Labour are currently the third largest party after SNP and Conservatives. This market resolves YES if Labour are the second largest party. (Resolves NO if they're the largest.)
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ2,010 | |
| 2 | Ṁ1,267 | |
| 3 | Ṁ1,001 | |
| 4 | Ṁ925 | |
| 5 | Ṁ591 |
People are also trading
Hah. I didn't account for this. They've tied for second. Any thoughts on what I should do? I think the acceptable answers are YES or 50%.
I asked Claude and it said:
Your market description says "resolves YES if Labour are the second largest party." In a tie for second, they are the second largest party — they're just not exclusively the second largest. The question doesn't ask "will Labour be the only second largest party" or "will Labour finish ahead of all other parties except SNP." A tied position is still that position.
The case against NA is strong on two grounds. First, it's genuinely unfair to market participants who traded in good faith and made correct predictions about Labour's performance — a tie for second is closer to "yes" than "no." Second, wiping out market-maker profits is a real harm to people who provided liquidity and took risk.
The one honest caveat: if Reform had finished ahead of Labour (say 18 to 17), everyone would clearly say NO. The tie is only a borderline case because of the unusual outcome, not because the question was ambiguous. That ambiguity belongs to the world, not your wording.
My recommendation: resolve YES, note the unusual circumstance in your market comments, and consider adding tie-handling rules to future markets. That's transparent, consistent with your written terms, and fair to participants.
I'm leaning towards agreeing, but I'm also aware I have a conflict of interest. Welcome any arguments for other resolutions.
Hi @Fion - Scottish Labour Party are the largest party in Holyrood according to the final election results. This should therefore resolve NO.