Traders here should be aware that this market creator has 

 other creators to resolve their markets incorrectly in order to benefit 

 financially, with arguments like "there are more shareholders who bet one way, so resolving in that direction would make more people happy". That market was very similar to this one (a "resolves to %" Keynesian beauty contest tied to a real-world question), so it seems highly likely to me that Crit intends to resolve this market incorrectly if it has an outcome they don't like.

 Furthermore, there are certain English language conventions that you should be aware of. 'should have + past participle' can indicate that something 

a good idea, but you did not do it. Now, I agree with your viewpoint that a fair and proper debate is no longer a good idea—especially since you sent me two messages earlier that were filled with malicious accusations. Utilizing the ban function provided by Manifold to ban you is fully within the official rules, and it does not violate any logic or principles of human nature. Therefore, this action is indeed appropriate.

 A fair and proper debate requires mutual consensus. I had hoped to engage in such a debate with you, but you remained silent in that market and only resorted to mudslinging here. Is this the kind of behavior one would expect from someone who seeks a fair and proper debate? Since you have acted in this way, I no longer wish to debate with you, which is not an unusual decision.

Just commenting on my alt account to point out that Crit has asked me to have a "fair and proper debate", then blocked me so I can't reply. I won't be engaging further with an obvious bad faith actor; anyone else who has concerns about my behavior is welcome to reach out on Discord and I'm happy to chat.

 You should have a fair and proper debate with me in the comment section of that market, instead of accusing me of 'malicious interpretation' over there, ignoring the detailed and well-intentioned comments I sent you, and then coming to my market to defame me.

 I have placed the link to that market here: 

https://manifold.markets/Jingliu/will-we-ever-cure-cancer

, so that friends of Manifold can judge who is really wrong. 

Why do you accuse me? What do you mean by 'to benefit financially'? Even if I could profit in that market, 

 (I don't understand why you are hiding this crucial point? You invested a significant amount of mana at the last moment before the market ended and created a massive limit order of mana to prevent the poor from changing the outcome, thus earning profits hundreds of times greater than others. It is you who truly seeks economic benefits). I have earned only Ṁ4500 in just 15 days on Manifold, so 

is Ṁ9 considered a significant financial gain

I am here for justice and fairness, not for Ṁ9.

 Just because you are a devout follower of mana, it doesn't mean that everyone's lives revolve around mana.

36% chance. Will we ever 'cure' cancer? As in, sure we can get cancer, but we reduce the mortality rate to 0% given a certain type of treatment, or 'cure'. (Not everyone has to have access to that cure).

Since this will not (likely) happen in our lifetime, resolves to the majority (YES if % > 50, No otherwise)

Will we ever cure cancer?

But yeah, the influence of a single person on final % is much less in polls

 I would consider making a separate poll and resolving this to the percentage in that poll. Usually people are honest in a poll.

 The problem is, anyone could bet this down to 50% in the very last second and then take a profit from that. That is why markets should never announce in advance that they will resolve to the closing %.

 Only if you want this to be less of a prediction market and more of a poll.

 First time asking, not quite sure about the rules. Could you tell me if 'Resolves to % at close' is appropriate?

The emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) has sparked intriguing debates about the possibility of machines attaining self-awareness.

Self-awareness, a defining characteristic of human consciousness, involves introspection, introspective access, and the ability to recognize oneself as a distinct entity.

This question of whether machines can become self-aware delves into the realms of philosophy, cognitive science, and AI research, raising profound implications for the future of technology and humanity.

#	Name	Total profit
1		Ṁ5
2		Ṁ3
3		Ṁ3
4		Ṁ2
5		Ṁ2

🏅 Top traders

Related questions