🏅 Top traders

I want to give you all here credit and acknowledgement. Nash Pit was inspired by the antics here.

has anyone taken out a loan with a higher APR than 10²⁹⁷% before

@Robincvgr If my calculations are correct, this loan had an APR of 10⁷⁸⁵%!

???

@Cogsdoc Look closer

@evan I don’t follow please explain

@Cogsdoc Evan loaned me 40k for a little over 20 minutes, dipping his NW below 200k at closing time

@evan
If there's a mismatch between the value I see and the value others see, this defaults to the figure shown when hovering over "6 PM" on the net worth graph.

you didnt specify
- a time frame (1D, 1W, 1M, ALL)
- a time zone

if mods want a better resolution source, i have archived the api responses:
https://web.archive.org/web/20250525010203/https://api.manifold.markets/v0/get-user-portfolio?userId=smzdPGfW29XzWkyfJfE0rDr3qYm2

@256 Evan did specify a time zone earlier in the description, PDT. And only 1D has enough resolution to hover on exactly 6 PM

@256 And the API is irrelevant, it says in the description that the profile page is what matters

@Robincvgr the fact that only 1D has the accuracy needed to properly resolve means it will be impossible to prove in the future. i suggest N/A.

https://manifoldmarkets.notion.site/Resolving-markets-5b35eec068fc413485832676afdf0a32

@256 @mods agreed

@Robincvgr the API would have said <200k at exactly 6pm PDT, but if we’re going off the profile page that says >200k for me

@brod

shows the correct value for me

@Robincvgr look where the line intersects on your graph, it’s greater than 200k! i suspect this is an artefact of smoothing in how manifold constructs the graph from the API data, but if it’s only the graph that matters, i mean, that is above the 200k line

anyway

If a market resolution has some ambiguity and there is dispute over the correct resolution, the creator will have the final say. However, we usually recommend an N/A resolution under these circumstances, especially if the ambiguity is at the fault of the creator.

it's clearly up to evan here

@brod the resolution criteria says "the net worth value on my profile page" and "the figure shown when hovering over "6 PM""

i think that clearly refers to the big number

@brod wow... so much ambiguity... this must N/A

@Robincvgr "it's clearly up to evan here"
not when there is a clear conflict of interest. we are going to have to take this to court.

@256

@crowlsyong ̶ ̶c̶o̶u̶l̶d̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶s̶ ̶b̶e̶ ̶L̶A̶W̶S̶'̶s̶ ̶f̶i̶r̶s̶t̶ ̶c̶a̶s̶e̶?̶ if that's even a serious thing and if evan consents to their jurisdiction, which i doubt he will

@Robincvgr clicking on the line at 6pm also says 230k for me! this makes sense, you did pay him back at exactly 6pm PDT.

@brod i paid him back at 6:00:30

@Robincvgr right in that minute range i meant. and again, i don’t doubt that at 6pm PDT his net worth was below 200k, that’s definitely true. but you’re arguing we should go off the graph, and the graph rounded “6:00:30” to “6pm”

@brod

the number when hovering at 6 still shows 189k for me. i don't know what more to say about this

@Robincvgr

and it says 230k for me! yes i clicked on that time. think you were a little hasty in paying back the loan…

@brod I think this is irrelevant because the retroactively displayed net worth value is a fallback case which is only used if, at exactly 6:00 PM Pacific Time, my net worth was displayed as >200k for some users and <200k for others. I haven't seen any evidence that this was the case

@Robincvgr Maybe @evan is my client... either way, you all have a right to a manifold attorney. remember that anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of the mods. i suggest y'all send me some mana as a retainer and i can represent you in a court of manifold law. (just kidding- don't send me mana)

it would be fun if LAWS was viable, but i really don't see how I could actually do anything to affect any outcomes. open to ideas on making the idea viable. it would be fun to hold a court in a discord chat. i could wear a suit and use lawyer words. and maybe a mod could be the judge haha

@crowlsyong I think it would be funny for the theatrics if everybody involved in such cases consented that the ruling was actually binding.

Basically, the most correct term would probably be "arbitration."

If there's a mismatch between the value I see and the value others see, this defaults to the figure shown when hovering over "6 PM" on the net worth graph.

-Market Description

I think this is irrelevant because the retroactively displayed net worth value is a fallback case which is only used if, at exactly 6:00 PM Pacific Time, my net worth was displayed as >200k for some users and <200k for others. I haven't seen any evidence that this was the case

-Evan

I think the case is pretty tight here. The primary authority is Evan's eyes, and the secondary overriding authority of the API is only invoked if somebody challenges Evan's eyes with contemporaneous evidence that's exactly on-the-hour.

Does anybody disagree with this argument?

@Quroe I have no dog in this fight, had no position at close, but contemporaneous evidence that was exactly on-the-hour is precisely what I supplied

@brod You provided a screenshot taken after the fact which showed the retroactively applied net worth value from the graph. If you have contemporaneous evidence, please post it here.

