This market resolves NO on March 20, 2026.
Old rules below:
I'll ask @FairlyRandom to generate a random number between 1 and 20 (inclusive). If the result is 20, this market will resolve YES. If the result is less than 20, this market will resolve NO. I'll use a suitable alternative if @FairlyRandom isn't available.
1,000People are also trading
@ian Is the markup not showing up for you? I thought it and the title made it clear the random number generation had already happened. Guess I'll edit it to be more obvious.
@evan I (and I think others as well) interpret those as spoilers and I need to click them to reveal them
@ian Interestingly, I found the market that originally asked for the "next-next pope" much more misleading. So easy to only read one "next", even if you're not dyslexic. I don't think that was intended by Evan, though. But then someone else added Prevost AFTER he was announced, BRAGGED in the comments that it was "too easy" (to mislead people), but then claimed it wasn't misleading at all and was backed up by numerous other traders. I also made a profit on that, but I'd happily give it up to an N/A resolution.
For the record: I do NOT blame Evan in either case. Both cases look unintentionally/accidentally misleading to me.
People betting on the time value of money.
Granted, the recent introduction of mana loans makes that harder to justify.