Resolves to the side with the most holders at market close, excluding bots.
For example, in the image below, the market would resolve NO, as it has 3 holders (4-1bot) compared to YES only having 2.
A bot must have the BOT tag to be classified as a bot.
Resolves 50/50 if equal
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,162 | |
| 2 | Ṁ950 | |
| 3 | Ṁ573 | |
| 4 | Ṁ502 | |
| 5 | Ṁ420 |
People are also trading
@Quroe , Can you run the physics on this? This simple question had good predictability, then showed extreme volatility, popularity. I’m trying to understand why a simple, predictable market with low liquidity suddenly exploded into a record-breaking number of traders on both sides.
Is this just random, butterfly effect in real life, or are people panic-buying because there might be hints for @bens https://manifold.markets/bens/will-manifold-solve-puzzle hidden in here?
@MyDreamIsHere2018 We had a trader that was actively petitioning other users in DMs to join their side. This market had a powerful word-of-mouth advantage.
Plus, yes, being a popular market draws in more traders by being on the front page of Manifold. It's a positive feedback loop.
...Also, Manifolders can't help themselves from trading on a market like this from time to time.
@MyDreamIsHere2018 This market here is also another good data point for how it plays out. Very similar rules compared to this market.
@Quroe Thanks for the detailed analysis. Do we know if there was an active campaign in DMs to get people to bet YES or NO?
Was this just one person petitioning, or is this market a trial run for some kind of Manifold mobilization tactic?
@MyDreamIsHere2018 I was personally contacted in DMs to join a side. I personally believe that I was not the only one contacted, but I can't prove it.
Manifolders are cunning when you give us puzzles and dangle a reward in front of our faces. Never underestimate the power of imaginary internet brownie points -- we are a coordinated community when given the proper impetus.
See this game show I ran for an explicit example.
@Quroe This is a dangerous social experiment settings - your challenge. If someone doesn't want to take part in the quest, they can't pass it back.
In your version of the challenge, you are enslaving people to do things they normally wouldn't.
Here, Jack made simple settings: only those who wanted to join took part. And as you see, more than 100 users made it happen on their own wish. The numbers are 10 times higher, and without any shame. Something to learn from.
@Quroe The 'Ass and Tits' challenge was a self-feeding loop with high volatility, but the market only swung once, maintaining some predictability. Limits were the MANA balances
This market has already swung twice in short time.
We were in extreme 'butterfly effect' territory, where a few holders could simply flip the outcome and profit from that. And no limits for that - as everyone is able do it freely.
You claim that DMs played the significant role
@Aizej at least 4 holders were added to the YES side in the last 0.5-1 hour even though NO was clearly ahead. And the additions were not people switching from NO to YES - the NO holders were more or less static.
@Aizej Manifold are not enforcing their rules. People are using multiple accounts, which isn’t allowed. They are aware of it, but they aren’t doing anything about it.
@NzJack0n Someone created the https://manifold.markets/khanhlinh account to buy 1,000 YES shares and try to manipulate the market, but it didn’t succeed anyway.
There are many bots without bot tags. John also tried his best. Nothing worked : NO won
people are strong
@Areal how do you know it's not someone's friend betting on a market bc the friend asked? who is using multiple accounts and how do you know for sure?
@Bayesian The account was clearly created for a single purpose, with no other trades, no any comments, or further interactions. It appears to be a one-time manipulation account with no intention of becoming a real user.
@Areal That doesn't answer the question. I've had my friends create accounts for the purpose of a singular market, too. It is not against TOS if they chose to never use Manifold again. As long as they don't create additional accounts beyond the first.
In fact, if you like Manifold, you should encourage this behavior! it may contribute to growth of the platform!
@No_uh A real person has persistent access to the account. A single-use Google account does not.
How many Google accounts are active in your browser right now?
Only one?
That's the answer
@Areal haha why am I getting tagged here? 🤣
I read this thread. @Areal it could be someone dumb enough to bet it all on one market and then lose it all. I think it's a non-zero chance of being incompetence and not malice.
@NzJack0n @Aizej how do you expect the mods to enforce the non-duplicate accounts? Blanket bans if more than one user per IP address/ISP could work for a small website but probably would throttle the growth of Manifold.
Maybe some ML solution to identify voting clusters is possible - but even that is not foolproof because Manifold FAQ explicitly suggests "follow successful traders" (https://docs.manifold.markets/faq#how-do-i-become-a-good-trader). In a liquid-enough market, you'll find 'successful traders' on both sides of the trade.
@Areal hmm I might be too sleep deprived right now to grasp your point (if you have one). Good day to you.
@Areal This was my stupidest bet yet and im lucky it actually worked out. I made my bet from 250 to 5000+ on the last 2 hours of the market because i wanted to offset the losses i already had. At that time it was 60 NO 43 YES.