Who comes up with the tweets?
This market resolves if at any time I become 95% confident of all person who generate the ideas for the account.
If I become 95% confident and the person or people are not included as answers I will add them, leave the market for as long as I feel is funny and then resolve it
If I become 95% confident of one person but don’t know they are the only one then Ill wait until the market closes then resolve.
The resolution is therefore any of the people whose ideas get posted roughly weekly. Before the close date it must be exactly all of them. So if it is Anna and Sarbjit the answers are “Anna" and "Sarbjit".
I'm not gonna resolve to "we can't find the second person" Most of the money there is mine, but if you bet I'll happily refund you. Sorry
The market cannot resolve negatively.
I may bet on this market, though at starting I have no strong guesses.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,142 | |
| 2 | Ṁ602 | |
| 3 | Ṁ213 | |
| 4 | Ṁ187 | |
| 5 | Ṁ149 |
@ms thanks haha, like i'd buy that! (yeah I just felt this site had the potential to get a bit addictive so wanted to get rid of all my fake money in a silly way :D)
So currently this market is broken because despite us knowing it's at least 2 people, frances is at 67%. I guess that's because I implied that the frances voters would get 100% of the money if I only found out 1 person.
Should I make a new, properly formulated market or change this one?
@NathanpmYoung I'm pretty strongly against changing this market. I think creating a new market gives almost all of the benefits without screwing over a bunch of people who traded on this market for the past 4 months.
@NathanpmYoung I don't follow - why not resolve this one such that frances voters get 100% if you only found 1 person?
I was given three guesses
Here are a bunch of conditional markets https://manifold.markets/group/qualy-the-lightbulb (please add more)
@finnhambly I mean that you can make seperate markets for each individual if you want to. You're right that tha'ts better.
@NathanpmYoung oh, got you! I'm not sure I'm actually that invested hahaha
Plus, I think there is still a strong enough incentive to bet on others here (since they're all such low percentages) so you should get a good idea of who it is if someone has the info :)
I'm starting to wonder if 'sentient lightbulb' is the right answer after all...
@TobiasHaeberli The resolution criteria say:
if it is Anna and Sarbjit the answers are “Anna" and "Sarbjit".
and combination answers will not resolve positively
@JeroenWillems I'm confused. Why did this tweet make people bet on Julian Hazell and Frances Lorenz separately but not on them being Qualy together? Am I missing something about how this will be resolved?