🏅 Top traders

@GeneFama@GeneFama why did you solve No?

@Kamlisha that's jan 11th

@DesTiny lmfao someone got triggered 🤣

@Simon1551 shut up lol

It was close, but this can resolve NO now:

@egroj What happens if they don't resolve until we have more data?

@Simon1551 what more data would apply?

@Simon1551 good question. In this market they sort of implied that they would resolve with first available data: https://manifold.markets/GeneFama/will-there-be-84800-confirmed-cases
I don't know if it has to be confirmed by them or just a screenshot is sufficient

@DesTiny There have been instances of OWD changing the data a few days after the first data point we get. So my question was if Gene doesn't resolve this now and we get the actual correct data will the right resolution be the info of the latest data?

@egroj That's fair I actually wasn't expecting them to update it so soon that's why I bet yes

@Simon1551 Even the CDC has 84,538 confirmed cases. OWD is reporting data from only like 45 countries since Jan 1 when there were significantly more in the dataset before then.

Cases will be most likely around 85,000 once they have the full dataset. These markets are very cooked lol

@Gen Unfortunately Gene did specify OWD

@Simon1551 Yeah, it’s just cringe that these markets have been poisoned and now they have nothing to do with monkey pox cases (the spirit it was intended) and now are just a bet on whether the WHO derivative datasets get pushed to GitHub fast enough.

Sometimes they push data that is incomplete, sometimes they wait for the whole set.

Everyone sources the WHO, but the OWD site pulls from the latest numbers and presents it as though it is complete, whereas the WHO site has big alerts saying it’s not a full dataset

Kinda ruins all of these markets, it’s not really worth betting on the cases if you can be right but still lose because of how they report the data. We’re betting on their data publishing rate lol

@Gen That's sort of true, but isn't that always the case? It's not like the WHO number perfectly corresponds to reality. The true number of cases is probably not exactly 84.538. All kinds of silly reporting errors and delays can result in that number being slightly inaccurate. Maybe some additional cases were confirmed locally at some level but they didn't propagate up to the master WHO database becasue someone forgot to send and email or activate a script. Unless the WHO achieves omniscience it will always be possible to "be right but still lose becasue of how they report the data."

@Gen That's correct and in this case we need to ask creators to precise in the titles what we are actually betting on.

Not long ago I saw a comment with someone complaining about markets being resolved based on little details that most of the time go against the spirit of what we were trying to predict in the beginning. It's frustrating

@Simon1551 I do think the description gives a great explanation of what we are actually betting on, but I think your argument has merit if you're talking about the explore tab where you only get the title and not the description.

For that I think people shouldn't be expected to explain everything about the market in the title as it becomes quite clunky and tbh ugly. To combat this I think we shouldn't promote not exploring the description of a market, and that the explore tab doesn't work very well, especially for more complicated markets.

@DesTiny Sure the description does give a good explanation of what we are betting on but an argument could be made that the title and the description are contradictory and at that point what should we follow?

The title asks "Will there be >=84,500 confirmed cases of monkeypox worldwide by the end of Jan 10 2023?" the answer is yes because there are already that number of cases. someone using the swipe feature reads the title buys YES shares only to find out that it wasn't actually the number of cases that mattered but what OWD reports.

Now if we follow the description sure resolving NO right now might be the way to go but then apparently she will resolve with the first data we have available for that day, she specified that in the comments but how likely is it that everyone checks for further info in the comments before deciding to buy YES or NO?

And like @Gen said is it really against "the spirit it was intended" in the beginning if that makes sense.

@Simon1551 so is the problem the source that was used?

@DesTiny The main issue here is that the source being used will use preliminary data and then update it constantly.

Jan 10 data will change throughout the week, and is already reporting differently to when it was “first” reported

If the first datapoint is used, rather than waiting for more complete data, then the market becomes more about predicting their reporting schedule than the real amount of cases.

We saw this at new years when the 2022 cases markets solved “no” and then a day later they were updated and the daily cases more than doubled

@DesTiny I don't think so, I mean she could wait a month before resolving but I feel like that too would probably unfair to NO share holders. You can just ignore what I'm saying I don't think that there is a "right" way to resolve this

Sad that this market is closed D:

@Gen I bought a bunch of shares on the other one when this one is much safer smh

@Simon1551 Ikr 😞

Are you going to resolve this based on the first data we have on the 10th or are you going to wait until we get the actual data? because they skipped 2 days

@Simon1551 Nevermind I found your answer

@Simon1551 trying to work this out for myself too. Did you get your answer from the description? I.e. That the market will resolve at 'year-end'?

@BenjiHorwell actually, have confused myself now, the label on the market says it resolves on Jan 11

@BenjiHorwell It's in the description of one of their other markets

@BenjiHorwell It won't change anything apparently now they only update it once a week

@BenjiHorwell Different time zones