@mods resolves N/A

@SentientTree I'm largely out of the loop here, but I don't see any evidence that this needs to be resolved NA. I would interpret this that it will resolve equally to all listed schools that attend and NO for all others. The choice of market structure isn't ideal but it would still function.

@wasabipesto and how does the “Other” option resolve?

@SentientTree Other would cover all schools not listed. If any schools not listed would have counted towards YES, then Other does so as well. For this I would probably would weight it equally as all other options even if multiple teams not listed would otherwise have contributed.

@wasabipesto All options besides Syosset would resolve yes, so that’s 11% for each of the other nine options. Maybe 12% for Monta Vista since they won to make it 100% total

How does this market resolve? All of these schools could attend based on state rules; is the market intended to be which will win?

@Doraemon some clarification would be good here. The market is set to resolve to a single option, and multiple schools from this list will attend the national tournament. Montgomery and Monta Vista have already qualified from their state tournaments. You could either:

1. Specify that the market is intended to be "who will win?" and will resolve 100% to the winner
2. Specify that the market will resolve proportionally to all teams attending the tournament (and clarify how the "Other" option would resolve - either the same as the other options [~11%], proportionally to the number of teams [~87%], or simply to 0%.
3. Resolve the market N/A in the interest of fairness to traders