The two markets, resolving at end-of August:

Their resolution criteria allow for arbitrary shenanigans with regard to manipulation of paper profits, meaning that betters are not merely forecasting how profitable other traders will be, but also need to account for the possibility of manipulation.

If neither of these two markes resolves YES, this market resolves N/A.

Otherwise, this market resolves YES if at least one of the linked markets resolved YES in a manner that appears to be due to manipulation/rigging/shenanigans.

A temporary profit spike caused my Manifold bugs and charting inadequacies doesn't count as manipulation, unless introduced or exploited intentionally to manipulate these markets - if a trader knows how to take advantage of a bug and does so then that counts, but a randomly-occuring bug does not count.)

The obvious manner of manipulating paper profits is a user intentionally mispricing a market on which they have a high stake. That would definitely count.

Collusion with other users to create temporary high paper profits would count. Creating a market and subsidising it before budding it to extremes to launder subsidy money into "profit" also counts.

Shenanigans resulting in actual profits do not count. E.g. manipulating a different market in order to get a favourable resolution, resulting in real profits is fine.

We just want to distinguish between actual profit, and manipulated paper profits due to intentional mispricings, methods of laundering cash into profit via subsidies/alts/collusion/whatnot, and so on.

I won't bet because resolution may require a judgement call. I'll resolve N/A if I can't determine to reasonable confidence whether shenanigans took place.