MANIFOLD
If Manifold forces balances to be used to increase the liquidity of all competitive markets, is that a good thing?
12
Never closes
Yes
No
Depends
See results

This would incentivize users to spend more of their free mana betting in competitive markets—likely favoring longer-term markets to reduce risk. That’s a positive outcome, as it helps reduce favourability towards short-cycle and improves overall market accuracy. It would also gradually clean up inactive legacy accounts by putting idle balances to use. And if users still choose to hold large amounts of mana, overall liquidity increases anyway—which is also a good thing.

Market context
Get
Ṁ1,000
to start trading!
Sort by:

It's a terrible idea. Forced engagement is never going to be a good thing. Having to constantly look around for markets to put your mana in, instead of investing your mana how and when you naturally want to, would make Manifold feel like a chore rather than a fun game. A lot of casual users would just quit instead of jumping through that hoop, so it would probably decrease user activity and market liquidity rather than increasing it.

A centralized, insured deposit that loans mana to other users would allow users with inactive balances to put it to work without being redistributive. But I think my preferred approach would be opt-in. Inactive accounts have their balances eroded by inflation.

© Manifold Markets, Inc.TermsPrivacy