This market will resolve based on whether President Donald Trump implements new tariffs on Canada by the end of the day on February 1st, 2025. The market will resolve YES if official announcements or executive orders are issued by the U.S. government imposing 25% tariffs on goods from Canada.
Note that although Trump often mentions tariffs for Canada and Mexico in the same breath, this market resolves only based on Canadian tariffs. Additional tariffs on Mexico are neither sufficient nor necessary to resolve this market as YES.
References:
1,000
3.00"Note that although Trump often mentions tariffs for Canada and Mexico in the same breath, this market resolves only based on Canadian tariffs. Additional tariffs on Mexico are neither sufficient nor necessary to resolve this market as YES."
This can be deleted. It's the classic case of trying to make the rules clear by adding extraneous text. In this case, if you say Canada you mean Canada. Mexico is not relevant.
This market will resolve based on whether President Donald Trump implements new tariffs on Canada by the end of the day on February 1st, 2025.
The market will resolve YES if official announcements or executive orders are issued by the U.S. government imposing 25% tariffs on goods from Canada.
This is two different things. Rules are unclear as to whether any new tariff counts, or you need a 25% tariff. Rules are also unclear as to whether the tariffs need to be implemented by Feb 1 OR can be implemented at a later date.
@Bayesian Sorry, what did you think it said? "On"? Like, I'd only resolve YES if it was precisely Feb 1st, but not Jan 31st?
@apetresc ‘By’ can mean ‘before’ or ‘before or on this period range’, different english speakers mean different things by it. I would recommend changing the title to before feb 2 but it’s up to you
@Bayesian Oh, I see; like, you thought I meant "before February 1st as opposed to exactly on the date he promised". I can understand the ambiguity in the title; actually my original title said "by EOD February 1st" but the AI feature recommended I drop the EOD so I listened. I can add it back.
@apetresc To be clear it’s my fault that I didnt read the description before betting, sorry for the trouble!
@Bayesian oh whoops I misread this as the clarification was formatting dates incorrectly. We don't have an AI recommendations on market titles yet :(
@Bayesian Oh was this created with the help of the ai market generations? I can add it to that prompt
@TimothyJohnson5c16 Oof! I didn't realize that the AI could still edit and add "clarifications" after market creation time. And yeah, it interpreted my comment exactly backwards. Thanks for the heads-up, it would never have occurred to me to check the description for an AI edit!
@Bayesian I'm going to add the prompt to the gen endpoint but what exactly should I say, is using 'by 2025' bad form? or is it specifically by EOD that's bad form? I'd love a suggestion on how you'd word the prompt given you have ideas about it
@ian using by [range of dates] is bad form. EOY, EOD, EOM, are fine, because they represent a specific point in time. by "the range between tuesday and thursday" is bad because it's "by [interval of time]". I can try writing a prompt sure
@Bayesian Ahhh so this question originally said by Feb 1st and you thought it was before feb 1st. whereas he meant by eod feb 1st. so saying by a date is bad too if you really mean by EOD.