I won't make any backroom deals to resolve this either way. This resolves only when definite evidence comes up. Until then, it'll stay open.
This market will resolve based on whether or not those two accounts were operated by the same person BEFORE this market was created - to the degree that all relevant evidence points to.
Transferring the account ownership/management to a friend after this market's creation to force a NO resolution wouldn't count.
# Pinned comments:
Jack:
> I just want to clarify: I only agreed to listen to evidence presented privately, and try to give my opinion of the evidence. I do not consider this to be a resolution council in any formal sense. As I told both Levi and firstuserhere, the responsibility for resolving is ultimately with firstuserhere. Levi can present evidence to whoever they want to try to convince them, and I think that is what Levi is doing, and it should not be taken as anything more than that.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ64,650 | |
| 2 | Ṁ27,354 | |
| 3 | Ṁ26,604 | |
| 4 | Ṁ24,849 | |
| 5 | Ṁ8,705 |
@firstuserhere I think this market fits the definition of 'non-predictive' and should be added to the Non-Predictive group. Added a poll below to check the public opinion, JIC:
@MayMeta Hmmm. Here are the types of markets that are in the non-predictive group. People obviously bet on these as well to predict what will happen, and evaluated evidence in some of these, and some of these are not self-referential also. Manifold should give a proper definition of what counts as "non-predictive" imo, it's a spectrum
Do any of the big YES holders want to do a detailed retrospective on how they made their bets and why they went wrong? It was fun reading the discord chat when the AI letter market resolved
@jacksonpolack There was a bit of dicsussion below with Mira about this, but I, too, would like to see more.
@Timothy to not lock up people's mana for little reason. Insane amounts of evidence have already been provided
@Timothy good question. I wanted to do that. Now, I was requested from top holders of both sides, especially Levi, as it was him being investigated to try to resolve this sooner.
Now, what would all but confirm that Levi is not HMYS? I'd love to hear your thoughts because I think I tried most things that are reasonable, and Levi was co-operative in providing evidence.
@evergreenemily you're not stupid for betting YES, I'd have bet yes too, and despite seeing so much evidence its still surprising to me that they have this much of a correlation in everything. But they do back it up...
@firstuserhere It is impressive that they're able to collude so actively that they're as statistically correlated as you'd expect alts to be. I can't imagine being able to coordinate my own trades that well with someone.
@evergreenemily they're so well correlated that absent this much of evidence, even if they were two people, in spirit, Levi=HMYS
@firstuserhere I was wondering, were they mostly betting in the same direction, opposite directions, or both? If it's mostly in the same direction, that makes sense as two people discussing how to predict together, and doesn't make much sense for an alt.
@jack For a long time my profit rose, and hmyss dropped since he mostly betted opposite me. For example in wvm he bet yes since he initally thought isaacs bribing strat would be op
I sort of got screwed for having a limit order that I couldn't cancel on the closed market. Good one @MayMeta .
@MarcusAbramovitch Yeah, also had some limit orders up and then 'we're resolving at X', ouch.
Not being able to cancel limits on closed markets is a weird feature, should probably be changed?