https://twitter.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1913807239871111169

Between 18:00 yesterday and 00:00, 387 attacks and 19 assault operations of the Russian army took place today. 290 times the Russians used drones.

In general, as of Easter, we can say that the Russian army is trying to create a general impression of the ceasefire, but sometimes does not abandon some attempts to advance and cause losses to Ukraine. Russia must fully comply with the conditions of silence. The Ukrainian proposal to implement and extend the silence for 30 days after 24:00 today remains valid. We will act in accordance with the real situation.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/c934nprkqz3t

This doesn't sound like a ceasefire is actually happening.

Polymarket clarification for this market with the same exact rules (literally copy-pasted) seems solid. And the "declared through official channels by both countries" clause certainly is not satisfied, regardless. Zelenskyy seemed to outright reject the ceasefire. N seems very safe here.

@Mana is this the market you mean? I see they're explicitly not counting an Easter truce:

https://polymarket.com/event/trump-wins-ends-ukraine-war-in-90-days

Quoting market creator: "my understanding is that a ceasefire that means ‘nobody can fight at all for the next week’ would count as a temporary end to the conflict". I'm interested to hear from NO holders how "nobody can fight at all for the next day" is qualitatively different from that.

@CalibratedNeutral

I sold my position now because I want to sleep but my view on resolution for this market is:

• My understanding of Bayesian's intent is that this was mostly a mirror market for the Polymarket one, but with the reserved right to resolve differently for Polymarket mis-resolves

• Polymarket will (now) resolve no.

• Will this be a mis-resolve?

  • (a) I see 2 main degrees of freedom in the [original] Poly & manifold resolution criteria and state of play

    • (i) Did they mean that a ceasefire has to be on the way to an overall peace?

    • (ii) is the ceasefire really agreed?

  • (b) does the ceasefire pertain to all theatres?

  • (c) what's the common-sense view?

On (a)(i) it's now quite clear that they meant "on the way to (some bigger) peace". I definitely originally interpreted this as more or less 'any ceasefire' though, but it seems like there were readers on both sides of the interpretation. A resolution which relies on either side of this isn't 'obviously' wrong at least IMO.

On (a)(ii) I wouldn't describe the state of play now as "agreed"; statements are conditional, "if they stop we'll join", and AFAICT combat has not stopped. The ceasefire could still become agreed.

On (b), this is unclear, but we see some indications of possibly no; AFAICT there's reporting Putin might have specified a ceasefire specifically "in Ukraine" (as opposed to in Belgorod or Kursk); but this might just be loose language.

On (c), at a common-sense view, a ceasefire is yet to occur, though it still might in time.

So I see (a)(i) leaning no, (a)(ii) no, (b) being unclear but maybe no, and (c) being no

If the ceasefire actually really happens in time it becomes much less clear, but I'd still lean no; I think with ambiguity the default outcome should be in line with the top level intent to mirror polymarket.

@draaglom really excellent post! agreed on all counts. one thing I'd like to add is that we still have 5 hours left and as this is a fast moving situation, I think people should at least wait till expiry to be angry over the rules. And ultimately, people really shouldn't attack Bayesian, everyone does their best to make good criteria and the complexity of the real world often makes that difficult, there are so many different weird edge cases that are difficult to foresee.

@draaglom Thank you for the well thought out response. I appreciate you taking the time to spell these considerations out.
I am still leaning YES, all of these things considered. The Polymarket link in the market description seems like it is meant to make people aware of a similar market, but going solely by this (Manifold) market's description, if military activities are temporarily suspended then it should resolve YES.

@SemioticRivalry To be honest I haven't seen anyone being angry over the rules here. It's mostly people on Polymarket being angry, because Polymarket substantially altered their resolution criteria last minute.
This market here isn't the one on Polymarket though.

@SemioticRivalry thanks!

@CalibratedNeutral Yeah, one thing for the metaphorical post-mortem here is another case of highly salient info buried in the comments. Bayesian commented here (and above in same thread) re: polymarket derivation, but in a busy question like this it's very easy to miss. No shade to Bayesian, IMO it's a frequent problem manifold-wide.

@CalibratedNeutral No doubt people are much more reasonable here than polymarket but I still don't want bayesian to get attacked :)

Polymarket:

>A qualifying ceasefire must be indicative of at least the temporary end of the Ukraine-Russia military conflict. An “Easter truce” will not count.

@draaglom Good thing we're on Manifold and not Polymarket.

