This question will only resolve YES for direct engagement between Iran and Israel. Here are some potential scenarios that would each independently resolve YES:
Israel conducting airstrikes on targets inside Iran and/or the Iranians shooting down Israeli aircraft in Iranian airspace. Any airstrikes must be acknowledged by Israel and unambiguously NOT conducted by the US.
Targeted assassinations conducted by either side against government or military leaders of the other regardless of where they take place.
If it is shown Iran has boots on the ground in Gaza operating alongside Hamas or even directing their operation tactically in theater that would count, but ID needs to be irrefutable or acknowledged by Tehran.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ34,103 | |
| 2 | Ṁ23,644 | |
| 3 | Ṁ11,737 | |
| 4 | Ṁ3,089 | |
| 5 | Ṁ2,037 |
People are also trading
The market author literally bought shares after they were likely already set on the resolution. Even supposing that the resolution is correct, this is super unethical. If the market owner had strong evidence for the resolution, they should have resolved the market then, not buy more shares.
@OlegEterevsky Dude, how did it affect you?!? Why do you think that is even remotely unethical??? It is done by all the top market makers before resolution and always has been. Please explain to me why your way is more ethical? Seriously.
@BTE I'm new to Manifold, so I wasn't aware of this. I think it creates a bad conflict of interest, and creates disproportionally big payoff for the question author. It also just feels dishonest to me.
In the future I'll try to be careful not to bet on the markets the owners of which do this.
@OlegEterevsky @BTE I guess once burnt, twice shy. We vote with our feet by avoiding potentially unethical situations and market makers who cheerfully put themselves into conflict of interest situations. Coming from the Wall Street world, regulation helps, but in the end it’s the man in the mirror that matters.
I have searched high and low for reliable English language new sources that approach asserting any of the four resolution criteria. I’ve asked the market maker to provide a link to an English language source with any official credentials. I have gotten no response. Avoid this market maker is my resolution.
@PGeyer I have already explained this but once again, the criteria aren't there to all be met. The confirmation is not for the targeted assasinations but the airstrikes mentioned in the first bullet. And the point wasn't for israel to give a press conference, it was to make sure it wasn't the US who conducted it. I regret even creating the criteria since this market had none for the first 10 months. But it is very clear that targeted assassination resolved YES no matter where it happened. Plus I gave everyone a week to sell their position or even change their bet and you all decided instead to be stubborn and pretend I didn't make it very clear how this wouild resolve days ago. If you don't want to bet on my markets, fine with me, I am sick of wasting my time coddling all the sore losers anyway. I lose more than almost anyone on this site, but I don't blame it on the market maker, I own it. You all should give it a try.
@PGeyer For what? The targeted assassination? There are a dozen in the comments already.
@OlegEterevsky Note that @BTE is wrong/exaggerates about "all the top market makers [do it]". Sure, it is done by plenty market makers, but there are also plenty market makers that never or almost never bet on their own markets. And particularly betting just before resolving a market is frowned upon by quite a few people.
@BTE Another unsupported ad hominem, claiming I don’t own my losses. I do, always, and I await your showing me a link to a reliable English language news source supporting your asserting. Third request.
@FlorisvanDoorn Well not by me and I make more markets than literally anyone so please don't be condescending. But again you are just claiming it's unethical without providing any reasoning at all. "other people think so" is not a reason, not even close. But I am all ears when you are ready.
@BTE It gives the market creator an unfair advantage compared to anyone else betting.
Everyone else has to hedge against the possibility that the market creator take a fringe reading of the market criteria, and resolves it the other way than the trader expects.
Everyone else doesn't know how many hours/days it will take for a market to resolve, and has to factor in the cost of keeping their mana in a market for a while.
Neither of these apply to the market creator. Is it unethical to give the market creator an advantage over all other traders? In my subjective opinion, yes [EDIT: at least in the case that this is not clear from the market description. Things like personal markets are different], but I can understand that people may disagree.
Lastly, my previous message was mainly intended to inform a self-proclaimed new user that there are differing opinions on this site about this issue, than to accuse you that what you did was unethical (which I technically did not even say).
Gotta love it when the market creator is #1 on the profit leaderboard (/s)
@MilfordHammerschmidt Literally never happens. I was 5 days away from losing 10k mana until the assassination last week. You all need to stop blaming me for shit happening. I bought almost my entire position BEFORE THE ATTACK ON 10/7. You all make nonsense because you don't even bother to look at the details just want to blame someone besides yourself.
“Targeted assassinations conducted by either side against government or military leaders of the other regardless of where they take place.”
The comments and reviews that criticize the resolution need to address this or you are just whining. Take yourselves more seriously and when you are wrong own it. Don’t blame others.
@A16ab What do you think that image is saying? Like all you showed is that I sold a portion of my position whenever I saw it was over 75 and like the mediocre trader that I am I also bought 7000mana at 75 immediately before resolving the market. Like if you think there is manipulation to be found in that image please enlighten me.
@A16ab And how many times are you going to rate the market 1-star? Like every 30 minutes is too often, not to mention petty.
@MarcusAbramovitch With all due respect, I find it humorous that the guy who has the most profits is completely incapable of making any argument other than insist you were manipulated. Or that you must have lost because I was cheating. Not even an attempt to claim a targeted assassination didn’t happen!! LMAO!!! You should be embarrassed to be making such pathetic arguments but I know you make all of your profit betting 10k on markets where the outcome is already obvious, or at least obvious to you!! Then when you get burned because you made a lazy, stupid and premature bet you start making baseless claims and accusations in hopes the other bettors will pile on and pressure the market maker into bending to your will. Good luck with that.
If assassination resolution criteria was satisfied, what reliable English language news source supports it?