There have been multiple markets where the creator has incorrectly resolved their market for profit - most infamously Mr Stone and most recently Alex
In addition, it is difficult to ignore the profit incentive for even the most honorable market creators. Your judgment is simply less trustworthy
As such, it is totally rational to distrust markets where there is a profit incentive for the creator
As a market creator, I'd like the ability to increase my credibility by selecting a toggle in my market regarding whether I can bet in it - and for it to be clear to traders whether I can or not
This also eliminates the need for a lot of caveats that I and other market creators will sometimes provide
Discussed in this feature request post.
Market closes by end of 2025.
Related questions
@Gabrielle FWIW, I'm also heavily biased in favor of betting on my own markets...where the resolution criteria is clear-cut and highly objective. It's in the subjective cases where I want the option to credibly promise to not bet.
@AndrewHartman Agreed the potential for alt accounts still enables manipulation, but it at least reduces the likelihood / increases the friction.
@CarsonGale this site really needs a sybil prevention system. I thought they had one, but they apparently specifically do not
@CarsonGale It does, certainly. But a desire to preserve one's reputation on the site also imposes (considerably greater) costs on the process, I think. I'd happily take the feature if it were free, certainly, but since you must presumably spend time on it you don't spend on something else, I'm not persuaded it's a high enough priority personally.
@AndrewHartman I think there are really 2 use cases here. (i) is what we're discussing, which is purposeful manipulation. In that regard, I think it just straightforwardly makes a set of "non-creator-betting" markets that are more secure than others (even if it's still possible to misresolve for profit via alt accounts). And (ii) is that it subtly encourages market creators to select the option and not bet on their own markets, which I think is a good best-practice to encourage.
All in all, I think it's a great feature, even if there are likely other things to prioritize beforehand. This market would resolve positively until 2025, so creating the feature anytime in the next 3 years would result in a yes resolution.
I'd love to know if any of these points are convincing to you.
@CarsonGale Point 1 doesn't persuade me much, since due to the reputational risks it's best to use an alt account anyways (preferably one people can't ID as yours). Point 2 is interesting - I don't really see why it'd be a best practice, tbh, but I'm open to arguments for it. I have historically rarely bet in my own markets, because I try to pick topics where the outcome is genuinely uncertain (and, if it is uncertain in my judgment, I'm unlikely to bet on it, y'know?)