I created this related multimarket with 20 options about disarmamament, in case you are interested:

My current expectation for resolution timing is:

- 0 --> should have been resolved as NO already
- 1-4 --> should have been resolved as NO already
- All others -->
- x will resolve as NO as soon as we have more than x points agreed
- if we get up to 17-20 before January, then all responses are resolved
- if we don't get up to 17-20 by January 1st 2026, the final exact count will resolve as YES, and the others as NO

Do you also see it like this?

Again, we are not forecasting execution, we are forecasting agreement. So the points already signed should lead to NO resolution of the first two answers.

If we are betting on different assumptions and I did a wrong interpretation, please let me know, because then I have to change my bets.

disregard this comment

I was not aware that it's not possible to resolve individual options early in dependent markets. I learnt it today

My feeling is that the 20 points + 1 map original plan may end-up in ~4 deals of 2-7 points each:

1st) Hamas+Israel on hostages + withdrawal to line 1 --> Done
2nd) Palestine Authority + international community on the interim Gaza governance --> today Tony Blair meets PA, without Hamas
3rd) ISF + Israel withdrawal --> tomorrow 20 head of states + UN chief meet without Israel in Egypt and they will likely prepare a proposal for Israel to be accepted
4th) disarmament + surrender + amnesty --> once power handover to GITA+PA and IDF replacement by ISF are clear, they will call Hamas and ask them to accept and disarm

For sure there will be a lot of additional negotiations between the parties, back-and-fort versions, overlap in some points, but I wouldn't be surprised if we see more than one document, each signed by different actors, for the remaining points. Then the resolution of this market will be tricky.

In this first agreement we have:

Point 3
Point 4, partially

Point 5

Point 7

Point 16, line 1 of the map

we expect we may have subsequent agreements, but they will probably last a while, if they ever get done

https://www-kan-org-il.translate.goog/content/kan-news/politic/958603/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=gl&_x_tr_pto=wapp

https://x.com/WhiteHouse/article/1972736025597219278

@MiguelLM Thanks. Central points 1, 2, and 13 are missing. As are also-important points 9, 12, and 15. I'll keep monitoring the situation.

@ae would you be OK to resolve as NO already the responses 0 and 1-4?

@MiguelLM I believe so!

@traders I am making a call for anyone who has a good argument against resolving NO on "0" and "1-4"

@ae My argument is only that you should delay making this resolution because "shit happens". No harm in delaying resolution for 48 hours.

@StephenFowler28ac I think we are voting for “agree” and not for “agree and execute”, right?

I'm going to set the resolution date to end of year, since it looks like there will be extended talks. May resolve sooner if there's a clear signal sooner.

Just to be clear, if both sides agree on, say 18 points, but then opposition to 2 of the remaining points results in no deal, this resolves to 0, right?

@Balasar correct

I tend to think this negotiation round's results will be announced as:
A) negotiations failed (0 points)
or
B) plan agreed (20 points), even if some of the points include vague wording that needs to be detailed later

I don't expect an announcement like "we agreed this 13 points, and we don't care any longer about these other 7 points"

@MiguelLM Agreed. Note though that this'll resolve to creator's best judgement on the number of agreed upon points, not media headlines or announcements.

@Primer If it helps, I will try to be pretty conservative in applying my judgment — in the sense that if there is media consensus by reputable outlets, I will follow that even if I disagree personally. I don't expect this scenario to happen.