Resolves as Yes if the actions taken in the week 13 Apr-21 Apr by both parties are less radical than the current state of missile launches and drone attacks.
Related questions
🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ1,732 | |
| 2 | Ṁ1,035 | |
| 3 | Ṁ374 | |
| 4 | Ṁ155 | |
| 5 | Ṁ117 |
@ZviMowshowitz do you think this week still has a chance of "deescalating"? if not an escalation, it was at least a response of the same "escalation level" as the Iranian one
@ukaszBartoszcze I think strongly yes. This was an attempt to de-escalate without looking weak, and Iran seems game for that. Or it might go another way, but I would have left this open.
@Odoacre the outcome was NO because there is substantial evidence available that Israel has, in fact, escalated. Confirmed by ABC News and quite a lot of footage on Twitter.
@ukaszBartoszcze How has Israel escalated compared to last week? Iran launched drones and missiles and Israel hasn't even struck back at all...
Also please look at what was happening to the market right before I resolved- large trades being made to the NO side, signifying people who got the information quicker than I did tried to arbitrage by acting quickly on the real time news. I understand most of you thought a deescalation was coming- so did I when I created the market. Looking at the news though, I would think most of you would either say this is an escalation or at least a response of the same caliber as the Iranian attack. So a "NO" resolution is the best outcome.
@ukaszBartoszcze I'm watching ABC News right now per your above comment, and the host just said that based on what we know so far, the volume of missiles in Israel's retaliation appears to be lower than that in Iran's initial attack. If this turns out to be true, then I don't think Israel's retaliation qualifies for a YES resolution, though I suppose it comes down to how literally you interpret the resolution criteria in the market description.
@gregrosent don't you mean NO resultion here?
"I don't think Israel's retaliation qualifies for a YES resolution"
otherwise both heurestics (volume of missiles and total damage) lead to a no resolution as resolved in the market
Current state of missile launches and drone attacks
So far that's purely Iran though. If Israel strikes back how do you decide if it's escalatory? Does it have to be with more missiles/aircraft than Iran used? What if Israel hits back with just 5% of that, then Iran does another strike like last night but 10% smaller?
@ShakedKoplewitz If there is a response from Israel and both countries keep sending missiles at each other but the strikes are not bigger than the current strikes and no new methods of attack (ground invasion, new, drastic economic sanctions) are used than this resolves as YES since the escalation level is lower than the current one
@ukaszBartoszcze no manned aircraft were used in Iran's attack, so if Israel carries out airstrikes using them, does this resolve Yes? Or is it a case of it must be a new method of attack AND of a larger scale?
@ukaszBartoszcze NO is what I meant, not YES - thanks for clarifying. It would make sense to add a general clarification to the question description, imo.
@ukaszBartoszcze Seems like that's just a different tactic rather than an escalation (unless Israel uses more than a few hundred planes).
@HarrisonNathan I answered all questions asked on this thread. You did not ask a single one. I don't think what you are doing here is appropriate. 83 trades were submitted to this market, with majority of users understanding the spirit and the wording of the question.