@Bayesian failed to "double it and pass it on". But, per the rules...
Shame upon the Manifolder who breaks the chain. That, or shame may be brought upon the Manifolder who sends their managram payload to an inactive or distrustful user.
Resolves to the poll below. If @Bayesian has the most points, then he bears the shame and resolves YES. If @121 has the most points, then he bears the shame and resolves NO. Otherwise, it's a tie and resolves 50%.
Resolves to this poll:
Dashboards:
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ48 | |
| 2 | Ṁ22 | |
| 3 | Ṁ20 | |
| 4 | Ṁ11 | |
| 5 | Ṁ9 |
@traders Oops. Closing dates were not set up properly at first. The intent was to close on the 23rd at 9pm EST.
The prediction market was correct, the poll wasn't.
@Bayesian Just to confirm, you are asserting this to the community, correct?
Not asserting this to specifically me in opposition to this poll?
@MRME because I didn't intend to pass it on. I made a deal with 121 so we'd both profit from him passing it on. It had as one of the clauses (see 6767676767) that he would take on the shame in my stead.
If you two BOTH consent to sharing this, what were the details of closed-door conversations you two had?
I consent, @121 do you consent
Remeber https://manifold.markets/Quroe/if-the-hero-assembles-a-full-party#pa6nx4rxl4r
rule 6767676767
@121 That being said, I'll wait a bit before casting my vote.
Convince me. Why do you bear more shame than Bayesian?
I find it difficult to shame you while the Bayesian Gigacorp is in business. With great power comes great responsibility, and Bayesian certainly has great power.