I will place a decently sized NO limit order at 50% on this market. If no more than 15 people (excluding me) bet NO, the market resolves YES, and you get the mana from my limit order by betting YES against it. If more than 15 distinct people aside from me bet NO, the market resolves NO. The liquidity of the market is low, so you get very little personally from betting NO.
"Betting NO" counts the number of distinct people who have (except for me of course, putting the initial limit order) placed a NO trade or filled, even partially, a NO limit order, at any time. Selling a YES share does not count as betting NO. This will be resolved based on the trade log history.
As an example, if 16 distinct people bet NO, the market would resolve NO.
Resolves YES if the defection threshold is not reached by the end of the market.
I will not bet on this market aside from that, and will not use any kind of alt account or rigging.
1,000People are also trading
You're just rigging the game at this point.
"Here's a string of these markets that all defected. What's the chance this one will defect too?"
(That last one was actually the third in line. This is fourth).
If we want a cooperate, it needs to be coordinated - if all new players see data against, it's a self-fulfilling prophecy.
(Oh, wait, that's the point isn't it. Spiderduckpig is making money on this, as long as enough people hit their limit orders to offset market creation costs)
Someone should shout "now" on the fifth one, if spiderduckpig keeps it going that far! ๐
@DannyqnOht I've been increasing the threshold every time, so it'll be harder and harder for me to win. And I didn't really make any mana on the last market because people put up limit orders
@spiderduckpig Really? I thought you put a big limit "no" at 50%... How would someone's limit order stop that? A bunch of people took you up on that, right? Shouldn't that have made you mana since the market actually resolved no, and you bought a bunch of no at 50%?
@DannyqnOht man what do you think rigging is
you have access to all the available information
"no" is winning because it's the rational choice. if n-1 people have bet no, then buying no is obviously rational because it causes a no resolution. if n-2 people have bet no, then buying no is rational because it puts someone else in the n-1 case, so you know another actor will buy no and you'll win. we can backpropogate this to n=0.
the question just becomes "how much time does it take for those effects to happen so that this is actually how it goes, and risk aversion about people being irrational doesn't win out" in which case showing the past markets is important data!
@DannyqnOht No, because people put NO limit orders up at 40%, so I basically didn't fill any of the order (same with this market too). But don't worry, I will lose eventually
@spiderduckpig I actually made less than 1 mana if you check the market profits lol. Plus 75 from trading bonuses, but that's not much when risking 3000 mana, and I only care about my profit graph anyways which trading bonuses don't count towards, I don't care about the net worth graph
Last try reached 13 NO in ~1 day and a half.