This is fairly obviously not the correct resolution for this market, this market would resolve at the same time as the market (the Kuril Islands market) that this market is about. Same for the market linked below. Failing to understand the purpose of the market, not asking for clarification, placing a large bet, and then resolving in your favor is certainly one way to use the "Trustworthy. ish." badge.

@Austin

@Sailfish I will unresolve. I saw that the market was closed for a few days and looked at the linked markets and saw the resolution criteria was No

@Sailfish I have unresolved both now

@Sailfish fwiw, it is very common for a market close time to be "the time for the market to resolve"

@Sailfish Where did you say that? I, as well as pretty much all the other traders, it seems like, inferred that this should resolve at the close date.

@MarcusAbramovitch Thanks, after Isaac clarifies whether or not certain markets will be subsidized I'll resolve the no longer relevant markets N/A.

fwiw, it is very common for a market close time to be "the time for the market to resolve"

I understand that this is true, and I would actually say that this is in some cases a failing of Manifold. Up to the minute pricing is good in some, even most cases, but it's not always the best option.

Since the purpose of these markets is to judge whether or not a subsidy will affect future trading, they should close at the end of the subsidy period. It can't inform a decision to subsidize or not after all the subsidy money is handed out, and leaving the market open just bleeds profits (or losses) from engaged users who update it towards to correct direction while providing no value (the subsidy has already either been or not been given).

@Sailfish if you would like to re-open the markets, i will then sell my bets and maybe you can have a more accurate market

@Shump How could I resolve a question about the total number of traders on a market that is still open? It's an unknown until the market closes. For what it's worth I think this whole linked-pair of markets to inform a subsidy decision is kind of silly, and it wasn't my idea, but the relevant market is here.

I should have clarified the resolution criteria, so that's my fault. I assumed it was clear since the quantity can only ever be above or below 200, and we only know the quantity after the market closes. I hope it also makes sense now that this market should close much before it resolves. I'll remember to add an explanation of exactly why a market exists and what it's trying to measure in the future, I think that's probably more useful than using the description as a place for extra resolution criteria.

@MarcusAbramovitch Sure, I've reopened the whole set of questions, the subsidy market itself hasn't resolved so it's still an open question anyway.