@draaglom lmao since WHEN was that the definition of “ceasefire”? Was that even remotely qualified before? Not that I have a horse in that race, but…

I don’t think this short ceasefire, if it happens, should count for resolving this market.

To count toward the resolution of this market, an armistice, ceasefire, and/or negotiated settlement must be indicative of at least the temporary end of the Ukraine-Russia military conflict

The truce is, per Putin, solely for humanitarian reasons with Easter, and not a step toward ending the war.

@Gabrielle On Polymarket, the markets for other dates even explicitly exclude "humanitarian" in their rules. Very likely that Polymarket/UMA would prefer to resolve all these markets the same for consistency.

@Gabrielle Ending the war has nothing to do with it. "I order a stop to all military activities for this period". That means a temporary end of military conflict.

@Gabrielle @CalibratedNeutral exactly - the end state of the conflict is irrelevant and the criteria is explicit:

• "An armistice, ceasefire, or negotiated settlement is announced by both Ukraine and Russia regarding the ongoing war in Ukraine at any point".

This is what Putin announced / said, I'm not seeing this as a humanitarian pause in any way:

• "I order all combat operations to cease for that period. We proceed from the premise that the Ukrainian side will follow our example,” Putin said. “At the same time, our forces must be ready to repel any violation of the ceasefire and any provocations from the adversary."

The following line isn't great, but I think it's just superfluous text:

• "indicative of at least the temporary end of the Ukraine-Russia military conflict"

@vitamind how can one of the few explicitly stated necessary conditions be superfluous text?

@MachiNi Because a Russo-Ukrainian ceasefire is the temporary end of the Russo-Ukrainian war?

@vitamind let me rephrase this resolution criterion according to you then:

To count toward the resolution of this market, the temporary end of the Ukraine-Russia military conflict must be indicative of at least the temporary end of the Ukraine-Russia military conflict

@MachiNi or:

To count toward the resolution of this market, a ceasefire must be indicative of at least a ceasefire

@MachiNi What qualifies as temporary end of the conflict, if ending the conflict temporarily doesn't?

@CalibratedNeutral a humanitarian truce for instance doesn’t put any dent into the conflict as such. Pause and end are totally different words and I still don’t understand why people keep pretending like they aren’t. During WWI France and Germany would sometimes pause hostilities for Christmas. That in absolutely no way was indicative of a temporary end to the war.

@MachiNi Again: What is a temporary end to a war then.

@MachiNi Actually, type 'temporary end of war' into Google and report back to me what you see.

@MachiNi no, the criteria for me - or how I would define it had I written this question - is:

"To count toward the resolution of this market, an armistice, ceasefire, and/or negotiated settlement must pertain to all theaters of military conflict between the two countries, and be declared through official channels by both countries. The specific date that such an agreement will take effect is not relevant to the resolution of this market. The only requirement is that the agreement must be announced within this market's specified timeframe."

Pause and temporarily end are equivalent, imo, also.

@CalibratedNeutral no one has ever denied that the terms can be used like this. That’s not the point. The point is that the resolution criterion seeks to add substantive (not analytical) information and it’s totally unclear what it’s supposed to add if it is tautological.

@vitamind you can read as well as me and the criteria include:

To count toward the resolution of this market, an armistice, ceasefire, and/or negotiated settlement must be indicative of at least the temporary end of the Ukraine-Russia military conflict, must pertain to all theaters of military conflict between the two countries, and be declared through official channels by both countries

By the way, it’s a criterion, criteria is plural.

Halftime is not the end of the game (half in jest).

@MachiNi To make it clear that a 'negotiated settlement' e.g. to stop using a certain type of weapon, or a ceasefire which applies only to a very small location, do not resolve the market YES. "Armistice, ceasefire, or negotiated settlement" are just restated from the less specific description "This market resolves YES if:

An armistice, ceasefire, or negotiated settlement is announced [...]".

@CalibratedNeutral

https://guide-humanitarian-law.org/content/article/3/cease-fire/#:~:text=An%20armistice%20or%20a%20cease,an%20end%20to%20a%20conflict.

To me this is the key difference and what ‘at least indicative of’ is all about. Remember that the original market title, like that of Polymarket, is about ending the war, period. That’s the context. People have completely twisted the bare criteria to mean something completely different. This has been a botched market from the start. At least acknowledge the ambiguity.

@MachiNi The title of a market does not matter, only the resolution criteria. If both sites cease military actions, then by definition this constitutes a temporary end of military conflict. There is no ambiguity.

@CalibratedNeutral ok cool glad you’ve got it all figured out.