Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ5,981 | |
| 2 | Ṁ516 | |
| 3 | Ṁ427 | |
| 4 | Ṁ380 | |
| 5 | Ṁ141 |
You said "I will manalink people 50 mana if they give me a good review for this market (5 stars)." I gave you a five star review. You made a promise, keep your promise.
You ask, "How do I know you're not gonna switch it afterwards?"
Well, simply, I don't care that much. But if you're so concerned about it...
@chrisjbillington That could just be a quick check-in without checking notifications. Hope springeth eternal in the human breast; Man never is, but always to be, blest.
@DanielFilan yes but perhaps just a quick market.
@hmys is an agent of chaos, and said that their actions around this market were because it was fun to make people angry.
Making excuses for them is unnecessarily generous.
@chrisjbillington To you, perhaps; I am a Christian, and thus I believe God literally requires me to be unnecessarily generous
@hmys You initially resolved a controversial market that you yourself had bet in, in the direction of your own bet, with no explanation, and no discussion period.
If you wanted a better review for me, I think it would’ve liked something a little bit more like what happened here:
https://manifold.markets/andrew/will-twitter-will-open-source-all-c#Nhzd3wPdk0tPOUcrulG6
@hmys I wouldn't say I'm "mad" (over just M40 fake money in my case) -- just think you mis-resolved this market given the very clear communication of the book review winners on ACX.
I'll note that I've given every market I've reviewed 5 stars up to this point, except for a misleading "Will Trump tweet" market that I lost 3,000M in since the market resolved on if Trump would tweet again after the mugshot tweet. In that case, I gave 3 stars since it was partially my fault for rushing in on the mugshot tweet news and not being more careful with markets that lack descriptions/clear criteria.
In the case of this market, even though it was for a reason many may not have foreseen, Scott did not win his contest because he disqualified himself. He didn't say he won and then change his mind; the disqualification was concurrent with the announcement of winners. If I had bet YES on this I would still be giving 1 star because I would still recognize the resolution to be incorrect.
Not sure the "I'll bribe you with mana for good reviews" approach is helping your position...
I did not participate in this market, and I think that either resolution could have been fine. I don't particularly care that OP had stake, it's not ideal, but I don't think a person should resolve contrary to what they think is the right outcome just because they had a stake.
But I did leave a 1-star review solely for bribery. This is halfway to bannable behavior IMO, if people can just offer mana for reviews, the reviews mean nothing.