🏅 Top traders

Resolved to 50% since the atomic number of the element Tin is 50, and there doesn’t seem to be any research ongoing to determine if Tin has potentially more protons than discovered before, so this resolution is unlikely to change by Feb 1st!

@traders Would anyone object to resolving this early? I lost about 5% interest in this question.

@Mochi For this question, I support the general Manifold philosophy that question creators should have broad authority to do as they wish with their questions. This seems roughly consistent with the intent of the question.

(As a significant NO holder, I'm not speaking in my capacity as moderator here.)

@Mochi I’ve lost about the same amount of interest. I have no objection to an early resolution.

This market being made private is a huge blow for the field of alchemy.

Please remove all of the unrelated tags.

love this market idea

Clear YES. Atomic number equals 50

I'm missing something. Why would somebody bet this is going to change? And why is those tagged as Sports?

@ErwinRossen In case tin gets some more protons

@ErwinRossen They're exploiting loopholes in the financial system of the website to gain free mana.

I will just note that officially, exploiting loopholes is against the community guidelines. You never know, maybe everyone will get punished.

@ErwinRossen I made a market about this to see if people think it will be a big deal:

/Eliza/will-users-breaking-the-community-g

@ErwinRossen are you not 5% interested in this question?

@Eliza Wait what? Exploiting loopholes is punishable?

So.... making a question every week that resolves 'yes' and buying all the shares in the liquidity pool, just to get the free 100m from making a free question, is not supposed to happen? Because I was actually thinking about doing that...

@DannyqnOht That could be against the spirit of the community guidelines depending on the state of mind you are in when you do it 🤣

A core element of the site is we are supposed to act with honor and be excellent citizens!

@DannyqnOht I would honestly object more strongly to that than to this question.

I agree with objecting to question-creation hacking more than objecting to interest rates, both morally and in terms of "what do we want site members doing".

I agree with being good citizens individually.

But I disagree with making a system rely on participants in the system agreeing with you on the definition of good behavior :P

I know some people have the attitude "you should exploit loopholes loudly because they should be patched. If you don't, then someone else is going to exploit them quietly, and getting them patched is a public good." I don't necessarily want to forbid that kind of "citizenship"...

(Aside: this isn't that big a deal. I think the 100 weekly mana is small, the daily 25 from prediction streaks is bigger, and it's annoying to get the 100 weekly mana so it's not a huge risk in the system right now. So I'm not being too loud about it. But it... does seem like the kinda thing that aught to also be caught by the same kind of reasoning that we're using to decide on the interest rates question. In general - if someone tries to game the system, are they doing things we want or things we don't?)

Oh. I tested & confirmed that currently, it's far easier to just make a poll for 10M to get the 100M bonus. Thanks Eliza for your comment! Nevermind all the stuff above (as long as you agree that I'm not gaming the system by making polls like this)

Not sure why I'm at -8 profit?

@MarySmith someone may have moved the price slightly from 50%

@MarySmith new report from CERN this morning

@BrendanFinan 😨