1,000
3.00@seaton I have identified 2 alts on this market. If u wish for me to unresolve this market so you can reopen it then let me know.
@DavidChee I mean I am very obviously an alt, but I don’t see why that would justify reopening.
@Alt102938 I wasn't counting you, there are 2 other alts (which violate our guidelines), who also traded. But Seaton didn't say anything about alts not being allowed, which is why I am deferring to him.
@TobyBW I literally can't even if I did want to, after it's been resolved you can't edit it without a admin
@seaton Ok. Just letting you know, the admin said he would leave the decision to you, so this market will stay closed.
@seaton I have sent additional details about alts to @DavidChee and I am confident that there are more alts Please wait and then take a decision once you have all the information.
@Akzzz123 Seaton already knows there are 2 alts and has decided not to reopen. The market's resolution criteria or title did not specify that alts are excluded. It's the correct resolution, and just because you lost a lot of mana, does not mean it should be re-opened,
@Dreamingpast More number of alts do not change anything fundamental. Alts may be banned under manifold's guidelines, but they were not excluded in this market and should not affect resolution
@seaton Without doubt there has been a violation of community guidelines on this market. The market should thus reopen to discourage such violations in the future which I am sure you would agree with.
I would request you to wait for some time till there's more info on additional alts before taking a decision.
@Akzzz123 Creating multiple accounts (alts) is permissible under certain conditions:
Any other alts created should have a clear indicator in the name or bio stating it's an alt
@Akzzz123 creating alts is not an offense nor is betting in this market with those alts. Only alts which violate community guidelines are questionable, and those are manifold's headache, not this market's
@Dreamingpast Betting with alts on this market is a violation of community guidelines and firstuserhere has been fined by Manifold for that.
@Akzzz123 Excuse me, correction: I was fined for using gambling gandalf to bet on my own markets, which is a violation of guidelines
@firstuserhere And using alts to manipulate such markets is a violation too. Manifold seem to have fined you only for farming bonuses tough.
@Akzzz123, I understand your frustration and I am about to be travelling today but if you'd like, I'm happy to give you a 0 interest loan for a month of 3k mana to make back some profits
@MarcusAbramovitch Thanks, I'm sure there were alts used to manipulate the market which should change the resolution of the market. I trust Manifold to sort it.
@Akzzz123 It should not change the resolution of the market, only delay the resolution. To resolve no would be just as if not more unfair as resolving yes, as otherwise the market should have continued for an additional ~8 hours after its close.
@bingeworthy I disagree. The amount of traders in such markets influences how many more people bet on it. There's simply no way to control for the impact of alts and so it should invalidate the market at the very least.
My argument for NO is because the market has been closed and the conditions of the market don't mention that it should be open till the end date. Reducing the count of alts would thus flip the result.
Either N/A or NO would be fair outcomes I believe.
@Akzzz123 brother listen, if market didn't resolve yes, then we can see if it resolves YES or NO by reopening it, but everyone will be hell bent on resolving YES now 💀 💀 💀 💀 💀 💀 💀
@Akzzz123 come on brother, let us flick this market https://manifold.markets/seaton/will-this-market-have-200-or-more-u
@Akzzz123 Your solution means that if someone wanted to manipulate a market, they could just do it in the reverse way. If a NO bettor who thought that they would lose made their alts all bet on YES, in your world they would be rewarded by either getting their money back with an N/A resolution, or winning profit with a NO resolution. The only correct solutions here are A: say that alts are fair game in this market, or B: reopen the market for as long as it would have been open, pull out all alts, and continue until the end.
@BeScared y only 1? only 1 is salty. Brother you played you lost. chilllllll everyone else took it easy
@Akzzz123 Re-resolving to NO would absolutely not be a fair option. Many people bet large amounts on YES because they assumed that the market would be resolving according the title and the presumed resolution criteria, which were met when the number of unique traders reached 100. Using shenanigans with the closing date, like saying "Well, nothing explicitly said it had to be open until the close date," to justify a NO resolution is not fair to anyone. It is universally the norm on Manifold that markets that rely on something happening before the close date don't get to change their close date, except by resolving early if the event has already occurred.
If we accept the argument that "unique predictors" should have been interpreted in a way that excludes alts, then you could argue for an N/A resolution, but even that sounds unreasonable, given that the norm is to use the number of unique traders displayed by Manifold to determine this.
@BeScared can u remove firstusername's discord from your profile and clarify who ur an alt of pls. Otherwise I may take further action.
@Akzzz123 I will look into some of the possible alts and enforce warnings/fines if necessary. But it is not my job to do investigative work to make sure the resolution of a random gambling market which is delisted is correct. Unless the creator is either the one with the alts and is defrauding ppl, or they ask me to unresolve it if alts are found.
@DavidChee I have lost mana because of violation of Manifold's community guidelines. I would request Manifold to do the right thing and cover my losses because these losses would not have occurred if not for the violation of the guidelines in place.
I understand you are limited by time but I have shared evidence for manipulation that goes beyond this market, so I trust it is in Manifold's best interest to take a deeper look into this.
@Akzzz123 dw I have said I will take a look at the alts themselves. And if I do find em I prob will unresolve and defer to creator whether they want to increase the duration
@BeScared I don't care about the username, u can call urself Stephen King lol. The guidelines on alts state that you have to make it clear in your bio which account is ur main one. Also u shouldn't be linking to other people's discords/twitter in your profile.
@Akzzz123 the loan offer stands. I assure you manifold won't undo this resolution. I know it's frustrating because isaac and others got me on this type of stuff before. That is how manifold goes sometimes. I assure you that my campaign was, to my knowledge, alt-free and you are going to do yourself a disservice if you make an enemy out of yourself. Message me on discord if you'd like
@MarcusAbramovitch marcus advertise in discord, yes? For giving people bribe to bet YES? @Akzzz123 doesn't understand what lengths people go to for profit!!!
@Akzzzz123 it didn't take thag much effort. I did this since I was on hold with a government agency and saw this market and derivatives to manipulate
@MarcusAbramovitch I appreciate your offer, Marcus, but it's about sticking to what I believe is right. If people think an account with <10K portfolio is the "enemy" in this market being manipulated by whales with 200K+ net value, then that's up to them.
@Akzzz123 why u assume whales manipulate? Someone not in top 5 (my main) is who manipulated ok?? I wanted credit and i hate that i'm not getting freaking attention even!!
@Akzzz123 I've been trying to get attention, by trolling or whatever but ffs!!! I did this ! I pulled it off !!!! I made you cry like a baby because of my skills.
@Akzzz123 i did so much 😭 at least someone acknowledge and stop giving credit to f**cking whales for everything!!! I hat ethis
@Akzzz123 I don't think of you as an enemy. I think of you as a guy who I unfortunately manipulated a market against and don't want any lasting disagreement. It sucks to lose when you feel you should have won. I had the same happen to me in many many non predictive markets. That is the problem with them. Don't engage in them if you aren't ready to lose some you think you won
@MarcusAbramovitch My concerns about the violation of community guidelines are mostly around accounts unlinked to you since the ones linked to you seem to be your friends. I believe N/A resolution would be a fair outcome since there's no way of controlling for the impact already done due to manipulation from alts. Whatever the resolution, I am sure we will not have any lasting dispute over this.
@Akzzz123 Manifold isn't morally on the hook to print mana to cover damages frthird-party violations of the CGs. Neither would a stock exchange or a bookie if a third party cheated in the market or on a sporting event. You also didn't pay for a guaranteed dispute resolution service here.