Update 2025-16-01 (PST): • Day One is defined as 24 hours after being sworn in as President. (AI summary of creator comment)
Update 2025-16-01 (PST): - If an action occurs prior to Trump taking office that makes it impossible to resolve yes, the market will resolve as N/A. (AI summary of creator comment)
Update 2025-28-01 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): - Resolution after one week: If no evidence of an action that will likely not be reported such as "eating a hamburger" or "pooping his pants" is provided within one week after being sworn in, the market will resolve as No.
Evidence Submission: If you have evidence of such actions, please post it in the comments.
Update 2025-01-28 (PST): - Re-resolution: The market will not be re-resolved after the initial one-week resolution. This allows participants to profit from the uncertainty. (AI summary of creator comment)
Update 2025-01-29 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Resolution Clarification:
A significant gaffe is defined as a "signal" that is magnificent enough to warrant media notation.
This definition was chosen to minimize subjectivity by relying on media coverage.
Alternative definitions, such as "caused media outrage," were considered but not adopted.
Update 2025-01-31 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): Clarification on j6 Pardon Resolution
The j6 pardon is interpreted to cover individuals who are convicted as well as those facing charges or ongoing prosecutions.
If evidence shows that an individual was still in trial at the time of Trump's Day 1 action, the market should resolve as YES.
1,000@typeofemale The executive order restricting gender-affirming care for individuals under 19 was signed on January 28, 2025
@Marnix at the very least, this one can resolve NO. In his first 24 hours, he pardoned the January 6th protestors en masse, carving out commutations (not pardons) for 14 specific people as part of a group pardon. He pardoned one named person (Ross Ulbricht).
@Predictor Lots of resolutions are tied to the flury of executive orders that he signed. It takes time to get some level of consensus reporting on the effects of what was enacted.
@Marnix sorry if this was discussed but the j6 order names 14 individuals in particular and then all other j6ers. Shouldn't that count?
@AndrewMcKnight I think the spirit of the question is naming individuals at all. But to get annoyingly technical, the group mentioned is all j6ers other than these 14.
@AndrewMcKnight The 14 people mentioned were explicitly NOT pardoned - they had their sentences commuted.
@AndrewG
From what I can tell his j6 pardon covered not only those who had been convicted but also those who were still facing charges or ongoing prosecutions. Therefore this should resolve YES if there was someone still in trial, unless I am misinterpreting the question.
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/were-there-any-j6-members-stil-tk.N9rvdTIa.T8I.M_DN.Q
^ This search/sources claim there were many such cases.
@Quillist thanks, that's a decent amount of free mana, honestly kinda shocked it hadn't already been traded up
Wait, other users (e.g. @AndrewHebb ) are still buying it down, have I made a terrible mistake by buying a bunch of yes shares?
>grant a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all other individuals convicted of offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021;
It only pardons those who were convicted.
@AndrewHebb you are so right, the rest are not pardoned but the cases squashed t "e government of all pending indictments against individuals for their conduct related to the events at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021. The Bureau of Prisons shall immediately implement all instructions from the Department of Justice regarding this directive."
@AndrewHebb fuck, it appears I have been Mariah Carey'd as @Quroe would say, and because the market has already been resolved I have no opportunity to sell my shares before re-resolution 😥
@Quillist why did you say it would count people who weren't yet convicted?
@JussiVilleHeiskanen I'm nit-picking but I think the correct quote is shifted a line or two back
I further direct the Attorney General to pursue dismissal with prejudice to the government of all pending indictments against individuals for their conduct related to the events at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021.