Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ52 | |
| 2 | Ṁ46 | |
| 3 | Ṁ34 | |
| 4 | Ṁ29 | |
| 5 | Ṁ24 |
Reason for YES: Intimidating Uyghurs outside of China to spy on human rights campaigners by threatening their family members inside of China is a new category of bad condition, which makes it worse than previously reported. And it was reported by the BBC, which is definitely reputable.
@cloudprism Huh. I thought this was "well known" (in the loose, "everybody knows they do that sense", not in the sense of specific evidence). Surprised that this counts for a YES resolution. Not really objecting though.
@ScottLawrence I had no idea personally, but I haven't followed the issue so closely as to be an expert on it, and it didn't appear in the wikipedia page as far as I could see.
I'm having a hard time defining narrow criteria in general on my markets because I like to capture the gestalt of something underdiscussed and that is difficult to capture in a single measurement.
Unclear if this counts directly, given that the primary effect is on Uyghurs outside of China, but presumably there's similar things happening inside https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-66337328
@ TradersOfThisMarket
https://twitter.com/charlesrollet1/status/1684155484373393414?s=46
There's not a lot left that could worsen the situation, but things like mass killings and mass starvation are still on the table, i.e. go full on open Nazi.
A few more murders, rapes, labor camps, imprisonments and torture won't do it, all already par de course.
I'm unsure if North Korean style imprisonment would count as something new.
@HaydenF sorry cannot delete this wrong tag, Manifold Bugfest again.
@cloudprism Can you clarify?
Hmmm.
@EugenGrue The other version of the question I had for this market was "Has the extent of tragedy in Western China been fully uncovered?" Not sure if that helps.
I'd consider "worse" to mean anything categorically or otherwise substantially additional to what was already included on this page at market creation:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uyghur_genocide
And idk, I guess CNN, Reuters, AP, FP, etc
@cloudprism I think the challenge is that it feels very likely that 'something' worse will be reported, but it's a question of whether that could be considered to be systemically applied or not.
@SavioMak What would help? Do you have an example of how to make this criteria less vague?
@cloudprism sorry, not interested in thinking that through. I commented out of good intention to not get ad money wasted. The market question seems inherently difficult to get a clear resolution criteria though.
@cloudprism IMO best would be to ask series of more specific questions: eg will x be reported, will y be reported, ...
@JoshuaWilkes This market is asking the general question. Feel free to make markets asking more specific questions
@cloudprism You can at least give some examples of what hypothetical scenarios would count, what wouldn't count, and what would be borderline.
@jack I'm more trying to get at a prediction of directionality and accuracy than any specific criteria. If a respected journalist can reasonably say "it's worse than we thought" then this resolves YES. If any new news is released detailing any new findings that are easily categorized as bad, then this resolves YES.
The intent of this market is to gauge general sentiment of whether the CCP is hiding and/or misrepresenting what the answer to this question would be.
I personally would prefer not to speculate any details.
@cloudprism The problem is that the threshold for how much counts as "worse" is going to be very different for different people.
If any new news is released detailing any new findings that are easily categorized as bad, then this resolves YES.
This sounds overly broad. Consider the case if some new and bad finding is reported, that was in line with previous expectations but just revealing it in more detail, for example.