Resolves as YES if a verifiable tweet, from @realDonaldTrump, is posted from the time of the creation of the market and before Sept 1st, 2023; otherwise resolves as NO.
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ2,476 | |
| 2 | Ṁ1,231 | |
| 3 | Ṁ700 | |
| 4 | Ṁ617 | |
| 5 | Ṁ426 |
@AliciaGrugett This market was created after the tweet was posted, so 'again' implies posting a tweet after that tweet.
@ken guess I'll hold this bullshit position, but since it's not clear when a market was created, would help to actually put that crucial detail in the description
@AliciaGrugett yeah damn the same thing happened to me. This market is confusing/misleading. Technically the resolution criteria in the description are fulfilled though, Trump did tweet before September, and it was an "again" tweet given he has tweeted in the past.
@LudwigBald he has done that but that would be referring to things that have occured already. If the point is to make predictions, then referring to things that have already occured, those wouldnt count.
@higherLEVELING the point is, it's not obvious at a glance when the market was created, which is why clear resolution criteria should be specified in the description.