This resolves to YES based on my subjective judgement of whether someone has exploited poor resolution criteria in one of my markets to make it resolve in a way I didn't intend.
@IsaacKing Surely you meant: "Yes, of course this market is potentially self-referential, and of course I intended it"... which means (unless I'm being an idiot, happens often) that this market in fact can't be gamed in this way, and we're all good to go back online? :)
@Boklam TBH, that's exactly what I expected Isaac to say, and that's why I didn't buy a bunch of YES.
@IsaacKing I don't think that was accurate. I showed that the market is gameable, but I didn't actually game it.
@Yev I think pointing out the potential issue is sufficient to count. I don't think "gaming" requires that you actually bet to profit on it.