Official announcements from both Russia and Ukraine before market end is enough (independent when/if it goes into effect).
General ceasefire agreement that covers more than energy also counts.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,745 | |
| 2 | Ṁ1,638 | |
| 3 | Ṁ117 | |
| 4 | Ṁ92 | |
| 5 | Ṁ76 |
People are also trading
The latest statements by Zelenskyy:
Last night: https://www.president.gov.ua/en/news/te-yak-rosiya-bude-povoditisya-najblizhchimi-dnyami-pokazhe-96849
"It has been agreed with the American side that a ceasefire in our energy sector can begin today – we believe that once the respective statement on the results of the meetings and all the work of the teams today is published, the transition to silence regarding the energy sector can begin."
Today: https://x.com/ZelenskyyUa/status/1904822986655363390 :
"Launching such large-scale attacks after ceasefire negotiations is a clear signal to the whole world that Moscow is not going to pursue real peace. Since March 11, there has been a U.S. proposal for a total ceasefire, a complete halt to strikes. And literally every night, through its attacks, Russia keeps saying “no” to our partners’ peace proposal."
Both of these statements clearly describe a potentiality, not an existing state of ceasefire.
This Polymarket with similar rules is also very likely resolving Yes:
https://polymarket.com/event/energy-infrastructure-ceasefire-in-ukraine-in-march
@MaxA Yes, some of them. A lot of them argue for NO, but YES is currently trading at 99%. Originally, I intended my market as a simplified copy of the Polymarket. Given how controversial this resolution has become, and the fact that some are even questioning my intentions, I think it would be better in future markets to just refer to Polymarket’s resolution directly. That way, if there’s blame or confusion, they can blame Polymarket's resolution instead of me
@Simon74fe Polymarket has a lot of misresolutions. A lot of their markets (most of those with interesting questions) are self-resolving: if the price reaches 99%, then no further new info can change their view and prove them they are wrong. Decisive Uma tokens are centralised in less than 5 hands, and the whole resolution system encourages "voting with the mass", instead of voting for the truth.
If you will take copying their markets as your policy, then you are not using the main point of manifold: You are the adjugator, you can listen to both sides and make independent decision according to rules of the local market. Making a polymarket mirror is sad, it imports all their faults of the system.
@traders Recent news has been a bit confusing, but it's clear that both sides have agreed to a ceasefire. While one statement mentioned only an agreement to "develop measures for implementing a ban," other statements explicitly confirmed the existence of a ceasefire. They still disagree on the details and even the date, and are already accusing each other of violating it (which only further confirms there was indeed an agreement). The announcements from Russia (via Kremlin press statements) and Ukraine (via statements from President Zelenskyy and the Minister of Defense) clearly qualify as official announcements under this market’s rules. According to these rules, official announcements from both Russia and Ukraine before market end are sufficient, regardless of when (or even if) the ceasefire takes effect. Therefore, the market resolves "Yes."
@Simon74fe Your question asks: "Will there BE an energy infrastructure ceasefire?"
There IS NO energy infrastructure ceasefire.
@Simon74fe English is not my native language, but as far as I can understand it, the word "be" means that something exists. Not an agreement to have that something but the actual thing. That actual thing, an energy infrastructure ceasefire, did not and does not exist.
@Simon74fe your rules contradicted the question statement. You chose to favor them. It's your right. It's my right to disagree with this resolution.
@Simon74fe hello there was no ceasefire that hello how can you argue there was a ceasefire if they’re actively striking energy infrastructure?
@Simon74fe Can you find any sources that would show Zelensky considering any ceasefire to be IN EFFECT, not just to be AGREED ON? I can't (and I speak Ukrainian).
@Simon74fe You can accuse someone of breaking a promise that was never made or never finalized; it happens in diplomacy all the time. The argument also dodges the substance of what a ceasefire is. It’s not just a word tossed around—it’s a concrete pause in fighting, usually with terms both sides recognize. It’s ok this market should’ve stayed the full month and it would be clear there was never a confirmed ceasefire but I see that you were the top profiter of this market so it make sense why you would resolve early.
@Simon74fe This is a Schrödinger ceasefire. The Kremlin's readout, for instance, states that this is an agreement from 18 March, but we all know both sides hit energy facilities after that date. So, if all that's been announced is some additional work on that specific agreement, it's not a real thing - at least, not yet.
As is usual with fuzzy criteria, you'll now have to decide between the spirit and the letter.