If market creators don’t receive fees from trades, from trader bonuses, from rewards for getting a certain number of traders, for league rewards caused by their receiving traders on their markets, or any other similarly direct thing that leads them to receive manatery or monetary compensation for receiving attention in any markets they create, including options on other markets, and this end in monetary compensation lasts more than some sub-fortnight temporary period, this market resolves to YES.
Otherwise, this matket resolves NO at the end of the current year of our Lord 2024.
Below is some non-essential context:
it is often argued that the best markets should get lots of nice benefits, like trader bonuses or fees sent to the market creator and similar things, so as to make manifold an environment where quality markets end up actually being created. It is often implied that it would be an injustice, even, for market creators not to be subsidized in this way.
I think that’s very plausibly the case, but I’m not convinced. An ideal I intuitively hold more closely is one where question creation helps people get truth-correlated predictions if they pay for them, and can otherwise create questions that will predictably get very little activity unless it is algorithmically determined to be very good. Creators’ benefits being truth + status as popular market creators, ought to be enough. In other words, if the market creators aren’t willing to trade $ for activity in their own markets, something about manifold as a prediction market platform is not right.
See this experimental ChangeMyMind market where I ask whether my mind will change about this and other questions: