🏅 Top traders

FYI since I had not cancelled the google alert.

There were two occurrences since the market closed:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-66676630
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-66786412

Fundraiser for bus driver involved in fatal Harrogate crash

A teenage Ukrainian refugee lost three family members in the crash near Harrogate, police say.

usages of "horrific" are expanding faster than we're dropping "people" for "folks"

These were higher than I expected

Who uses the word "absolutely" in a non-editorial article?

@NicholasKross Perhaps if it's in a quote.

Just a reminder that as per description, the market will be resolved 24 hours after close.

So this resolves NO if "just" a second holocaust happens but nobody uses the exact phrase "absolutely horrific" in the NYT or BBC to describe it? lol

@LightLawliet Wouldn't they call it absolutely horrific, though? Unless if it was the holocaust of conservatives, I guess

@lukres Maybe, maybe not. But the title is not the actual question that is betted on.

@LightLawliet Just imagine getting people to agree what absolutely horrific actually means

@LightLawliet @lukres Probably would be good to at least put quotes around the phrase "absolutely horrific" in the title, to prompt people to check the description.

@jskf Done. Added single quotes against all rules of interpunction

"Absolutely horrific" has been used here:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/09/us/hurricane-dora-hawaii-wildfires.html

The event (Hawaii fires) is still ongoing, therefore this should be resolved as yes. The phrase refers to the fires, which are still burning and the state of emergency is still on.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/maui-wildfires-upcountry-kula-still-burning/

And more specifically to stranded travelers, which is still happening:

https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/world/they-were-alone-in-a-fight-to-survive-maui-residents-had-moments-to-make-life-or-death-choices-1.6519002

https://www.hawaiianairlines.com/hurricane-dora-faq

Hawaii wildfires continue to burn in the Upcountry Maui town of Kula: "We're still on edge"

East of the Lahaina disaster, firefighters are still battling blazes that have claimed 19 homes.

@xenochain This article was published before the market was created (in fact it inspired me to create it). The intention was that the article should be published between the market opening date and 24 hours after market close. I apologise that this was not spelled out explicitly.

@lukres So I will not close it based on this article (unless perhaps there is a consensus by Trustworthy users that I should, but I don't think there would be one). I suggest you sell if you bought yes based on this.

@lukres to make the market more clear and avoid irreducible pluralisms in the interpretation of the overlap, I'd suggest omitting the clause "it counts if the event started before the market opened" in the future. In the current scenario, the "absolutely horrific" event is ongoing and meets all your criteria:

1. Not speculative.

2. Coincides with the marketized period.

3. The event (not the article) occurred while the market was open. This should resolve as 'YES' this time. Please consider using more precise language in the future.

@xenochain You are right about the clarity of the current rules and it's completely my fault for missing the case of an article published in the past about an event still ongoing.

That said I am relieved that you exited the market with negligible loss, and any further bets were made after my comment. I will clarify the rules, however I will do it in this market and will use my discretion as market creator to not close it as "yes" based on the NYTimes article. The reasons are as follows:

• There are actually great many events that were called "absolutely horrific" in the past and are still ongoing. The market would be absurd if past events counted, so the only way to resolve it now would be N/A.

• I believe most people understood the rules as they were intended, as evidenced by the low probability prior to your bet and nobody bringing up any past articles.

So while you are correct on purely logical grounds, I will continue the market based on common sense ones.

Great idea for a market

Just to clarify potential issues:

• it does not count if the event is merely speculated to have been absolutely horrific

• it counts if the event started before the market opened, as long as the absolutely horrific part overlaps any part of the period when the market was open