The "Barbie 90%+" market seemes to have sparked controversy due to its phrasing. On one side of the argument, betters argue that the resolution critiria had been met on a number of different occasions, but the market remained up. On the other side, OP considers the wording appropriate and had thus kept the market open.
I plan to judge the level of controversy of the outcome with a poll after the market closes (and remains closed for at least 24h, just in case it gets re-resolved). If you have better methods to gauge this, comment them below.
I'll post the poll on the 31th at ~17.00 UTC, and I will keep it open for 24h, then resolve the market based on the results (for this reason I am also moving the close date to that time). If there are 40% or more votes deeming it controversial, the market resolves YES (40% is fairly arbitrary). NO otherwise.
Here is the poll! https://strawpoll.com/mpnbod6qvg5
(I have already voted Neutral)
Results
With a 52% Controversial rating, the market resolves YES.
Inpsired by Sir Cryptomind's comment:
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ203 | |
| 2 | Ṁ160 | |
| 3 | Ṁ104 | |
| 4 | Ṁ92 | |
| 5 | Ṁ86 |
I don't really understand what is controversial about the market. Yeah the description is vague, but we already have a precedent in the google ai market that comments by the author supercede the description and even the question itself. And from reading the comments it was abundantly clear the author wanted to see where the rating actually landed before resolving. And as soon as the rating was was clear, he resolved correctly.
I feel like people are mad because they lost a lot gambling in a highly volatile market. I understand that feeling but that doesn't make the resolution controversial.
@dgga The more I read the comments on the linked market, the more I changed my position on this, and I now think the market was fairly well handled after all. Nevertheless, I voted Neutral on the poll, as I may be biased.
@NoyaV does the 40% resolution threshold include or exclude Neutral votes? If it includes them, any Neutral votes are effectively the same as Not Controversial, correct?
Side note: I tend to agree that the original market was at least handled okay-ish, and that the protest was over the top. But the question here is whether that result was controversial, not whether it should have been controversial - and it seems clear to me that it indeed was.
@ansgar I only added the Neutral option when creating the poll, as I figured my vote should not count and there may be people that only consider the resolution "barely controversial", and not enough to warrant the shitstorm that happened. This means that yes, Neutral votes would technically count towards NC, as what I was looking for was a strong enough sentiment that the market resolved controversially.
It could also be foreshadowing for a potential 'Will the resolution of "Will the resolution of "Will Barbie achieve 90%+ on RT" be controversial?' be contraversial?' market 😆
@NoyaV haha yes, I was thinking earlier that you missed the opportunity to have your description be "I'll aim to resolve after ~10 votes, or one day, unless it's really close and more votes are still coming in."
@DavidSpies It wouldn't be the first time there was some controversy over a "Will market X be controversial?" market.
Poll badged manifold persons.
I would say it already is controversial since the description was never updated to state anything in regards to the n<15 reviews and no clarification (yet) if the market is going until market close. And 1 time it should've been resolved YES based on the description of the 350 reviews.
From experience this market would resolve based like this:
If the market in question is resolved before market close and than reversed than it is "controversial" and be YES.
If the market is resolved after market close than it would be NO.
Probably more that could be elaborated on like the creator using comments instead of description to resolve the market.
Just my opinion.
Poll badged manifold persons.
You mean, to run a poll where only trustworth-ish accounts (or just with a badge) can vote?
Also, I sort of agree that, if the market were to get resolved, then after something like 24h gets re-resolved, then that would constitute as controversial, or at least moderately so.
@SirCryptomind I'm just catching up here. I fully thought it closed at 350... was it in the description that if more reviews are coming in he will keep open? Also does that supercede the 30 day criteria aswell?
love me a good controversial market....
Description: I'll aim to resolve after ~350 reviews, or 30 days, unless it's really close and more reviews are still coming in.
So we were at 90% at 350 reviews. : Resolving Yes ( I was a NO Holder)
We were at 90% on a day we were under 15 reviews (July 25th= 8 Reviews) : Resolving Yes (I was a NO Holder)
We were at 90% at end of 07/28 with under 15 reviews (July 28th=10 reviews) ; Resolving Yes (I was a YES Holder)
But it is still open....that is 3 times it should've closed and been resolved YES
The creator never updated the description to clarify the comments.
Comments should not supersede the description unless the description is updated to reflect the date/time the description is updated to reflect a clarification made in the comments.
Reviews by day:
Tu July 18th: 78
We July 19th: 87
Th July 20th: 45
Fr July 21st: 68
Sa July 22nd: 18
Su July 23rd: 11
Mo July 24th: 29
Tu July 25th: 8
We July 26th: 16
Th July 27th: 18
Fr July 28th: 10
Sa July 29th: 8* Ongoing
@SirCryptomind Great recap, that saves me from catching up.
So if he resolves NO it will be controversial on this alone. I don't like how loose some are with their resolutions.
@SirCryptomind “Comments should not supersede the description unless the description is updated to reflect the date/time the description is updated to reflect a clarification made in the comments.”
Manifold’s policy is that comments supersede the description as long as they clarify what the market creator perceives to be an ambiguity in good faith, even if the comments blatantly contradict the description. James clarified that here: https://manifold.markets/ElmerFudd/will-americans-celebrate-independen#ORMFrJ1DdASh9cF7vEhx
