If the debate happens and the mics are muted, let’s resolve who benefitted with a poll.
Will add liquidity once there are 5+ traders.
1,000
3.00@BlueDragon Are you arguing that this would only have resolved NO if they mics were muted the whole time?
@BlueDragon I had understood « mics aren’t muted » as « mics are never muted ». I think it’s more logical that « mics aren’t muted » resolves NO unless there is no single moment when a mic is muted. If I understood the other comments correctly, the muting function was used at least once.
@Mich I second this. I don’t think anyone’s understanding was that mics had to be muted the whole time or every single time. The mics were definitely muted many times to help the moderators keep things moving.
Ok I’m persuaded.
My resolution was based on the unmuting during crosstalk, which some media sources suggested was a sort of “partial” muting.
However since the rules were agreed upon ahead of time:
The Harris campaign also told CBS News it was offered assurances as to how any crosstalk may be handled. The microphones may be unmuted if there is significant crosstalk between the candidates. A candidate who constantly interrupts their opponent will be warned by the moderator and their comments may be relayed to the audience. And, if the microphones don't pick up the exchanges, a group of reporters who will be in the room would report anything noteworthy.
I agree this should be resolved NO.
@mods could you please re-resolve this for me?
🙏🏼
I’ll hold off on resolving because it’s always possible this will change again … ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@BlueDragon Thanks for the clarification. In case debate happens, mics are muted, and answer to the poll are even or close to even, is it possible that Trump and Harris resolve to probabilities ? Or will make sure that whatever happens there are only YES and NO resolutions ?
@BlueDragon Will exactly one answer resolve Yes no matter what happens? I'm confused because the market is the unlinked format.
@EvanDaniel Yep, it’s unlinked so that I can resolve the various options at different times if/when that is appropriate (for instance if the debate happens I can resolve “ Debate doesn’t happen” as NO without closing the market). The additional benefit of independence between the options is that there are more opportunities for arbitrage. However, although these options are modeled independently, the outcomes are mutually exclusive. Only one will resolve YES.
@Mich This is interesting, I hadn’t considered resolving to PARTIAL. I can imagine doing that in the case of a tie in the poll for who benefitted, Harris vs Trump. I can also see adding options to the poll like “no one benefited” and then resolving accordingly.
The counter argument to any of this is that I don’t want to add complexity or change the rules as @traders understood them when they bet. I’ll mull it over for a day or so and let others chime in if they wish.
@BlueDragon Yup, now that tranding has started this way, I think it's a good idea to just ensure exactly one option resolves YES no matter what
@MattP Thanks, yes I do not intend to change the rules. The only case I’d consider is PARTIAL if the poll is a tie.
Liquidity! 💦💦 Upgraded to Basic.
Honestly I’m not sure who would benefit in this round from the muting of the mics. Yes it unexpectedly disadadvantaged Biden by drowning him in his own lapses while making Trump look disciplined, but:
Harris might have an easier time distinguishing herself from Biden (and Trump) if she isn’t being talked over by a belligerent dude.
Trump said in the same breath as he opposed any rule change that he would prefer the mics not be muted, presumably so that he grab attention and signal to his base with his reactions, this might help or hurt him.