
In a year, will I believe that scandal markets on powerful individuals are a beneficial way of penalising bad community behaviour and net good overall?
39
2.8kṀ4682resolved Nov 29
Resolved as
37%1H
6H
1D
1W
1M
ALL
Feel free to convince me and try and make money.
State of the discussion:
Powerful people should be held to account (95%)
There should be a way to profit (even to charity) for people coordinating information (80%)
Markets on this have the right incentives (80%)
It's easy to damage reputations by quoting the markets regardless of what they say
They cause stress to those they are about
Jackson argues that scandal markets might harm the reputations of prediction markets in general
The early assassination markets were by the US Government, these are by a private company.
This question is managed and resolved by Manifold.
Get
1,000 to start trading!
🏅 Top traders
# | Name | Total profit |
---|---|---|
1 | Ṁ167 | |
2 | Ṁ131 | |
3 | Ṁ67 | |
4 | Ṁ60 | |
5 | Ṁ25 |
People are also trading
Related questions
Will there be a fraud/criminal scandal that harms EA reputation as much as the FTX crash harmed EA reputation, before 2030?
13% chance
Will I give a shit about any EA scandal throughout the next five years?
19% chance
Will there be another EA reputational crisis before 2028?
77% chance
Will a sex scandal negatively affect the reputation of AI xrisk in the next five years?
71% chance