Will anyone be banned or uninvited from the next Manifest conference due to threats from other potential attendees?
Basic
17
Ṁ22k
Jan 2
67%
chance

At Manifest 1.0, several people threatened to not attend if Richard Hanania was allowed to attend and/or speak. Manifold ended up prohibiting him from being a speaker, but allowing him to attend.

(Further background and discussion here, here, here, and here.)

"Due to threats" refers to Manifold making the decision not out of their own personal preferences, but because attendees threatened to not come or to do something else that Manifold finds detrimental. This includes justifications along the lines of "more people dislike X than like X, so it's utility-maximizing to ban them". It also includes situations where the threats were implied, such as lots of people aggressively telling Manifold how uncomfortable they would be if X were to attend, without explicitly threatening any action.

If Manifold doesn't make their decision process public, I'll take my best guess. I won't bet.

Get
Ṁ1,000
and
S3.00
Sort by:

Fwiw this market refers to the manifest that already happened (it was made long before manifest 2)

Ah, so this market is just seeking a resolution now?

Manifold you guys REALLY need a UX Designer. It took me 5 minutes to figure out when Isaac posted this!

And that's a LONG TIME for me.

*5 minutes and two separate attempts.

bought Ṁ834 YES

If history is anything to go by, they'll ban any random smart neurodivergent dude that makes them step out of their standard comfort zone.

Eg: me.

I'm not aware of this having happened, should resolve NO I think?

This happened to me, should resolve yes if this was for the last event.

Literally got my entire $800 ticket refunded without so much as a chance to plead my case. Extremely unprofessional and a bad sign for the future of Manifold.

(someone apparently thought that I would be like, physically violent or something? Which is laughable and absolutely ridiculous. The fact that I can type extremely fast, have strong opinions, and aren't afraid to say them has literally nothing to say about whether or not I'm physically violent. Anyways. Yeah. That's my piece, and what's why I voted this market up to 99% just now.)

seems quite possible that someone, in one message, would both bring to our attention something that we weren't previously aware of that causes us to no longer want someone to attend and/or to give them a free ticket, and in the same message tell us that they would pull out of attending if we didn't drop the other speaker.

compare:

  1. we invite alice and bob to speak; bob says "alice did X thing, if you don't bar alice from attending then i'll drop out of the event;" we think that X is obviously beyond the pale (e.g. alice committed homicide or assault or something); we uninvite alice because her behavior was beyond the pale.

  2. we invite alice and bob to speak; bob says "alice did Y thing, if you don't bar alice from attending then i'll drop out of the event;" we think that Y is not beyond the pale (e.g. alice made the case that electrons don't have qualia or something); we uninvite alice because we don't want bob to pull out.

in this case, i think (1) should not make this market resolve YES, but (2) should. and i think (1) is vastly more likely to happen than (2); i think we're pretty unwilling to bend under pressure per se, but much more willing to change our minds based on changing evidence.

this someone is Duncan Sabien.

source: I know a person who works at Lighthaven who told me this.

Saul you should cut the CEOspeak tbh. It's not a good look.

bought Ṁ200 YES

Hmm it seems like that’s “because of threats TO other attendees” not “threats FROM other attendees” (I.e. it seems like they were proactively taking this move because they thought it was right, not because other manifest attendees pressured them into doing so)

© Manifold Markets, Inc.Terms + Mana-only TermsPrivacyRules