https://www.glowfic.com/posts/7426
Resolves YES if >=50 new substantive replies after https://www.glowfic.com/replies/2078154#reply-2078154 (last post as of market creation). Might still resolve YES if less than that - see below.
I will post a large NO limit as a combination of prediction, decaying bounty, and emotional hedging.
"Substantive" will be a good-faith assessment; blank beat replies, one-word replies, and fragments will not generally count; gigantic complex replies will count double. As has been hashed out in the comments, tags consisting only of a single medium-sized sentence will count for half a reply; we may infer that a reasonable lower bound to a full tag is two full meaningful sentences.
Be warned: this is specifically about the original thread and not the attempted reboot.
1,000๐ Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | แน3,686 | |
| 2 | แน412 | |
| 3 | แน302 | |
| 4 | แน198 | |
| 5 | แน178 |
People are also trading
I would call the most recent batch of tags ~23 tags' worth of tag. I can provide a more detailed breakdown of what I counted as half-a-tag or not-enough-of-a-tag or double-tag if anyone really really wants; if there's one more decent batch of tags before July 1st, that'll suffice to resolve this market YES, barring complaints.
Some examples: I counted this as a not-a-tag; I counted this and the one following it as half-a-tags; I counted this, this, and this as full-tags, and this as a double-tag.
@Lorxus I'm mildly uncomfortable with your conjunction of "resolving an unanticipated edge case in the No direction" plus "buying a bunch of No shares while doing so", for ~incentive reasons. (When market-creators are known to trade on their own markets and to resolve ambiguities in the directions that favor their trades, this tends to reduce incentive for people other than the market-creators to trade on those markets.) No more deeply-principled objection, though.
(And, as cases of market-creator-trading-on-ambiguity-resolution go, this one seems less bad than most others, since it is relatively purely about an unanticipated-edge-case as opposed to a more ~inherent-to-the-market ambiguity of the sort where there'd be continuously-ongoing worry about bias in the core resolution criteria. So I'm not more-than-mildly uncomfortable with it.)
@Tulip And I'd never trade on my own market and then make an announcement of that type if it weren't so unusually clear-cut. "Mildly uncomfortable" is good enough!
@Tulip (and obviously if it should turn out that they really do return to the OG prodigal sorceress, well. guess I made a bad bet based on flawed reasoning and will cheerfully take the L!)
@Tulip I remain perfectly happy to take a well-deserved L if there's another bunch of tags in the next few weeks.