Resolves to the largest N satisfied by statements in whatever publication triggers a YES resolution of @jack's market, or N/A if that market resolves NO:
/jack/will-nyt-publish-an-article-mention
E.g:
If the NYT doesn't mention any of the meta markets on whether the NYT will mention Manifold, and doesn't mention the markets on whether the NYT will mention those markets, and so on, then N=0.
If the NYT mentions @jack's market or another market with similar resolution criteria, or the general fact that Manifold contains markets on whether the NYT will mention Manifold, then N=1.
If the NYT mentions that Manifold has markets on whether it will mention such markets, i.e. if it references @DanMan314's market:
/DanMan314/if-the-nyt-publishes-an-article-men
Or if the NYT otherwise articulates that Manifolders are betting on this possibility (e.g. that they are betting on Dan's market, or on the N=1 case of this market), then N=2.
If it concocts some statement to the effect that Manifolders are betting on the N=2 case, then N=3, and so on.
If the NYT leaves it ambiguous how many layers of meta this goes to, e.g. "and Manifold has markets on whether we will mention those markets, and so on and so forth", then N="ambiguous"
If it successfully makes a statement that spells out Manifolders are betting on the value of N generally, and that it does actually go to infinity (e.g the above but "and so on, to arbitrarily high N", or "and so on, ad infinitum"), then N = ∞.
Clarification added Oct 6th PST: As with @DanMan314's market, "mention" will be interpreted broadly:
A link to or screenshot of one of these markets, or a screenshot of any part of the Manifold site with one of these markets present in a card or portfolio or anything will count.
A link to or screenshot of a comment thread or discord channel from which one can discern the existence of these markets will count.
A link to Manifold (or elsewhere) which only happens to currently contain a link to or other reference to one of these markets (e.g. because it's trending, or in a specific users' portfolio) won't count.
A link to Manifold (or elsewhere) where the appearance of one or more of these markets is more than incidental (such as a link to a dashboard someone made that is specific to these markets) such that one would reasonably expect them to still be present if the link were clicked e.g. a month from now will count.
I will not resolve inconsistently with either @jack or @DanMan314's markets, provided they resolve consistently with each other, and this requirement trumps all others if in conflict. I will not resolve this market until both of them have resolved.
@Joshua Isn’t the only true arb that 1-P(0) in this market has to be at least the probability in Dan’s market? Because if dan’s market resolved yes this market can’t resolve 0
@EliLifland Yeah I realised that once I started flattening my position that it probably wasn't terrible EV to just pretend that I wanted to get super long on it but I had already started by that point, please pity me
FWIW I think it's pretty likely that Dan's market resolves yes anyway, it's a pretty obvious addition and adds humor to the article that readers would enjoy so I'm happy to be kinda long
I was hoping someone would make this market!!!!! It’s glorious.
@jskf I intended to solve it, this market is infinite markets. Reference to the N=M case of this market will cause this market to resolve to N=M+1
Please point out if I have screwed up anything in the description, it was hard to write. If I have made mistakes, I will resolve to what I intended, which I think should be fairly clear: no mention of meta markets ⇒ 0, mention @jack's market or similar ⇒ N=1, mention @DanMan314's market or similar ⇒ N=2, etc.