These options resolve YES if Kamala Harris says the exact sequence of words during her nomination acceptance speech at the 2024 Democratic National Convention.
This will follow the same rules as the Trump-isms Debate Megamarket—see the original market for more detailed resolution examples.
You can add your own responses, but note (1) I intend to be strict with resolution (following the rules below), & (2) I reserve the right to edit all entries to better match the spirit of the market.
Resolution might take a few days because I'd like to consult the transcript.
Resolution examples:
Needs to be exact same words (in order): "not going to go back" does not count for "not going back".
Needs to match tense & pluralization: "aborted" or "abortions" do not count for "abortion".
However, any punctuation is fine ("Billions! And billions..." counts for "billions and billions"), and contractions can count as the expanded words ("what's" is equivalent to "what is").
An abbreviation is its own word. "MAGA" does not match "Make America Great Again", "LGBT" does not match "LGBTQ. However, how it's transcribed is irrelevant, what matters is what's said (e.g. in a previous market "Pennsylvania" was spoken but transcribed as "Pa.").
Different ways of transcribing the same word count: "January 6th" = "January sixth".
To add flexibility to an answer, use parentheses or an "or". So " 'Free lunch(es)' or 'school lunch(es)' " matches "free lunches", "school lunch", & etc.
For context, here is the equivalent speech that Biden gave at the 2020 DNC. And here are some recent remarks that Kamala gave at the DNC winter meeting.
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ29,657 | |
| 2 | Ṁ12,964 | |
| 3 | Ṁ8,186 | |
| 4 | Ṁ3,875 | |
| 5 | Ṁ2,424 |
@traders THAT'S A WRAP. I don't want to make any mistakes so I'll wait until the transcript/recording is up before resolving.
In the meantime, bet on the TRUMP-ISMS in the first debate.
@traders Kamala just announced her first interview (joint with Walz on CNN), airing in 48 hours. Not much time for proper predictions, but I made a small market for anyone who wants to lock in some bets real quick:
@traders Resolved all remaining options NO. LMK if you think I made a mistake. Next bet on Trump-isms at the debate:
@traders I resolved all the YES options I found, based on the transcript and what I heard (live & in the recording). In 24 hours I plan to resolve all other options NO. Please let me know if you think I missed anything.
Note that the linked transcript is imperfect—I'm pretty sure it's the written/planned remarks, and not always exactly the words she said. So if you think you heard her say any of the remaining options, LMK ASAP.
Yes. The speech transcript says
She also taught us -- never do anything half-assed. That's a direct quote.
And you can confirm with the timestamp—I hear "half-assed". So currently I plan to resolve "ass" to NO.
here’s an example in the description that explains:
“Needs to match tense & pluralization: "aborted" or "abortions" do not count for "abortion".”
@Gen @pluffASMR hmmm, I guess I read that the opposite way. Like, if the tradable option was "Abortions" and Kamala said "Abortion" then it wouldn't count. But if the option was "Abortion" and Kamala said "Abortions" then it would count. Slightly ambiguous, but I see the point.
Luckily this didn't matter for my profit personally (massive as usual) :P
Yes, +1 to the quotes above.
If you have a suggestion for how to improve the wording, LMK. But I don't think the examples are ambiguous. I never imply that matching isn't symmetric, and if anything, the way I phrase it should make it clear that "abortion" is the tradable option (i.e. it's the one that's literally in this market). Also, the interpretation doesn't match the other examples/options—e.g. all the cases that use "(s)" to allow pluralization (which wouldn't be needed otherwise).
Obviously no worries if you misinterpreted & I'd always like to make the rules more clear, but also I include a preposterous/comical number of disclaimers about the rules being strict so I'm not sure if there's a way to clarify it further lol.
@traders THAT'S A WRAP. I don't want to make any mistakes so I'll wait until the transcript/recording is up before resolving.
In the meantime, bet on the TRUMP-ISMS in the first debate.
Weird things like that happen at extreme probabilities. For example, on another market my Max Payout was lower than what I would have to spend to buy those shares (replying to your first post).
@traders @Joshua / @ManifoldPolitics / @Manifold have asked that I leave this market open for ManifoldTV live trading during the speech. They rule with an iron fist and I of course must acquiesce.
WARNING: DO NOT LEAVE YOUR LIMIT ORDERS UP DURING THE SPEECH. I'll try to check before the speech to ping people with them up, but no promises that I have time.
If you expected the liquidity return because the market would close early, I have been told you can complain to @ManifoldPolitics and I'd assume they can cover the loss.
Also, when live trading, please keep in mind that the rules are quite strict. If you think you heard something that sounds similar to a phrase here, I do not recommend betting it up to 99% in case there was a word missing or added.
the market tier system was added back in May or June and this has been the case ever since - it's to provide liquidity
You should have gotten it back. I can see it in your balance log (https://manifold.markets/CryptoNeoLiberalist?tab=balance-changes) and there's a 1k uptick in your networth graph.
You might not have noticed because you spend roughly 1k at the same time.