Resolves to absoluteValue([top YES holder position] - [top NO holder position]) / max([top YES holder position], [top NO holder position])
For example, if the top YES holder has 900 shares, and the top NO holder has 600 shares, the difference is 300, which is 33% of the maximum position of 900. (Would also resolve to 33% if the top NO holder had 900 and the top YES holder had 600).
1,000๐ Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | แน2,414 | |
| 2 | แน301 | |
| 3 | แน211 | |
| 4 | แน33 | |
| 5 | แน7 |
Too late. Btw, the strategy (or should I say, evil scheme ๐) was to steal all of @A's money. They placed a YES limit order at 20%, which is very dangerous! If someone else had teamed up with me, one of us could have brought down the percentage to 20% (getting < 5x the shares of A's limit), then the other could have bought it down to 19.9%. The person who brought it down to 19.9% would have nearly equal in NO shares to @A YES shares, bringing the resolution to ~0%. There wasn't that much money to be made, but it was completely free!
PS: I'm sharing this because evil-monologuing is fun, but I get that doing so when the scheme didn't pan out is slightly lame. ๐