Each answer should be a specific market. Resolves equally (up to 10% each) to all answers I judge to have an improper resolution (not counting resolutions that are just late) during the month
If there are up to 10 answers that are accepted as improperly resolved, each of them will be chosen at a 10% share, and the answer "Less than 10" will be chosen with the remainder. If there are more than 10, then resolves to each of them equally.
I consider "improper resolution" pretty broadly inclusive. Generally it's a market in which a reasonable bettor should've expected better. It includes things like:
incorrect resolution, whether intentional or by mistake.
not correctly following the resolution criteria, e.g. premature resolution
excessively bad interpretations of ambiguous resolution criteria
etc
deliberate or excessive lateness is improper but is excluded in this market. If a market is resolved late but otherwise resolved properly, I will not count it in this market - see https://manifold.markets/jack/what-markets-shouldve-resolved-in-o instead. This is to simplify the operationalization of this market.
Notes:
I will judge subjectively, but I will read the community's discussion to inform my judgements.
Deciding whether a market was improperly resolved is not necessarily a statement about whether it was morally bad or anything like that, it is first and foremost a statement about whether the market functioned as traders should reasonably have expected, and whether they should be wary of potential misresolutions in the future.
Only submitted answers will be considered. If a market meets the criteria but nobody submits it, then it doesn't count. I intend to submit any markets that I notice that qualify, but of course I might miss some.
If there are duplicate answers that refer to the same market, only the earliest will be chosen.
For examples of markets that might count, see https://manifold.markets/group/improperly-resolved. Also see my previous market What markets will I consider to have a improper, dishonorable, or dubious resolution in September?
Related:
1,000
3.00@Yev I commented on the other market, I think it counts as gaming and therefore a correct resolution.
@Yev I think this one will count. Though resolving N/A is definitely not as bad as other misresolutions.
@Yev I'm going to call this one ok, not improper. Only the author traded on it, and they explained why it was N/A (market not working as they intended). Similar to some of my other calls here, I think if you close it N/A for a legit reason before anyone else bets on it, that's almost certainly ok I think.
@Yev I think markets labelled [TEST] probably won't count - would be better if there were labelled [TEST][DON'T BET] for example, but [TEST] is already a reasonably clear indication.
The one that was resolved N/A a few seconds after opening also doesn't count - that's fine to correct a mistake.
@Yev I think it's borderline in general. The fact that they were only open a few seconds and then closed is a big point in favor of not improper though - if they had been left open and attracted other traders then that becomes more of an issue.
@Yev No. Resolve date must be in October. (So it would include ones that incorrectly resolved early in October but should have resolved later)
