Notable silence on the issue by Elon on his X profile — has posted primarily about Tesla and DOGE. Can he keep himself from talking about the tariffs until then?
This market resolves YES if Elon Musk makes at least one post on his X account (https://x.com/elonmusk) that directly mentions or discusses the tariffs announced by Donald Trump on April 2, 2025, by 11:59 PM ET on April 6, 2025. The post must explicitly reference the tariffs (using words like "tariff", "tariffs", "import tax", etc.) and must be clearly about the Trump administration's recent tariff announcements. Both original Tweets and quote Tweets are sufficient if the above is satisfied.
Resolves NO if no such post is made by the deadline. Reposts about the subject by another author will still resolve to No.
Sources:
Musk's X profile: https://x.com/elonmusk
1,000🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ406 | |
| 2 | Ṁ369 | |
| 3 | Ṁ209 | |
| 4 | Ṁ169 | |
| 5 | Ṁ79 |
People are also trading
Why the 50% resolution with no explanation? If there's something you think counted, it'd be best to post it in the comments. Also, resolving 50% before the timeframe is up is crazy as there is still about 50 minutes left for him to make a post that satisfies the criteria 100%. A N/A resolution is better than 50% in these cases anyway, imo.
@Mana my sincere apologies, here's the explanation to your concerns:
1.) I did intend to resolve the market at 11:59PM ET but I was prompted by Manifold to resolve the market — I thought I had to resolve at the moment I got the notification.
2.) I'd taken the suggestion below in the comments on a 50-50 resolution; I didn't understand what a N/A resolution entailed. That's my fault and I'll know that going forward.
3.) I resolved the market 50-50 because Elon posted this (https://x.com/aaronblake/status/1908571214114595057?s=46) comment that's since been deleted which fulfilled talking about the tariffs but failed to satisfy saying the specific words in the resolution. In hindsight, I should've gone with N/A.
Really sorry, I'm new but that's no excuse in all the steps that led me to resolving the market in this way.
@marcSQZNP don't be too hard on yourself, I think a N/A resolution would've been best but the spirit you've handled this all in is extremely commendable! :)
@MalachiteEagle I would've resolved this as N/A once the market concluded since Elon didn't use the words specified in the resolution criteria. But I've messed up and resolved the market to 50-50.
@marcSQZNP haven’t followed all of the above but fwiw if you wish you resolved it N/A a mod can easily unresolve it so you can do so. (If you like the current resolution, then ignore this)
@MalachiteEagle I saw news about this as well, however, he hasn't posted about his remarks from the video-linked call on X specifically about tariffs.
This market will resolve based on Elon's remarks on X and no other platforms.
@marcSQZNP ah yeah thought I'd just post it here anyhow. Seems he's willing to see what happens if he floats this opinion at least!
@MalachiteEagle it's much appreciated!
I think that with the Trump administration and Elon's recent decoupling that Elon's finding it beneficial in terms of PR (and in turn, Tesla's PR) to take a position against tariffs. While at the same time, excluding explicitly mentioning China from his proposed "zero-tariff" opinion — on one hand perplexing since he has interests in China through his giga factory and on the other not due to his proximity to the Republican party.
@marcSQZNP I suspect that at this point he's drawn a big black line over China mentally. But yeah, curiously no criticism of the CCP so far.
.
Here, Elon is implicitly talking about Navarro’s role in tariffs; may be enough for at least a 50/50 resolution:
@ooah0 thank you for bringing this discussion in the comments!
When making the market, I was curious as to how well the AI feature would account for edge cases but it's actually introduced an edge case in itself because of the "explicitly reference the tariffs (using words like "tariff", "tariffs", "import tax", etc.)" clause for the YES resolution.
I think a 50/50 resolution seems fitting if Elon does not explicitly mention tariffs as described in the resolution before the deadline because the title of this market is "about" tariffs, which was my original intent. However, people may be betting because of the descriptive words clause.
If anyone objects, I'm willing to take full YES and NO resolution arguments into consideration. If I'm missing anything in terms of general norms on Manifold, I'm new, please educate me!