Isaac King
resolved Feb 4
This market resolves to whatever percentage it stayed at the longest.
Resolved as
61%

There's a tolerance of 2 percentage points. So if there's a point in time where the market varied between 50.1% and 51.9%, that still counts as an uninturrupted stretch. (And I'd resolve to the midpoint of 51%.)

To be clear, this is about the longest uninterrupted stretch at a certain percentage, not the total added up over the whole lifetime of the market.

Closes at midnight Pacific time on February 1st.

#NameTotal profit
1Ṁ75
2Ṁ63
3Ṁ11
4Ṁ10
5Ṁ3
Sort by:
XComhghallpredicted YES at 61%

The probability varied between

• 60% and 62% from 2023-01-30 21:09:22 to 2023-02-01 03:00:00. The market should therefore resolve to 61%.

• 59.5% and 61.5% from 2023-01-30 21:09:22 to 2023-02-01 00:09:22. The market should therefore resolve to 60.5%, or 61%.

Isaac Kingpredicted NO at 61%

@XComhghall I can't resolve to a fractional percentage, so looks like 61%. Any disagreements before I resolve?

XComhghallbought Ṁ0 of NO

2.00 percentage points exactly, or that the displayed rounded probability may vary within 2 percentage points, e.g., 60-62%?

@XComhghall 2 exactly

XComhghallpredicted YES

@IsaacKing The variation between 60% and 62% was the displayed rounded probability. Exactly, the probability varied at [59.5%, 61.5%) from 2023-01-30 21:09:22 to 2023-02-01 00:09:22. The market should have resolved to 60.499999999%, or 60%.

Isaac Kingpredicted NO

@XComhghall Oh, I see. Too late now...

I'm confused, did the difference really come down to the difference between 61.5%) and 61.5%] ? The Manifold math is all floating point so this seems impossible.

To clarify, I'm confused that in the other comment you say 60.5% and in this comment you say 60.499999999%

XComhghallpredicted YES

@jack I am not sure, but I think so. I thought that if it were 61.5%, it'd round to 62%. I placed the bets so that they were respectively M1 below what would make it 62%, and M1 above what would make it 59%. And yes, 60.5% was imprecise, I think.

Isaac Kingbought Ṁ340 of NO

You mean the midpoint of 51%, not 50%, right?

Simonpredicted YES at 60%

@Conflux Bro I've been wanting to say this since I first saw the market but I didn't want to be that guy

Confluxbought Ṁ5 of NO

@Simon1551 Based on my knowledge of Isaac King, I think he's likely to be appreciative and not offended!

...though I'd probably have said this for a different market creator too

Confluxpredicted NO at 60%

oops, ambiguity - by "said this", I mean "said the correction"

Simonpredicted YES at 60%

@Conflux I feel like I criticise Isaac a lot already, so nit-picking over something so small could sour things, I personally wouldn't mind if it was done to me but I have no idea what he thinks about it so I rather not say anything. I'm probably just overthinking this too...

@Simon1551 Pretty confident a nitpicky correction wouldn't sour things. Let's see if we can find out :)

@Boklam OK I probably went overboard here but let's find out...

https://manifold.markets/Boklam/would-isaac-king-be-annoyed-if-some

Simonpredicted YES at 60%
Isaac Kingpredicted NO at 60%

@Conflux Yes, thank you. Fixed.

XComhghallpredicted YES at 57%

60-62% 01-15 23:40:28 - 01-16 21:55:49, 22h 15m 21s

57% 01-16 21:55:49 - 01-17 19:07:09, 21h 11m 20s

It would make things more exciting if you extended time if one side stayed in majority for more than 75% of the time. So other side has a chance to fight. Or maybe that wouldn't work like I'm imagining

firstuserherebought Ṁ5 of NO

How do you find out/calculate what time the market stayed at the longest? @IsaacKing

firstuserherepredicted NO at 55%

@firstuserhere what percentage*

@firstuserhere May be obvious on the graph, or if not someone can check the API.

firstuserherepredicted NO at 55%

@IsaacKing okay, thanks

So it needs to move by 2% or more to count as a change?

@DesTiny Yep. (This is to let limit orders work to keep the percentage flat enough to count.)