Description

From now until the end of 2026, will prediction market manipulation of any sort result in verified harm? Market manipulation requires traders with invested stakes in a market attempting to sway the outcome of the market. A commonly cited example are supposed "assassination markets" which could result in traders committing murder in order to win a bet. This is one way "at least one death" could resolve.

This market is a twin to this market on Insider Trading harms. The primary difference between the two is that Insider Trading denotes important figures involved with the resolution in some manner, trading in accordance. By contrast, Market Manipulation is done by random traders, who can be reasonably presumed at the time of market creation to have little to no relevant sway on the resolution. Cases where Insiders manipulate markets, such as a sporting event participant throwing a match, count as Insider Trading. On the other hand, a random trader assaulting a sporting event participant before a match counts as Market Manipulation.

Resolution Criteria

The "Other" category covers any unspecified harms aside from legal, PR or related troubles suffered by the market manipulator, prediction market or other predictors. An example that would resolve YES is this recent case of death threats being issued to a journalist. The Other category is much more ambiguous; not all threats are sufficiently credible or severe. In addition, cases where false or misleading information is spread to influence a market only resolve YES if the information is both spread outside the market and is plausibly harmful.

Any event reported on in the major news media which offers reasonable justification that market manipulation was causally implicated in deaths, injuries or other harms is sufficient.