cliffs; polymarket is revising conditions for bet payout _after_ bets are being placed basically.
above and beyond how ludicrous this shit is, it begs the question; why? what possible reason would there be to compel a book to revise the conditions of a bet after thousands of people have placed their wagers? whats their skin in this?
https://twitter.com/redhairshanks86/status/1870774637119828217
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky
"America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs
This is of concern to me, as a polymarket user.
I always had a backdoor worry that shenanigans could occur there with their so-called "smart" contracts, which never seemed to really work like actual smart contracts.
Here is the full claim:
The Polymarket Drama: Act II
let me start by saying: i didn't choose the thug life, the thug life chose me. i have 0 skin in the game on this bet, but people in the comments were calling for me to write about it, so here we are.
the original rules are: the bet should resolve to NO if biden signs the relevant bill to provide further funding until 2025, deadline 31 dec 2024.
this happened yesterday, there is no dispute about it. i put the official press release into the first comment. biden signed the bill, every single news outlet is reporting it.
however, this bet is still at 99% YES. why?
because 2 days ago, polymarket arbitrarily added an addition to the rule: the signing needed to happen BEFORE 20 dec 2024. they added this rule months after the bet already started.
people in the comments are going crazy, threatening to sue polymarket etc.
Here's the "additional context" making it resolve to YES:
https://twitter.com/redhairshanks86/status/1870775173252866452
Here's a counterclaim, albeit from a guy with one of the biggest YES positions, who obviously benefits from this situation:
https://twitter.com/redhairshanks86/status/1870808219502903465
(1) The rules indicate that if Biden doesn't sign by the applicable funding deadline (December 21 12AM as established by the last CR), then the market resolves Yes. End of story.
(2) There was a site banner next to the title to remind traders to read the rules and that no signing by midnight means a resolution to Yes. A nice touch.
(3) Polymarket even clarified, re-iterated the rules, and said the market should resolve to Yes.
(4) This same situation with Biden signing the next morning already happened in the March shutdown market, and that resolved Yes after UMA dispute and Polymarket clarification.
This is purely a reading comprehension issue, not a rules issue or resolution issue. Polymarket has had some bad rulesets, but this isn’t one of them. They went out of their way to spell it out. Different markets have different criteria for a shutdown. The bar used by Polymarket (and previously e.g. PredictIt) is a lapse in appropriations. Not the OMB commencing shutdown procedures.
I agree with the people unhappy about this.
The original rule was:
The additional context:This market will resolve to "Yes" if the U.S government shut down occurs between August 30, and December 31, 2024, 11:59 PM ET. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
The market will resolve to “Yes” if the acting President fails to sign the relevant bill(s) extending government funding by the applicable deadline(s), even if no government shutdown is explicitly announced.
For this market to resolve to "Yes" any shutdown will count. If only a portion of the US government is covered by any signed bill(s) extending funding of the US government, and a portion of the US government goes unfunded, this market will still resolve to "Yes".
The primary resolution for this source will be official information from the US government, however a consensus of credible reporting may also be used.
As per the rules, “The market will resolve to “Yes” if the acting President fails to sign the relevant bill(s) extending government funding by the applicable deadline(s), even if no government shutdown is explicitly announced.” President Biden did not sign a bill extending funding by the midnight deadline (12:00 AM ET) on December 20, hence this market should resolve to “Yes”.
Polymarket is claiming that "applicable deadlines" meant 12am ET December 20, thus Biden's failure to sign the bill by then meant it resolves to YES, even if there's no shutdown.
However, as December 20 was never mentioned specifically as an "applicable deadline" in the bet, and since December 31 was a date mentioned as the bet's endpoint, this resolution doesn't make sense. Polymarket claims that since the original signing deadline was December 20, that's what is being used, and the extension (where a bill was signed) doesn't matter. But that's bullshit.
There is currently an appeal in place, which will be decided upon at 7pm EST on December 23.
Laughably, even the additional context seems to have an error, as their "12am EST December 20" really meant "12am EST December 21", a common mistake when people forget the midnight is the next day. Didn't matter for this bet, but funny how that was also wrongly listed.
https://polymarket.com/event/us-gove...wn-before-2025
Might be worth it to throw a bit on NO at 1c, and take the 99:1 shot that this gets overturned.
https://twitter.com/GroundKantroll/status/1870527469478170848
I really think I'm gonna fire like $50 on this shit, just in case they have a change of heart and reverse it
Though it feels like I might be flushing $50 down the toilet.
Get a load of this guy
Bro just fired $145k on YES to make slightly more than $1k if it resolves that way.
Either dude is a complete retard, or he knows something.
Well I fired $63 on it, to win $7000. 0.9c per share.
Probably flushing it down the toilet, but maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised.
Originally Posted by Dan Druff
Though it feels like I might be flushing $50 down the toilet.
Get a load of this guy
Bro just fired $145k on YES to make slightly more than $1k if it resolves that way.
Either dude is a complete retard, or he knows something.
remember how much money we all made fading MAGA zealots in the comment sections of predictit?
i get the feeling that polymarket and kalshi are going to be their new hobbies.
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky
"America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs
I am committed to investing some time exploring the idea that Trump pardons SBF or somehow his sentence is severely reduced.
It looks like nobody will lose money except those chumps who sold distressed positions. It is expected the funds returned could be 120-150%.
Sure SBF made unauthorized VC investment with customer funds but many home runs like AI Anthropic resulted in and BTC launched
The crypto bro’s running the show now in DC might surprise when the presents are passed out to all those “suffering” FTX bag holders.
check out last few posts in end times thread. conjecture biden might before trump does
uhhhhh they are returning funds based on the pico low prices.
"Birds born in a cage think flying is an illness." - Alejandro Jodorowsky
"America is not so much a nightmare as a non-dream. The American non-dream is precisely a move to wipe the dream out of existence. The dream is a spontaneous happening and therefore dangerous to a control system set up by the non-dreamers." -- William S. Burroughs
There are currently 8 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 8 guests)
Reply With Quote