Changing this to N/A. Although there is plausible deniability, the repeated pattern and the fact Levi is the top profitor leads me to believe he engineered this market for his own gain. He is also an experienced enough creator to know that any other creator in this position would have marked this market N/A themselves.

@DavidChee Also Levi has been temporarily banned. This market is only 1% contributing to the ban, it comes after much repeated bad behaviour and I've taken way to much time up messaging and calling with him to explain to him what he can and can't do.

@DavidChee this market should probably also be resolved N/A Will the [STREAK 🔥] market reach a 50+ streak before resolving? It resolves based on how this market resolves. Plus I made 1000M here and lost 800M on that market so I'd be quite annoyed if this one is made N/A and the other one isn't.

I gave chris a 5k manalink after this market resolved since I can understand how he might've misunderstood my intended resolution criteria.

@levifinkelstein and also profits on this market doesn't count since it's unlisted
EDIT: they don't count for leagues, but do show up on profit graph

@levifinkelstein Lesson learned...appreciate the bail-out.

Don't get me wrong, very poorly-written resolution criteria. But I should not have bet without clarifying.

@levifinkelstein Since the market N/Ad and I got my losses refunded to me that way, I have returned this 5000 mana via managram.

There seems to be some confusion around how to interpret the criteria. To clarify:

The streak updates each time we enter a new date in GMT+2 starting at 1, so 21st would be streak=1, and 22nd would be streak=2, and so on.

From description:

So if the 24h interval is hit on the 27th the streak would stop at the 27th.

Sorry for any inconvenience.

@levifinkelstein So you will resolve this NO right? Because the last trader was on the 26th.

Why sell?

@Timothy I've flipped back and forth twice on my understanding of the market. I thought it was about calendar days in GMT+2, then I thought it was about 24 hour periods since market creation. The two interpretations give different results. I'm pretty sure it's the former now (the wording is not super clear), but I foolishly wasted my mana changing my mind, this was very dumb.

@chrisjbillington Yeah I was thinking about this for 30 minutes to make sure I didn't make a mistake. But if you have to act fast its dangerous

@chrisjbillington you're lucky I only managed to buy Ṁ78 YES while it was at 4% 👍

@Timothy Didn't give much to you, but I gave about M1500 to limit order holders. Disaster for me!

@chrisjbillington I was lucky with this market but on the other one Will the [STREAK 🔥] market reach a 50+ streak before resolving? I lost 700M because I thought it was about any trade not about new individual traders.

@chrisjbillington Anyway the last unique trader was at 5:10AM Jul 26th in GMT+ 2. Resolves YES @levifinkelstein

@chrisjbillington If the last trader was the 26th, wouldn't it be the 27th when the 24h interval ends?

@levifinkelstein you said you would update the streak number at midnight GMT+2. Update to what? To what it should be, presumably - it was not clear that you would always add one to it had there been a trade in the last 24h and that that number is what resolution depended on.

That number is 7, even though there were unique traders only on six calendar days in GMT+2. Resolution was stated to depend on the length of the streak. You're gonna resolve this to 7 even though the streak was six days long?

You also left the number in the title at six. You said you might be late updating it, but this is a bit suss. You've been all over this website these last few days, and you happened to stop updating it at 6?

The resolution criteria also said something about depending on market creation time, not GMT+2. What's going on there? It'd be 5 24h periods if we're counting from market creation time, and 6 if we're counting starting from 1.

So what it is? Calendar days in GMT+2? 6 days, resolves YES. 24h periods since market creation? 5 days, resolves NO. Calendar days in GMT+2, plus one? 7 days, resolves NO. 24h periods since market creation, plus one? 6 days, resolves YES.

(These numbers might be wrong, I have not thought them through enough but you get my point)

You should N/A and write better resolution criteria, and I should know better than to bet on resolution criteria that look like this.

@levifinkelstein Fyi I'll ask admins to N/A this if you don't. I can't prove it but I think this market's criteria were maliciously written to encourage this kind of misunderstanding, to allow you to resolve whichever way you wanted. My fault too for falling for it of course.

@chrisjbillington addendum: maybe I am jumping the gun here and you are just misunderstanding your own resolution criteria. You started the streak counter at 1 because of course there were unique traders already on day 1. But at the next midnight GMT+2, you shouldn't have incremented it again, because that would be double-counting day 1. You can't have a 2-day streak when only one day has passed. If you had checked in on the market at that point to see what the streak is, the result would have been "it's still 1, all is well", and you wouldn't have incremented the counter.

You can have a counter that is greater than two if it started at 1 and increments every midnight, but "update" doesn't mean "increment" and such a counter is not actually the length of the streak. If you'd said you were going to resolve the market based on a counter that behaves blah blah way then great, but this market is supposed to be about a streak, and the counter merely a convenient and possibly-out-of-date reflection thereof.

F**K, @SMd186 this market was 15 minutes away from resolving YES. Why did you have to place a bet.

@Timothy

@SMd186 Oh I didn't see this.

@SMd186 This resolves YES now btw. so you should bet if you want to make some risk free profit.