I am hereby stating that I created answers in this market to discredit all the other ones (not the ones that were also jokes). The point is to make fun of people who (pretend to) give greater-than-epsilon probability to this BS.

Some of my psyop answers were caught and N/A'd (Jews control at least one nation's government, upside-down Australia isn't real). But others were left up, including this one.

@JamesF or @mods, please resolve this as YES.

If my options alone are not enough to resolve, just look at the market as a whole. Like, after the very first usage which was unfortunately serious, Rationalussy has always been a meme, and so is the corresponding answer here.

Some people made serious options about the Hellenistic era, or the Sentinelese people, and others ran away with them in meme options.

It's time to accept it: some answers here are, and have always been, psyops to discredit all the very serious and scholarly theories espoused by other answers.

@BrunoParga I am not sure your individual actions count as a “psyop” though

@mariopasquato well, we have to see what the market creator thinks. I am positive it counts.

@BrunoParga fair enough, but by this metric wearing a hat to hide your bald head on a tinder pic is a psyop. A very limited one

@mariopasquato A very grave one

@Lilemont it’s called hatfishing

@mariopasquato I love that it has come to asking precisely this question precisely on this market, but...

What would it take to convince you?

@mariopasquato I'd also still love to hear from @JamesF.

@BrunoParga I would define a psyop as an organized effort by an entity that can mobilize significant resources. Where I set the bar is immaterial because OP will certainly set it somewhere else

@mariopasquato bet you they won't

@Vesperstelo Could you be more specific? "Intersex" is a quite vague term which, today or in the next 75 years, could easily be moved around to apply to most female boxers.

@marvingardens I can't believe I'm saying this in the batshit conspiracy theory market, but

to be fair, it seems reasonable to assume this resolves based on the definition at the time of question creation.

I mean, it's not like this market exists for anything but personal signaling anyway.

@BrunoParga Today, intersex is quite a vague term.

@marvingardens the definition of "having mismatched or ambiguous karyotype, internal and external reproductive organs and/or assignment at birth" seems sufficient for the market.

do you have some kind of authority over this market

if Khelif is shown to have traits which don't match that definition of intersex and do match other definitions of intersex, what do you think is going to happen here? will everyone be like "ah well Bruno said this once earlier in the comments so that's the real criterion"?

@Snarflak @JamesF We will need to draw a line on the spectrum between 'let it happen' & 'failed to stop it'. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_intelligence_before_the_attacks

@MalachiteEagle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nathan_Gill

the p320 stuff is literally proven right now...

@OKanon Hardly. The Air Force GSC story turned out to be a lie.

@GG there are youtube videos of people replicating a discharge without trigger pull

@dgga

Wyoming Gun Project went viral last year for using a screw to push a P320 trigger backwards, through the pre-travel and into the wall, stopping less than 1mm before the trigger broke. He then pushed the slide down causing the striker to drop, which would have ignited a round were it in the chamber.
2 problems with this test:

• It's not uncommanded: A competent operator keeps their finger off the trigger. If a foreign object is already pulling your trigger 95% of the way back, the safety has already been bypassed by the user/environment.

• More fundamentally, this failure is not unique. JaredAF replicates it on a Glock, and explains why any striker-fired gun with standard slide-to-frame play will fail this test if you hold the trigger at less than a millimeter before its breaking point.
  Mega-markets only give you a short space to describe your option, requiring readers to fill in the blanks. Every gun could conceivably fire if struck by lightning or put in an oven. The controversy is whether the P320 has a unique vulnerability, making it fundamentally less safe than trusted platforms like the Glock and the M&P. The WGP video proves the opposite: that under extreme, staged manipulation, the P320 behaves exactly like its competitors.

@PhilosophyBear what's your reasoning for it being so low given that he's read the report and the report repeatedly mentions him taking over?

https://manifold.markets/JamesF/what-conspiracy-theories-will-be-pr#ff0d1ghdgk5

@BrunoParga They are descended from Vulgar Latin.

@Chumchulum magnum si verum.