🏅 Top traders

Going to resolve this as NO.

All the sources that I've read stated that Putin wasn't on BRICS summit in person. I did not see a single article that stated that he actually was there.

This can be resolved NO @bessarabov

@Akzzz123 No, It can't. From the market descripton:

> This market will be resolved NO shortly after this market closes if such event does not happen.

@bessarabov The summit got over the day before. Is there a good reason to keep this open?

@Akzzz123

Yes.

1. If I close it now this will break the rule that was stated in the market description.

I don't know for sure, but it can be that some person would be upset if the rules stated in the market description are not satisfied. I can easily imagine somebody made bets with this resolution logic in mind.

2. From my point of view this is generally a good idea not to hurry with the market resolutions, but to wait for some time, to be more sure that the event has or has not happened. This is why I explicitly stated when this will be resolved.

For example. I'm closing this market now as NO, but tomorrow it turns out that he has attended this summit but it was a secret. What should be done in such situation? (I think that this is highly unlikely to happen, but it is possible)

@bessarabov I suggest in future you adopt more permissive resolution criteria, according to the site norms. These seem unnecessarily stringent.

I also note that according to these criteria a YES resolution could happen immediately, even though it could be the case that after it was reported he attended it turned out to be a body double.

In these extreme edge cases Manifold will surely facilitate reversal of the resolution.

@bessarabov I don't think there's a hard and fast rule that you have to stick to the market close time. It's always a good idea to avoid blocking people's mana for too long. And Josh has made some good points which I will avoid repeating.

@JoshuaWilkes

> I suggest in future you adopt more permissive resolution criteria, according to the site norms. These seem unnecessarily stringent.

When I have created this market I was not sure the exact dates that summit would take place. That is why the closing date was created with a margin.

My understanding of the site norms (that I'm trying to follow) is to:
- set clear resolution logic and date
- strictly follow the rules that ate stated in description
- not to change the description after people start betting.

So your idea to resolve it early is not within site norms from my point of view.

@Akzzz123

> to avoid blocking people's mana for too long

This is a person's choice to bet or not to be on the market. In the market description there is a clear explanation when the market will be closed.

@bessarabov You can always update the resolution time in cases you are not sure when the event will end. As long as it is after the event then it is totally reasonable to end it. Your reason for keeping it open longer because Putin might have attended secretly doesn't sound reasonable at all.

@Akzzz123

> You can always update the resolution time in cases you are not sure when the event will end

No, I can't do that. If I do that I then I break the market logic that somebody can rely on. I'm sure that the rule "do not change the market after the bets has started" is the only correct one.

I can change the market closing date if I explicitly stated in the market description that I may do it, but there was no such rule in this market (and even after this conversation I'm not sure that it is a good thing if it was such rule — this will unnecessary complicate the market)

> Your reason for keeping it open longer because Putin might have attended secretly doesn't sound reasonable at all

This is not my main reason why I'm not doing this. The main reason why I'm not resolving this market now is because there is a clear definition when it I should close it and I want to follow the rules.

@bessarabov so maybe in future you can make markets where you explicitly state that you will adjust the closing time to match the end of the event you are trying to cover?

@JoshuaWilkes Probably. I can neither confirm nor deny that I will do it.

This is the option that I will have in mind, but whether it will be used depends on the market that I'm creating.

@bessarabov You should have kept the close date in 2070 when all the documents have been declassified and we know for sure that Putin did not attend the summit 🙏

@JoshuaWilkes It's like talking to ChatGPT

@Akzzz123 You don't have ro be rude. I'm sorry, but I'm blocking you,

@bessarabov

My understanding of the site norms (that I'm trying to follow) is to:
- set clear resolution logic and date

There is no norm to set a resolution date, the best time to resolve is as soon as the resolution is sufficiently clear. Since you've added that clause explicitly in the description, it's fine to follow it but its existence makes the market worse and it would be better to avoid it for future ones :)

Putin gave a talk with an AI altered voice?!?! https://thehill.com/homenews/4166570-putins-voice-in-brics-address-raises-eyebrows/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-19/putin-won-t-attend-brics-summit-in-person-south-africa-says

I made a multiple choice market here that looks at possible outcomes beyond "attend"/"doesn't attend": https://manifold.markets/AndyMartin/what-will-be-the-outcome-of-putins

What will be the outcome of Putin’s possible attendance at the BRICS summit?

Context: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-05-30/south-africa-paves-way-for-immunity-for-brics-summit-attendees https://www.ft.com/content/1c8a6b2d-a190-46ec-90ad-fa3410998ae1 South Africa has claimed it cannot arrest Vladimir Putin at a planned Brics summit in Johannesburg next month…

I think the situation is framed well here:

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3227731/south-africa-faces-diplomatic-dilemma-over-putin-brics-summit-looms

South Africa faces diplomatic dilemma over Putin as BRICS summit looms

Pretoria has granted diplomatic immunity to leaders at the event, so Russian president might avoid arrest if he does attend in person.

I'm confused since it looks like SA idiotically painted themselves into a corner if Putin decides to go. But for Putin, if he can get away with it, going would force SA to take their side more, since there would presumably be material blow-back from the west (and who knows, maybe that' why China seemingly shot down the idea of moving BRICS to China, since that move would serve their pro-multipolar interests as well)

There's been some speculation the summit may be moved to a different country, how would you resolve if that happens and Putin attends ? I would expect this would resolve NO, but would be nice to have it explicitly listed together with the other special cases.

/Odoacre/will-the-15th-brics-summit-be-held

@Odoacre nah, will be alpha move to have in SA and will be alpha move by Putin to show up in spite of ICC arrest warrant

@Odoacre Haha! Thank you! I was not thinking about such possibility. Creating markets is hard.

I was thinking how should I handle this possibility. At first I thought that in such case I should resolve it as n/a, as this is an event that was not explicitly stated in the market description. But after thinking a bit more, I think that this is ok to resolve this market as NO if the summit is moved to some other country from South Africa. My rationality about it that the needed country is explicitly stated in the market subject 'Will Vladimir Putin attend BRICS summit in South Africa in August?' and I'm not changing it. And this NO resolution plays well with the other NO resolutions already stated in the market description.

So, in case the summit will be in August 2023, but it will be held in some other country (not in South Africa) I will resolve this market as NO (no matter if Vladimir Putin will attend it or not). I will add it do the ticket description.