I will resolve this YES if, after the AI letter market resolves, someone who bet on the market claims that they had inside knowledge meeting the following criteria:

• It matches what actually happened (e.g., if they claim they had inside knowledge that a certain Turing Award winner would sign the letter, that awardee's signature must actually be on the letter).

• Their bets back up their claim to inside knowledge (i.e., they bet on the correct position and made large/very confident bets). Any user who holds more than 10,000 shares of the correct position (except bots) would count for this, and others would be considered on a case-by-case basis, depending on whether I think their bets are indicative of sufficiently high confidence to result from inside info.

• They can produce convincing evidence, beyond just their bets, that they had knowledge of how the market would resolve that wasn't available to the public. This only counts if the market resolves in a reasonable way, not if their inside knowledge was, "I knew the creator was going to resolve it in a ridiculous way".

If this market resolves YES, but I find out that the claim was fabricated (and there is no other credible claim), I will ask admins to re-resolve it to NO. If no evidence comes out by the close date, I will resolve it NO, but I may ask for a re-resolution if evidence for YES is produced afterward (I would have a higher standard for how convincing this evidence has to be, though).

The market in question: https://manifold.markets/quinesweeper/will-there-be-another-wellrecognize