Are you going to resolve this?

@MattP I don't think it needs to be as emphasized in the UI, but having the incentive seems good to me. Perhaps it would be more aligned if being on streak offered a free market creation every so often?

@Austin Yeah, (subjectively) I think site performance has remained about the same on Android/Chrome, if slightly degraded. It definitely doesn't feel like the mobile experience is all that prioritized - though to be clear the baseline is not bad (the site works ok on mobile, just can be slightly laggy at times).

Hmm… the optics are 100% whining about “Z” and “white supremacy” but if there’s a completely different set of reasons related to an entirely different platform and not just a bunch of ❄️‘s using this as a pretext then perhaps it was a horribly communicated but plausible call.

@Gigacasting I'm glad you liked loans!

I'm generally with you on being very anti-censorship. The reason we finally banned E Harding (and it's a partial ban) was that he was actually posting a bunch of spam, both on market comments, and on Discord, and to people's DMs. To be frank, he's clearly mentally ill and his spam was not helping our site.

We don't yet have a way for users to block him so this was a step that we had to take.

Thanks for weighing in with your concern though!

also loans were the best feature and it’s not even close (counterbalanced by the fact the site won’t even load for a certain anonymous trading bot anymore)

Personally I would have muted him, but he’s done fewer bannable things than one specific person who’s launched personal attacks and mis-resolved multiple markets.

Ultimately is the site a broad-based forecasting platform or “a religious recruitment tool”; do you want ~50 EAs or ~100k people?

A bit of a red flag that your priorities are not growth or widespread accessibility, and are a decade ahead of every platform in its “censorship” life cycle.

What basis is there for being angry he likes a war his country is waging, or being more than amused at his weird posture posting—the idea of a “forecasting” platform where you’ve outright imposed some inchoate morality on your users will not scale.

The initial turn-off of the site to anyone outside a certain bubble was how “niche” it seemed and unless he did something seriously bannable this was probably the first step toward not scaling toward a broader community.

Banned user

[J] From 89 to 100 DAU this month, on Amplitude.

[S] Did reach an all time high of 200 DAU by our other stats.

I think with Challenge Bets, we were thinking "this would be good for Manifold if people used this virally" and less "this is a thing people want".

For example, how many users did we talk to before introducing this?

[A] It did kind of work. Succeeded in getting traction and we are learning from it.

[S] Curation important. Doesn't use any non-binary markets.

[D] Not just getting these users to sign up on main Manifold site.
Can we copy what else was working on these sites: curated high quality markets, significant leaderboards with prizes. We should learn from the experiment.

[A] Want to be learning things, but working with partners is slower because of back and forth. Can we in-house this functionality to learn faster?

[S] Asymptotically approaching completion. Takes a lot of coordination with Phil & David & rest of team.

re Fede: I think going into specific niches that provide values for those specific niches is really important - we don't even need to necessary replicate for a lot of niches yet, we need to find like, 2-3

[F] Cover more niches to provide value.

@JamesGrugett [A] we should study how eve online and mmorpgs work to learn what they use

[S] Focusing on utility now might not work. Focusing on fun first will allow us to scale and then become more useful.

[J] Help people find markets they are interested. Better home page. Updates on markets we're invested in.

[F] Talk to users to understand what they want.

[c] Focusing on one metric like D1 is not that good.

[S] NPS would be good to track.

[mqp] Brier score of Manifold.

[A] Manifold as fun thing vs. useful thing. Not always aligned.

[J] Either and both work. Vision was to become more useful at scale.

Broadly, I think the two main possible forms of value are:
"Providing a fun experience/game"
"Help with decisionmaking"
And we need to push hard on one of these

Another lens or kind of value is "how much fun are users having", if this is what the "value" is we need to hone down on that more "making Manifold more fun"

[A] no quantitative regression - after pushing these changes what is our latency

Mostly: one vision behind Prediction Markets is that they help people make better decisions about the world. But we haven't focused on this as much; we don't have even a clear definition of who our users are, or which problems they face that we're fixing

[A] Site slowness and crashes are easy to overlook, but make a big difference to users.

[A] could look more into crashalytics, monitoring