The dispute is over whether Haley saying she will vote for Trump counts as an endorsement.
This market resolves to the same thing as that market, either YES, NO, or 50-50.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,144 | |
| 2 | Ṁ90 | |
| 3 | Ṁ67 | |
| 4 | Ṁ64 | |
| 5 | Ṁ58 |
On May 22, Nikki Haley stated “I will be voting for Trump.” Haley stating that she will vote for Donald Trump suffices as an endorsement of him. Moreover, she explicitly stated this without any ambiguity. Thus, her statement counts as an explicit endorsement, and this market should resolve to “Yes.”
GG. Well not formally, but it will resolve to Yes.
@aenews guess my new thing is predicting Polymarket decisions I'm 2:2 in recent days 😂
this was a wild ride what a close call
@shankypanky Yeah absolutely insane. First time in history they've clarified during an ongoing dispute voting or reveal period.
@aenews I assume they're waiting to allow all voters to reveal their tokens even though the decision was made? is that because they all have 24hr to reveal after voting so they're giving them a chance to do that?
Alright sits down
So this first request never was the resolving vote, as only the second dispute (to be voted on the next cycle which starts today) would have that power. So this vote itself is effectively made into a poll that informs voters how to vote in subsequent rounds.
On top of that, because this vote was so close, it won't meet quorum requirements for either side. So it will roll and go to a re-vote. So today, once reveal period ends and commit period starts again, we'll see the second dispute being voted on (which has power to resolve) + Rolled Vote #1 for the current dispute.
And yeah commit periods and reveal periods last 24 hours from 0 UTC to 0 UTC.
@aenews yes, I do. and to me it's painfully simple. American culture often leans too hard on semantics as a diversion - is the argument that she's not endorsing him because she didn't use the term "endorsement"?
her statement was really clear, not only saying she's voting for Trump but even saying "Trump would be smart to reach out to the millions of people" who voted for her to collect their votes, and that "I genuinely hope he does that." she's voting for him, saying what his campaign would be wise to do for their success, and obviously suggesting to her supporters that they should turn their votes to him.
A political endorsement is a public declaration of one's personal or group's support of a candidate for elected office.
buying no on Poly isn't at all based on reality but personal preference/affiliation imo - these people can't cope their way around the facts. she didn't have to say anything (I do know it's tradition and she'd probably continue to get the question about who she will vote for) but chose to make a very public statement that she's directing her one vote to him, and when public figures declare their voting choice it's always because they know they have influence on at least a portion of the population who would be convinced to vote the same way.
personally I think it's insane that the two-party system is basically a bunch of children bullying each other then turning sycophantic once they're not in competition anymore. Trump made statements the other day that he can see Haley "on my team in some form" as if he didn't say deplorable things about her and her family for months. she's out there endorsing him despite saying he's chaotic and would be terrible for the country. burn it all down and start over, I say, but here we are.
afaict these are the arguments for No? I think people are leaning way too hard on terminology - endorsement can be explicit (for reasons I commented above) without using the word. I also have no idea what Haley's statements two months ago have to do with anything lol
eta: I guess this explains some of the logic on the No side? (I still disagree that it should be no)
@shankypanky Basically this has gone to a dispute on the UMA Oracle. Voting has nearly concluded, so waiting on results. The argument from Team N is that this might possibly be considered an endorsement, but it definitely is not an "explicit" endorsement which requires a higher bar. They also say that there is not a consensus that agree on whether or not it was an endorsement.
I personally have argued Yes, and have been the largest Y shareholder for most of the dispute (not anymore tho as I sold most of my shares).
Are you on Discord, stefanie?
@aenews yeah I got that, but I still consider it pretty explicit for all of the same reasons, personally. I'm keep an eye on the market to see what the resolution is - I feel mostly comfortable staying with my Yes position (so far lol)
since the question is about before June I assume No means the market stays open until the end of the month?
yes, I'm on Discord
@shankypanky Yeah that's right. The options that were voted on were Yes or Too Early (Stays Open).
I'm @aenews on Discord. Not sure if you've ever joined the UMA server, but you should consider posting for future disputes (could post for this as well, but would purely be for discussion since voting is 95% complete). Your kind of well-reasoned logical takes would be a great thing to see more of, whether or not we happen to agree in the future.
@aenews ah nice tip - thanks! I'll go look for it as I'd be happy to find a place to see and participate in discourse from time to time.
I'm in the Poly server but I don't look at it much. feels a bit feral lol
nvm found it ✌️
@shankypanky Ah, awesome. For reference, general discussion is in the #voting-discussion channel. And the #evidence-rationale channel has threads for each dispute where each person is allowed one post. These posts are also shown on the voting portal itself (all UMA voters will see them), so they directly affect the result.
@aenews oh solid - thanks for that. I was in voting-discussion seeing the comments back and forth. the community really makes a lot of personal jabs whenever the opportunity arises 😂 same as the Poly server ( s̶e̶e̶m̶i̶n̶g̶l̶y̶ t̶o̶ a̶ l̶e̶s̶s̶e̶r̶ d̶e̶g̶r̶e̶e̶) <- spoke too soon
I won't bother with this one but I'll see how it feels to contribute in the future if I might have something meaningful to add. I'm @shankypanky_ over there (someone got in before me when discord moved away from #1234 discriminators so alas, I'm stuck with an underscore)
@shankypanky It's to a lesser degree on UMA as the mods will remove anything too bad (Poly server has less moderation). You uhh prolly walked in a bad time 😆 If you ever feel a comment is over the line, can tag the community person Mide.
