You've been pinged from a discord request @IsaacKing to resolve this. Please do or please let some know why you can not yet, maybe?!?!

I heard that disinformation is everywhere in Manifold now.

Depending on how you define misinformation we are already doing that all the time, no?

@mariopasquato Examples?

@IsaacKing On some of the St. Porphirius church markets I was posting stuff from Al Jazeera knowing that it skews pro-palestinian, so if people took it seriously they would update accordingly. Someone else posted videos from the IDF which obviously has the opposite bias. In my case I bet (out of true belief, but it does not matter) in the direction in which I expect the post from Al Jazeera would push people’s opinions. Similarly, people posting IDF videos were predicting accordingly. Any sufficiently broad definition of disinformation could tag either the IDF videos or the Al Jazeera posts as disinformation: they are both state sponsored propaganda. Since you cannot check the intention of people the part about intention (attempt to…) in your question’s title does not apply. What is left is that the information may be misleading (depending you where you draw the line) and was posted by people who also bet in the direction implied by that information Edit: before people get angry about the example, it’s just an example. Think of the room temperature superconductor as an example instead if you need to

This was the main reason I was so annoyed by Nathan Wei comments on the Shifa hospital command center market. Simply posting IDF propaganda nonstop definitely influences bettors.

This is already happening!

Source: this comment

People do this all the time, but it’s far from a site wide issue. I don’t really see it ever getting to that point. Naturally, as more people start making shit up, makers will be more vigilant and then people will stop making shit up.

It will always come and go in waves like that, it’ll never be a site wide issue.

@Gen IDK, it's pretty cheap to do, and even if it only misleads 1% of traders, it's probably still worth it.

@IsaacKing If it’s misleading 1% of traders, is it a site wide issue?

@Gen If it's happening in a large fraction of markets, yes. Spam comments are annoying even if they don't make me bet poorly.

@IsaacKing Fair enough. My expectation is, if it’s only working on 1% of traders, other traders will act on the correct information and the disinformation spreaders will ultimately be discouraged. I don’t think it ever becomes a site wide issue (e.g. disinfo on 1/8 markets)

Interesting example here. @nmehndir accidentally posted something false, traders acted on it, they apologized and paid people back. I'd call this level of responsibility over one's comments supererogatory, but it's certainly a nice thing to do.

There appears to be some false information in the comments on /Spindle/experts-will-agree-that-a-major-der and related markets, but it is far from being a site-wide issue.

@Yev On the contrary; it appears to be your comment that is the disinformation.

@IsaacKing That is perfectly consistent with what I said.

What if it's a small number of people but a large number of markets?

@Yev Like if a group of 5 people are doing this across hundreds of markets? That seems significant enough for me.

@IsaacKing What if it's one person doing this across hundreds of markets?

@Yev I'll say NO on a single person. I expect, if they're somehow not banned for spam, other traders would get used to it and ignore their comments. (I guess they could constantly change their username in order to stymie this?)

@IsaacKing What if it's one person with multiple alts?

@Yev That'll count. Needs to seem somewhat successful though. If Manifold is just deleting their accounts as fast as they're created, that doesn't count.