The Open Philanthropy Worldview Contest awarded six prizes. Now I need to decide - would it be a good use of time to review and respond to some or all of those winners? Thus, six markets. I will use the trading to help determine whether, and how in depth, to examine, review and respond to the six posts.

If I read the post/article for a substantial amount of time, and in hindsight I judge it to have been a good use of time to have done so whether or not I then respond at length, this resolves to YES.

If I read the post/article for a substantial amount of time, and in hindsight I judge it to have NOT been a good use of time to have done so whether or not I then respond at length, this resolves to NO.

If I read the post long enough to give it a shot and then recoil in horror and wish I could unread what I had read, that also resolves this to NO.

If I choose NOT to read the post for a substantial amount of time, then this resolves to my judgment of the fair market price at time of resolution - by default the market price, but I reserve the right to choose a different price if I believe there has been manipulation, or to resolve N/A if the manipulation situation is impossible to sort out.

If I do trade on this market, that represents a commitment to attempt the review if I have not yet done so, and to resolve to either YES or NO.

Authors of the papers, and also others, are encouraged to comment with their considerations of why I might want to review or not review the posts, or otherwise make various forms of bids to do so (including in $$$ or mana, or in other forms).

These markets are an experimental template. Please do comment with suggestions for improvements to the template.

The post can be found here: https://www.openphilanthropy.org/wp-content/uploads/Deceptive-Alignment-is-_1-Likely-by-Default-David-Wheaton.pdf