
Chain:
@JeromeHPowell (M10)
@realDonaldTrump, formerly notrealDonaldTrump and TheManiflood (M20)
@Jack1, formerly NzJack0n and Jack0 (M40)
@prismatic (M80)
@solarflare (M160)
@Quroe (M320)
@IsaacKing (M640)
@bens (M1280)
@Marnix (M2560)
@strutheo (M5120)
Update 2026-01-03 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The chain is considered to have never ended as long as the possibility exists for someone to continue it. The chain only ends when someone definitively does not send the mana to the next person (not simply due to a delay or waiting period).
Update 2026-01-03 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): If the chain passes to Tumbles, the chain is considered broken.
Update 2026-01-08 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): The resolution criteria are the same as those used in the market: @/Quroe/how-many-manifolders-will-double-it
Update 2026-01-08 (PST) (AI summary of creator comment): This market resolves using the same rules as @/Quroe/how-many-manifolders-will-double-it, but without the 48 hour timer.
π Top traders
| # | Trader | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | αΉ134 | |
| 2 | αΉ25 | |
| 3 | αΉ15 | |
| 4 | αΉ0 | |
| 5 | αΉ0 |
People are also trading
Oh. That was for one of these. And here i was thinking it was completely detached from a market lmao
Anyway, there's no rules against passing it back. Technically, shouldn't it be on me to pass it again?
@realDonaldTrump Itβs getting expensive, I donβt think anyone gets shame if they donβt send it on now
@realDonaldTrump It depends on how faithfully you are adopting the original rules.
You seem to have adopted the episode 1.0 rules, and not the 2.0 or 2.1 rules. However, this line is on all of the ones I ran:
The same Manifolder cannot be in the chain more than once.
When I ran my episodes, I implicitly ran it with the intent that consent was not necessarily needed, but the communal shame could be pointed at the sender of the managram as a sort of relief valve against this. If it was sent to you, you're in the chain, whether you liked it or not. The community would be the jury about if consent or lack thereof mattered in the pass off. You could try to add somebody into the chain by surprise, but it could easily backfire on you spectacularly.
Funnily enough, my pass on to Isaac in this episode was a surprise move, without forewarning, because I thought it would be funny to see what he would do with it. Like, you can pass it on by surprise. Just be prepared for the consequences if they reject the play.
I'll leave this to your interpretation. You're the one running this instance, not me, so what you say goes, and I won't/can't complain.
@Quroe wdym? they just didn't send it to another person, and was active on the site. I can ask mods for a reresolution if they decide to continue the chain.
@realDonaldTrump This is the comment that seems to contradict the resolution. https://manifold.markets/realDonaldTrump/how-many-manifolders-will-double-it-lZhtyRhI5E#pshix9hpk8t
@Ziddletwix I might be crazy, but was it actually unresolved?
Never mind? Maybe it naturally closed to the end date?
