually listened to the podcast and thought it was obvious with no visual cues to read.

@iteal Yes these types of markers are always about convincing the creator. Telling me I am wrong or should defer to the consensus is not very compelling argument.