Holy😇 fucking🍆 shit💩! What type of market are there too many of?
32
378
2.8k
May 16
21%
Stock close higher (not stonks)
18%
Crypto
8%
Markets without resolution criteria and/or descriptions
8%
Jimmy Carter
5%
Poorly defined subjective markets
4%
Spam
3%
Whalebait
3%
Meme
3%
Stonk
3%
Intentionally misleading markets
3%Other
2%
Pivot-related topics
2%
Personal opinion
2%
Resolves-to-poll markets (until Manifold improves polls with options/functionality)
2.0%
Near-duplicate markets
2.0%
Sports
1.9%
What will happen/prop bet markets
1.8%
lots of similar binary markets that could all be put in one big MC market
1.8%
Møøse markets
1.7%
Politics

(Pictured: @strutheo making @chrisjbillington's words 90% more eloquent)

What type of market are you tired of seeing? Submit topics that you think are over-saturated on Manifold (or under-saturated). In the end, I will create a poll asking whether there are too many, too few, or just the right amount of each type of market. This market resolves to whichever type has the largest net proportion of people saying it's over-saturated (i.e., the largest percentage of people saying there are too many minus the percent saying there are not enough).

Get Ṁ600 play money
Sort by:
reposted

Holy fucking shit! This market is back online without any application errors, and the poll is ready: https://forms.gle/surogpwKSEPqpSdF9

@PlasmaBallin It may be advisable to vote "just the right amount" on options if you don't know what they are, to prevent an option from winning with only a few votes on it just because no one has any idea what it is. Besides, if you don't even know what an option is, then presumably there are not too many of them.

Stock close higher (not stonks)

What does this mean?

@PlasmaBallin These sorts of markets ("close higher"):

https://manifold.markets/browse/for-you?q=close+higher

not to be confused with these sorts of markets ("stonks"):

https://manifold.markets/browse/for-you?ct=STONK

@chrisjbillington Oh, I see. Yeah, I guess that should have been obvious

Can someone explain how to interpret the graph of the 'Stock close higher (not stonks)' %?

I seem to be stuck in simple 3 dimensional thinking and I think I might need 4 dimensional thinking to understand

@Nat It's quite simple, really. Someone traveled back in time about 1.5 hours while trading on the market and created a new timeline where the probability was slightly higher.

Markets without resolution criteria and/or descriptions

You are my hero. Would buy to 100, but I bet the poll voters won't even read the criteria so they might accidentally vote for a wrong option.

Markets without resolution criteria and/or descriptions

🔥 Hot take🔥: at least half the time the title already makes the resolution criteria clear enough without needing it elaborated in the description

disagree.

bought Ṁ1 Jimmy Carter YES

@shankypanky agree to disagree, check and mate 😎

not really sure how that counts as a check or a mate lol

@shankypanky Peter Griffin here to explain the joke: I meant it sarcastically to poke fun at my own lack of motivation to actually find examples to prove my point by prematurely claiming debate victory in overly condescending chess rhetoric

@shankypanky are there any of my markets (besides the ASI moon mining one, I intend to improve that one) that don't have elaborated criteria in the description that you feel need it?

@TheAllMemeingEye haven't had a chance to look but I will. I don't believe for a moment that "my markets are fine so this is a non-issue overall" is a good or valid argument though, personally. the addition wasn't about you personally.

@TheAllMemeingEye but if you're asking unrelated to the answer and just doing a crowdsource on whether any markets could be improved then that's different obvs. :)

bought Ṁ1 Near-duplicate markets YES

@shankypanky yeah sorry I didn't mean it as a proof, just I realised I often do this so wanted to check if it was causing problems lol

sold Ṁ10 Markets without reso... NO

@shankypanky would you agree that in most cases if the title has ambiguity one can ask for clarifications in the comments, which significantly reduces the problem?

@TheAllMemeingEye Market creators aren't obligated to respond. Gigacasting didn't, when he was active, and he was one of the biggest market creators at the time.

@ShadowyZephyr ah ok, I think I must've joined after he left then

Pivot-related topics
bought Ṁ100 Pivot-related topics NO

Keep in mind that the poll won't be happening until May 15, and the pivot will probably have already happened by then. I was thinking of adding this one but didn't for that very reason.

@PlasmaBallin I'm sure there are a million more markets related to the pivot itself after the announcement - not compulsory to only speculate on the unknown for a topic to be entirely too present (and this option still counts even after the fact)

Pivot-related topics
bought Ṁ50 Pivot-related topics NO

🌶

there are not enough

Resolves-to-poll markets (until Manifold improves polls with options/functionality)

This one is a bit ironic given this market

@JamesF 🙃

it isn't ironic I really want poll functionality and the suggestion box isn't getting enough attention

EXPAND THE POLL OPTIONS!

@shankypanky

Well I can't seem to edit comments but basically it's not ironic at all - the poll suggestions aren't getting enough attention

EXPAND THE POLL OPTIONS!

@JamesF I actually made the meta-markets option as an intentional attempt to be ironic.

oh apologies for the duplicate above - my missing edits earlier seem to have shown back up