For an option to be included in this market, the person the option represents must be notable. Anyone who is not notable falls under the "Chuck Tingle is not an otherwise notable person" option.
"Notable" means that, on October 23, 2025, they had a Wikipedia page under their real name or other pseudonym.
If multiple people are responsible for the Chuck Tingle persona, resolves to the one who is most responsible for authoring the content of the erotica books.
This market resolves when there is broad consensus about Chuck Tingle's identity and will not resolve before then. This market will likely take a very long time to resolve as Tingle is not very forthcoming about these topics.
1,000Hi @Robincvgr! I know there's no ill intent here, yet Manifold does have rules around doxxing markets. As it stands, this market goes against our Community Guidelines, so I'm going to NA it.
If, for example, Tingle were to say that his identity will be revealed on [x date], it would be fine to make a market and speculate before then. The same goes for anonymous personas who directly consent to an identity market, knowing it may reveal their personal information.
@Robincvgr I think we need to N/A this market because it can encourage potentially unwelcome ("doxxing") behavior.
From the guidelines on running a market:
Markets which may be unlisted, N/A’d or deleted
Below are criteria which may lead to action being taken against a market. We usually default to unlisting markets and are quite lenient. This makes it only discoverable with a URL. However, depending on the severity, some may be N/A’d or even deleted.
Markets and comments revealing other people’s personal private information or strongly incentivise leaking another user's private information.
There is some room for discretion in this guideline but unless the target of the market has signaled that they are okay with people doing this, I'm not comfortable with it so I will N/A this market at this time. If you can show some evidence that this would not be unwelcome behavior, we can reconsider.
My guess is Richard Grayson.
They're both bisexual, writers of strange, often gay-focused fiction, including erotica, semi-satirical political activists, neurodivergent, similar oeuvres and personas (see https://www.richardgrayson.com/)
@UQAU I still like my Scalzi theory, but I just read a little of Grayson's stuff and it seems very plausible.
@UQAU Read Grayson’s diaries or see him on video and it will seem highly unlikely if not impossible. He is not neurodivergent and is much too old.
https://thought.is/author/richard-grayson/page/60/
https://www.kold.com/2025/06/06/tucson-now-richard-grayson-explains-his-vision-cd7/