Will this Market have more than 25 positions by 15th march 6pm GMT?
Resolved
YES

Mar 15, 11:12am: Will this Market have more than 25 positions by 15th march 6pm GMT → Will this Market have more than 25 positions by 15th march 6pm GMT? at market close

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
1Ṁ235
2Ṁ148
3Ṁ98
4Ṁ70
5Ṁ64
Sort by:
R2D2 avatar
R2D2predicted YES at 99%

Moneyyyyy 🤑🤑🤑🤑

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpast

@CalebDitchfield isnt it an interesting market?

Messi avatar
Lionel Messisold Ṁ108 of YES

@Dreamingpast Why you sell? I buy bc of your argument

Wobbles avatar
Wobblespredicted YES at 97%

Jack has been on here for less than a day and is already in drama 😭

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 97%

@Wobbles The new "will i stop making controversial markets by the end of April?"

RESOLVED NO

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinsbought Ṁ200 of YES

@Wobbles I LOVE IT

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinspredicted YES at 92%

to the mooooooon

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinsbought Ṁ500 of YES

such a high p, maybe more people wont join as they think its not worth their while!!!!

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 92%

@JackJenkins people will always buy in for tiny gains especially when market is about to close

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastsold Ṁ34 of NO

NO is a cooler side than YES. We’re the underdog rn, and being the underdog is cool. 😎 And we’re rapidly catching up! Vote NO if you’re wanna show the loser YES-buyers who’s boss! You’re not a rule-following YES sheep, are you? 🐑

And for lowly non-NOs, it would be entirely your style to steal from hard-working NOs, but I ask that you don’t if you have a shred of goodness left in you (doubtful). 💔

If you buy NO shares, I’ll love you unconditionally* 🥰. But if you’re a dirty YES-buying traitor, go away! 😠 Shooo! We don’t want your kind in here. 🤢

Sending love to all ❤️ 😊 Join the NOs! 👃

PS: I’m not mentally unstable, I swear! Only pretending to be for dark unlegible reasons.

*there is no irony in this statement 🤭

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 96%

@Dreamingpast @BionicD0LPH1N copypasta generated

parafactual avatar
celestesold Ṁ213 of YES

alright im done with this market i sold. >5% chance of unpredictable shenanigans in my estimation

parafactual avatar
celeste

@parafactual i made 33Ṁ :3

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastsold Ṁ25 of NO

@parafactual i by betting on NO have made over 170 Ṁ :)))

parafactual avatar
celeste

@Dreamingpast i'll believe it when i see it

JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lachsold Ṁ3 of NO

@parafactual be careful with big sales in one move, you momve the market a lot and lose most of your gains

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 92%

@parafactual i keep selling my positions to realize that position, so that even if i lose i do not lose all the profits even if it makes my overall profits lower than potential!

parafactual avatar
celeste

@JacekLach i barely moved the market

JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lachpredicted NO at 92%

oh that was @JackJenkins not you, my bad

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinspredicted YES at 92%

the rug can still be pulled.......

42irrationalist avatar
42irrationalistbought Ṁ50 of NO

I made 5 mana from predicting NO early!

parafactual avatar
celestepredicted YES at 92%

@42irrationalist now you could make mana from predicting YES

JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lachpredicted NO at 92%

@42irrationalist yea im +20 market making, wish i had my limits set up before the dump to 5% tho

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinspredicted YES at 92%

very easy to mannipulate this market !

JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lachbought Ṁ0 of YES

@JackJenkins yea i guess if someone wants to make 25 accs they can single handedly decide this

firstuserhere avatar
firstuserherebought Ṁ140 of YES

@JacekLach that's actually against community guidelines:

firstuserhere avatar
firstuserhere

@JacekLach they may profit in Ṁ but will it be worth getting banned?

parafactual avatar
celestepredicted YES at 92%

@firstuserhere it's not clear this bans using alts to decide a market like this

JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lachpredicted NO at 92%

if all the accs are long, i dont think that is against the letter of those rules

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpast

@JackJenkins the Second last point may be violated?? Oh oh and ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinspredicted YES at 92%

i should have said more positions!

