Clearly my fault for not understanding how this worked. It was not my intention to be so ambiguous. And even if the market had stayed within the original intent, I think the chance of getting clear resolution is dropping. I don’t have faith in this administration to provide accurate and non-politicized information. Therefore I have resolved it as N/A. Apologies to those that wasted time or resources here.

@JasonSchissel It's probably inevitable that this will happen from time to time on a user generated content platform. I appreciate that you took responsibility.

Here's to better markets in the future! 🍻

@mods please N/A the market or make some kind of statement.

@MRME they should resolve the market properly.

If people want to bed that the assassin of CK was not the person who killed CK, or isn't human, then they should lose that bet surly.

If they NA it, they are just encouraging the behaviour

@mxrgb Try betting both those things up to 99% and report back to us what happens.

There are several options that should resolve to YES, but the linked/dependent MC market format fixes total probability at 100%, both before and after resolution. There is no way to resolve the market properly.

Let's say that in the end we have 5 correct answers. The only way to resolve remotely properly would be to resolve each of them to 20% – everyone who bet one of these options to above 20% would lose mana, though. Does not seem fair/appropriate to me.

@4fa

I'm new to this platform, I didn't realise these arnt independent questions

This is so stupid

Currently 99% credence that @Waffloid did it. Linked MC markets are wild.

@4fa Wisdom of the crowds...

@121 Resolve YES

@Chumchulum @mods please resolve YES, as Jason Schissel was last online 3 days ago and there is no argument that can be made for an assassin not to be a killer.

@Chumchulum It is dependendt. You have to resolve all at once. Can't do piecemeal.

@Chumchulum Resolving that one (or any other option) to YES would have auto-resolved all others to NO, btw, in case that helps you understand the market format.

Maybe only allow market creator to add options to dependent markets going forward. Can always suggest in comments

@JussiVilleHeiskanen are you suggesting it for this market, or all such markets going forward? That would help kill the platform.

@Chumchulum yep. Not workable I guess. Just remove overlapping options

@JussiVilleHeiskanen Rather the traders should invest in overlapping options to hedge their bets.

@JussiVilleHeiskanen That's already an option when creating a market and can be toggled after creation, but maybe it would help if it was the default setting.

why isn't this a set but rather a multiple choice?

I think there should be precedence to earlier added answers especially when there’s overlap.

Since the market was fine when it was like 4 options

https://manifold.markets/Robincvgr/will-if-we-discover-the-charlie-kir

I think this should n/a

This market is so stupid.

@realDonaldTrump Yeah, now it is. Started out okay.

@Valchap How is this only 27%?

@ac80 the market sums to 100%, it’ll probably be N/A’ed

@bens oh I didn't notice lol