@evan before i post anything, just to clarify, the only thing you would accept is a screenshot taken at precisely at 6:00.00pm PDT? that precise second?

@evan what if it was 3 milliseconds after, would they count for you? or too delayed

A good point.

@brod Your screenshot was taken several minutes after close, after the 41 thousand mana loan repayment had already occurred. Before resolving the market, I checked my net worth while logged in at 5:59:56 PM and then while logged out at 6:00:10 PM. Both showed a net worth of less than Ṁ200k, so I resolved this market NO. The loan repayment happened at 6:00:30 PM.

Let's take the other side of the argument, arguing against what I was saying earlier.

Is 6:00:30 still 6:00? If so, this test returns TRUE.

Resolves YES if the net worth value on my profile page is greater than Ṁ200,000 at 18:00 PDT on May 24th.

-Market description

The market did not specify seconds, so does this mean that the entire minute was being scanned, not just a snapshot?

@evan i take your evasion of my question as acknowledgement that “contemporaneous evidence” is an impossible standard.

now i don’t at all doubt the timing of those transactions, my contention is that both the resolution criteria and robin earlier in the comment thread said that the amount displayed on your profile at 6pm EDT is the source, and as my screenshots showed, your profile showed >200k nw at 6pm EDT, probably because robin’s transfer at 6:00:30 counted towards that minute’s count on the graph.

@brod To clarify, a screenshot taken 3 milliseconds after close would count as evidence. Sorry for evading your question. The important thing here is that the contemporaneous evidence should have been taken without events in-between 6 PM PDT and the timing of the screenshot that affect whether the value could be above or below Ṁ200k.

Your screenshot was not taken at 6:00 PDT, it was taken later, and it cannot determine what the profile showed before the screenshot was taken. Unless you can provide some sort of evidence that the profile showed a different value at that time, there's not much I can do for you here.

If my statement establishing Evan's eyes as the primary authority is correct, then he did in fact state that his net worth was above 200k mana at 6:00:30pm, which is 6:00pm due to to a lack of specification of the second in the market description.

Therefore, by Evan's authority, should this resolve YES?

For this version of the argument, it is not necessary for traders to provide screenshot evidence in support of YES. This argument asserts that Evan himself has supplied enough evidence for a YES resolution.

If a college homework assignment is submitted at 11:59:59pm, and the deadline is 11:59pm, it is my experience that those are valid submissions.

@Quroe I'm not sure whether "6:00 PM" refers to "6:00:00.000 PM" or "the interval between 6:00:00.000 PM and 6:00:59.999 PM". I also don't think it matters here. As far as I can tell, my profile page stats were last updated at about 5:51 PM and were not updated again until after 6:01 PM, so the profile page wouldn't have changed until after any definition of "6:00 PM" had already passed.

@Quroe

@evan Respectfully, and with a silly lighthearted demeanor, I argue that it does matter.

Resolves YES if the net worth value on my profile page is greater than Ṁ200,000 at 18:00 PDT on May 24th

This is the by-the-book test that was being performed to see if the market resolved YES or NO.

So, if we ask, "was Evan's net worth greater than Ṁ200,000 at 18:00 PDT?" the answer is YES if 18:00:30 PDT is inclusive of all times that are 18:00 PDT.

I assert that if you, Evan, at any point during that minute saw a net worth of Ṁ200,001, then this should resolve YES.

We're not testing if it was below Ṁ200,000 for any snapshot within the 18:00 PDT minute. We instead test if it was greater than Ṁ200,000 for any snapshot within the 18:00 PDT minute. These are two different, distinct tests.

You could argue that it purely depends on the net worth shown on the page, not what your implied net worth is from a repaid loan. The computer with lagging data is the source of truth in this case. (It is worth asking how we came to know that the loan was repaid at the 30-second mark, though.)

In that case, if you, Evan, stand firm that you did not witness a greater than Ṁ200,000 net worth on the page during the entirety of the 18:00 PDT minute, then we ask if anybody has challenging evidence.

Brad claims to have challenging evidence from the minute in question. If you, Evan, agree that the evidence was taken during that 60 second window, then we have to fall back on the API as the final arbiter.

As one of my close friends likes to end her arguments, "where's the lie?". Where is the hole in my argument?

@256 @strutheo

Okay, this deserves a spot here.

@Quroe lol yes repost it in memefold

@strutheo let me fix the text speed first i fcked it up at the end

It's possible that there's a point of contention about when Brad's screenshot was captured. Brad and Evan might be on different pages there.

@brod , do you have file metadata on your original screenshot showing that it was captured during the minute in question? If so, that would be convincing.

@brod If you can't provide the metadata, then I've lawyered as hard as I can possibly lawyer, and I gracefully concede to you, @Robincvgr. Well played.

@Quroe oh yeah sorry the screenshot was obviously not taken between 6:00.00 and 6:00.59. was 20 minutes after. was eating at the time. maintain my position that this is an infeasible standard

@brod