Is a market that always resolves to MKT particularly prone to market manipulation?

100Ṁ277

resolved Feb 8

Resolved

YES

ALL

Try and convince me otherwise. #meta #marketmanipulation #sitemechanics Jan 28, 4:06pm: See https://manifold.markets/JamesGrugett/is-ai-a-greater-existential-risk-to for an example. Jan 28, 4:10pm: #Shortterm

Self-resolving

Get

1,000

to start trading!

🏅 Top traders

#	Name	Total profit
1		Ṁ3
2		Ṁ0
3		Ṁ0
4		Ṁ0

People are also trading

Will Manifold allow market creators to noticeably prohibit themselves from trading on their own markets?

72% chance

If a market creator who is well-known in the real world resolves a market in a way that they believe to be correct, but Manifold admins believe to be incorrect, will they treat that market differently from the markets of non-famous users?

31% chance

When will manifold do/have done anything about market creators betting on their own markets?

Will this market resolve?

Sort by:

So it's the non-objectiveness and the certainty of how a market will be resolved that cause the problem, no the MKT?

No. The argument is that if your resolution condition is not anchored to something objective rather than mere betting behavior, the market will not produce meaningful results. Resolving to MKT is fine if the contract has objective resolution criteria and if traders don't know that you're committed to always resolving MKT (if they *do* know you're always going to resolve MKT or according to bet volume, then that opens up the possibility—really, certainty—of manipulation and means the market process will not be predicting anything useful.)

So it sounds like the argument is that markets that resolve to MKT are equally prone to manipulation as other markets?

That market didn't resolve MKT, but was resolved according to whichever side had more bet on it. It's the same underlying problem: the results aren't meaningful if a single deep-pocketed trader (or group of traders) can swoop in before the market closes and arbitrarily choose whichever outcome they prefer.

Did that market resolve MKT? That seems to be a counterpoint; a market that did not resolve MKT was just as easy to manipulate.

@Duncan, I think your original intuition is correct. Always resolving MKT leads to completely meaningless results. Case in point: https://manifold.markets/JiaobeiMandos/should-manifold-markets-implement-t-de1088aa58674

James argues that in MKT markets, actors are trying to predict actions of others (shelling point) but thats not the case for a typical MKT market unless you put a hard cap on maximum bet size for these markets. If you put a hard cap then it more of becomes a voting system that rewards the majority from the minority

Based on my opinion; you'll have to convince me otherwise. However, I will not sell my 'losing' shares prior to resolving, so there is something to win. Alternatively, if a significant number of people bid no AND convince me that their belief is wisely held and stronger than my own, I may resolve no. Given that many are better than math than I, this could be the winning strategy.

how will this market be resolved @Duncan ?

That can't do much better than a yes/no at best, surely?

I would say that it is! But there is also a factor of trying to predict what everyone else is going to do. The Schelling point may be the truth. So you would come out ahead by bidding the probability to where others would bid it.

People are also trading

Will Manifold allow market creators to noticeably prohibit themselves from trading on their own markets?

72% chance

31% chance

When will manifold do/have done anything about market creators betting on their own markets?

Will this market resolve?

96% chance

🏅 Top traders

People are also trading

People are also trading

Related questions