If any non-bot participant placs one or more bets on YES that total more than Ṁ5, I reserve the right to resolve the market to either N/A or to NO, in whatever way best punishes the user(s) who placed those invalid bets.
All my markets of this type with various maximum mana investments:
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ284 | |
| 2 | Ṁ92 | |
| 3 | Ṁ27 | |
| 4 | Ṁ26 | |
| 5 | Ṁ20 |
Basic scripted API check results – no guarantees, but it passes sanity checks. Bots and NO (net) positions were filtered out, and only YES accounted. How much mana did each group bet in total:
`valid YES bets?` `how much at stake`
<lgl> <dbl>
1 FALSE 177.
2 TRUE 147.How many people are on each side:
`valid YES bets?` `how many people`
<lgl> <int>
1 FALSE 5
2 TRUE 36Transgressors:
"cos" "Daniel Wünn" "Dorothy Green" "Douglasx" "Sophia A"Not sure what conclusions to draw here. @IsaacKing.
Ok, I didn't count up everything precisely, as there were a lot of trades, but just by eyeballing it, it looks like most users who placed invalid YES bets currently hold YES shares. The one exception is Lauro Langosco, who placed an invalid YES bet of M$6 and then bought a bunch of NO. However this is not enough to outweigh the other rule-breakers who bought YES, so collectively, it would be most punishing to the rule-breakers to resolve this to NO.
Any disagreement?