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinspredicted YES at 74%

lost 3 positions---- the rug may be starting to go!!!!

parafactual avatar
celestepredicted YES at 92%

@JackJenkins one came back

BRIAN_101 avatar
brian

@parafactual I can join you guys. I mean, just buy and hold? It's free money if people used sense to resolve YES

parafactual avatar
celestepredicted YES at 92%
BRIAN_101 avatar
brian

@parafactual Okie dokie

JohnSmithb9be avatar
John Smithbought Ṁ55 of YES

@BRIAN_101 I COMMIT TO BUYING AND HOLDING YES. IT’S FREE REAL ESTATE.

dmayhem93 avatar
dmayhem93bought Ṁ100 of YES

Ez

elonsmusk avatar
elonsmuskbought Ṁ11 of NO
JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinspredicted YES at 74%

well all the people that traded no could pull last min so its a tough trade as they will not win either way so it depends on them !?

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastsold Ṁ145 of YES

@JackJenkins difficulty is finding imposters in people holding YES

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinssold Ṁ892 of YES

@Dreamingpast im just trading this as it comes

R2D2 avatar
R2D2bought Ṁ100 of YES
Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastsold Ṁ53 of NO

@R2D2 ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

@JackJenkins The market says "by" that time, not "at" that time - and it already has 27 positions, so it is already guaranteed yes, whether people pull out now or not.

Heliscone avatar
Helisconebought Ṁ30 of YES

@RiverBellamy Apart from causing mayhem it's not immediately profitable to pull out? Unless you want to cause a panic, in which case everyone might switch to NO instead of pulling out...

Messi avatar
Lionel Messisold Ṁ50 of YES

What became of that debate where creator betting in their own market was ethical or unethical ?

JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lachbought Ṁ95 of YES

@Messi the creator has no more info here than you

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinsbought Ṁ500 of YES

@JacekLach thanks, thats why i chose such a q

Messi avatar
Lionel Messi

@JacekLach I understand. I was asking in general where they discuss making it wrong. Obviously here it is fun

Messi avatar
Lionel Messibought Ṁ50 of YES

Ankara mesi

parafactual avatar
celestebought Ṁ50 of YES

@JackJenkins be careful, if p is too high people won't be incentivized enough to buy

JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lachpredicted NO at 74%

hm the limit order did not work the way i thought it would, i thought i was setting a long position with a take-profit clause, not two unrelated limit orders 🤣

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinsbought Ṁ15 of NO

getting close

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpast

@JackJenkins clarification - at ANY time, or at close?

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinspredicted NO at 95%

@Dreamingpast already calrified

JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lach

@Dreamingpast comment below says at close - but it should be put in the question, yeah:

"Will this. market close with more than 25 positions" would be a better phrasing

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpast

@JacekLach also comments like "getting close" make no sense as people can exit positions just before close

parafactual avatar
celestebought Ṁ100 of YES

@Dreamingpast why would anyone do that?

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastbought Ṁ10 of NO

@parafactual because a NO resolution would be very profitable at that probability

parafactual avatar
celestepredicted YES at 95%

@Dreamingpast wouldnt you have to have a position to profit

JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lachbought Ṁ112 of NO

@Dreamingpast you cannot profit from the no without a position tho

you could collude, i guess, if we could transfer gains

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 95%

@parafactual Exactly. I could sell, see the market crash down because the number goes down, buy YES at cheap, and rinse and repeat?

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinssold Ṁ77 of NO

@Dreamingpast well then do so

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastsold Ṁ2 of NO
Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpast

@JackJenkins rubbing their hands as that sweet new trader bonuses roll in

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinsbought Ṁ0 of YES
JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lach

cmon folks time to close some of those positions if you got in early 😂

JimHays avatar
Jim Haysbought Ṁ10 of YES

At close, or at any time?

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinsbought Ṁ15 of NO

@JimHays well it would be at close as thats the only way of confirming accurately

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

@JackJenkins That is not the only way to confirm it accurately. All trades are recdorded. And the market doesn't say "at" close, it says "by" that time. Given that it is already over 25 positions, resolving it "no", even if people close positions before close, would be dishonest. Show some integrity Jack. Your word is on the line.

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastbought Ṁ10 of NO

@RiverBellamy eh no. The creator has clarified many times that the market at close positions are what count

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 97%

@Dreamingpast yeah should have been in description but it's ok it's been communicated several times

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

@Dreamingpast reversing your position is not "clarifying". "Clarifying" is only possible if there was ambiguity in the description, and there was not. Further, people should never have to read comments to figure out what would cause a market to resolve "yes" or "no". So as far as I am concerned, Jack's word is staked to what he wrote in the description, not the comments, and if he resolves it "no" I will regard him as a liar and block him.

