Will this resolution council proposal for the linked George Santos market work?
resolved Jan 6

This question is about how to resolve the following market:

Here is my proposal for a resolution council. I've had this idea floating in my head in general, so I'm writing it also to serve as a starting point for other people to use in the future, probably with many potential tweaks that could be made to improve it.

Short version: if you have a trustworthy-ish badge or Manifold team member badge, discuss and vote by posting in the comments on the linked market, and if a consensus is reached by 11:00 pm ET Wed Jan 4 then I will resolve to that consensus. (Anyone else is welcome to participate in the discussion of course and say what you support, but your votes won't officially count.)

I anticipate that most resolution councils will come to a consensus decision without too much disagreement, but the long version is to help clarify the rules in trickier cases.

Long version:

  • A resolution council composed of trustworthy and experienced community members will discuss the resolution and vote on the best one.

  • Any user with a trustworthy-ish badge or a Manifold team member badge is eligible to participate as a voting member of the council. Any other user is eligible to participate in the discussion as a non-voting participant.

    • As long as there are at least 2 other voting members, I will recuse myself from voting to avoid any potential conflict of interest because I have traded in this market. (If there's only 1 other voting member, then it's not much of a council, but I will delegate the resolution to them if we agree to it.) However, I will take an active role in running the council, because otherwise it's not going to happen, unless someone else wishes to take over that role.

    • Eligibility will be based on having the badge at the time voting closes. If a voting member loses the badge, their vote no longer counts and they are no longer considered a member of the council. If someone gains the badge, they can vote.

  • The council should discuss the resolution and vote on a decision.

  • Votes may be changed (because I expect this to be more of an informal, fluid process than one where there are multiple official rounds of voting)

  • The deadline for the first round of voting is 11:00 pm ET Wed Jan 4. The council may decide to hold more rounds of voting if appropriate.

  • Votes should follow the usual norms for deciding on a resolution; no dishonest voting is allowed. To formalize this, a 2/3 supermajority (defined here and thereafter as requiring a minimum of 2 votes) may decide to expel a member from the council. They may also take other appropriate sanctions, such as recommending removal of the dishonest member's badge.

  • If the decision of the council is supported by a 2/3 supermajority of votes with at least 2 votes, it shall be binding. The decision of the council shall also be binding if a 2/3 supermajority with at least 2 votes decides that it should be binding. Otherwise, the decision will be non-binding, but I will most likely resolve to the consensus resolution of the council if there is one, and if not do my best to resolve taking into account the votes and commentary of the council.

  • Because this is an experimental process, I will include the following clause which supersedes all other clauses: if it turns out that there is some clear flaw with this experimental process that makes it fail to work fairly, then I will make modifications as appropriate, likely with the consensus of other trustworthy community members.


The above is all about how to resolve the linked market. This question itself will resolve if in my subjective judgement, the resolution council successfully made a decision and I resolve to that decision. It might resolve NO if nobody votes in the council, or there is a 2-2 tie in the council. It might also resolve NO if the council blows up in some unexpected way and renders a decision I consider invalid (which I hope is very unlikely). It might resolve YES even if just 1 trustworthy person votes in it and gives good reasons.

Be warned that this could be highly subjective, trade at your own risk.

If you are thinking about trying to blow up my council to make profits by buying NO on this question, please don't - instead please tell me what you were thinking without actually doing it and I may decide to award bounties as appropriate :)

Get Ṁ200 play money

🏅 Top traders

#NameTotal profit
Sort by:
predicted YES

The resolution council delivered a 2-1 vote (2 for N/A, 1 for NO). And I resolved to N/A. So this meta-market resolves YES.

That 2-1 vote counts as a 2/3 supermajority, although not a very impressive one admittedly. (This meta-market would still be a YES even if I had laid out the rules differently)

bought Ṁ25 of NO

I anticipate that you won't get a consensus. There will be some disagreement and people are not getting paid to sort through that. Manifold team members have better things to do.

Maybe you will get a 3-2 majority decision but that isn't a consensus. I don't anticipate a supermajority.

I think the idea is solid and it will help you resolve the market.

predicted YES

@MartinRandall A lot of people got interested in discussing the resolution of Yev's 600k subs market. I don't think this one will attract as much interest, but right now there are 3 votes split 2-1. It's still in many ways more impartial/fair than just myself making the decision. I don't think it's hugely better because the 3rd parties probably spent less time thinking over the debates, but they could give their input based on my research. I think the value of this sort of council is not that important for experienced and trustworthy authors like myself - it's much more of a value-add for newer authors to be able to delegate a contested resolution.

I wasn't really expecting any Manifold member to chime in, I just didn't want to exclude them just because they had a different badge.

predicted YES

See a previous related experiment I did here:

bought Ṁ50 of YES

Please post discussion about how to resolve the Santos market over there on https://manifold.markets/jack/will-george-santos-rny-begin-servin.

You could comment on this market for more meta commentary about the procedure itself.