JohnSmithb9be avatar
John Smithpredicted YES at 95%

@RiverBellamy Might I interest you in this market?

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

@Dreamingpast If we go with your implied norm, that a market maker can change the meaning of a market in the comments, then I would have to read every comment on every market I have a position in just to know what I am betting on. That would be incredibly unpleasant, to the point of making this site basically unusable.

JacekLach avatar
Jacek Lachbought Ṁ0 of YES

@RiverBellamy yeah I'm kinda with you - the wording of the market suggests it should resolve yes if at any point there were 25 or more positions on the market; if it was "more than 25 positions at 6pm" then the 'at close' reading would be correct

and yes the fact that the 'at close' meaning was only in comments and not market description is the main issue

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 95%

@RiverBellamy go ahead because so far people have been betting on the understanding that the creator communicated. I personally asked them for clarification and got it. If that's irrelevant to you then that's a You thing

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

@Dreamingpast Just because you are betting on that understanding doesn't mean everyone is. If you bet 'no' and win, and someone else bet 'yes' without reading the comments (as they are entitled to and should not be disadvantaged for), then you have cheated them. That is on you, not them.

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 97%

@RiverBellamy I am not "betting on the understanding" - it is what the market maker told me and everyone

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 97%

@Dreamingpast and if description is important then @JackJenkins can add it to the description .

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

@Dreamingpast No, it is only what the market maker told people who chose to read the comments. The whole premise of a market is that you can read the question and the description, now what is being asked, make an assessment, make a bet based on that assessment, and contribute to our collective epistemics and understanding of the world, all withOUT having a conversation with anyone. If you want to converse with people on the internet, go join any of the random forums or discord servers out there. Markets are for communicating via bets without conversation.

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastbought Ṁ50 of NO

@RiverBellamy you can update based on clarification, as happens in MOST markets where people have doubts and ask the market maker -> clarification -> users update their position or exit if they misinterpreted what the market MAKER wanted

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

@Dreamingpast People's word is not based on what they wanted or intended when they said a thing it is based on what they actually said. What jack actually said was "by". It doesn't matter if he intended "at", his integrity is based on what he actually said. That is how integrity works everywhere else, why should Manifold be special?

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 97%

@RiverBellamy ok so on their word, it means at close, gg

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

They've already contradicted themselves, yes, which is not great. At this point, the best they can do is hold to the thing they said to the most people, "by", not "at".

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 97%

@Dreamingpast i and many others literally asked for clarification -> got the clarification of what ambiguity arises due to phrasing -> creator clearly resolves the ambiguity -> now what does it matter what the original description was? The maker @JackJenkins can add it to description now to help new buyers as old buyers already got clarification

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

@Dreamingpast Is it seriously your position that everyone who bets in a market is supposed to read the comments? Why would you want to condemn us to that hell?

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 97%

@RiverBellamy nope, it is not my position. that's why instead of going through comments (where it was ALREADY ANSWERED) i asked the creator who double confirmed it means AT CLOSE

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

@Dreamingpast There NEVER was ambiguity. Please stop framing it as "ambiguity" and "clarification". You can see very well that that is NOT what happened. Words have meanings. "By" means "at any time before". You clearly speak English. You know that.

JackJenkins avatar
Jack Jenkinssold Ṁ189 of YES

@RiverBellamy dont bet then... simple

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

@Dreamingpast Changing a market after it was created seems incredibly not ok to me. People have already bet, and are entitled to the profits of their bet, even if they never log in between betting and resolution.

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpast

@RiverBellamy This was an issue recently as Manifold Markets has a lot of markets where it is "By 2024" and it resolves on 31dec 2024. So the admins are clarifying by making changes to the title. Many people do not understand by and at the way you and I do

RiverBellamy avatar
River Bellamy

I'm just blocking Jack right now then. He has seen the arguments, and chosen to go back on his word. He is a liar.

Dreamingpast avatar
Dreamingpastpredicted NO at 97%

@RiverBellamy lmao they clarified themselves every time asked and you repeatedly ignore those