秋田预测市场 · Discord 审计

Kalshi“Platner赢得大选”市场标题与规则矛盾致用户亏损

2026-07-07 · Kalshi · 46 条相关讨论

mark zuckerberg 2026-07-07 06:30:05

hate to see ppl get rules cooked this way https://x.com/gaetend/status/2074247384758944236?s=46

hate to see ppl get rules cooked this way https://x.com/gaetend/status/2074247384758944236?s=46

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 06:49:53

he's 100% correct. that market was badly written and badly promoted

he's 100% correct. that market was badly written and badly promoted

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 06:50:03

i fell for it and i'm a big ol contract nerd

i fell for it and i'm a big ol contract nerd

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 06:50:32

i sent a bug report on it about a month ago, and tbh im shocked they kept it up

i sent a bug report on it about a month ago, and tbh im shocked they kept it up

John G 2026-07-07 06:51:39

I bought no on both sides of that market expecting this exact outcome. Yeah I'm a little annoyed too.

I bought no on both sides of that market expecting this exact outcome. Yeah I'm a little annoyed too.

tooeasy27 2026-07-07 06:53:03

I almost bought Nos as well last night. But i stopped right before i did and re-read the rules again. But yea, it was poorly presented and confusing.

I almost bought Nos as well last night. But i stopped right before i did and re-read the rules again. But yea, it was poorly presented and confusing.

John G 2026-07-07 06:53:41

I realized it after then left stink bids up h oping someone would get confused but no dice

I realized it after then left stink bids up h oping someone would get confused but no dice

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 06:54:59

I don't have a screenshot on me, but the original strike title was like, "Platner Wins General Election"

I don't have a screenshot on me, but the original strike title was like, "Platner Wins General Election"

John G 2026-07-07 06:55:39

One was "Graham Platner wins" and the other was "Republican defeats Graham Platner"

One was "Graham Platner wins" and the other was "Republican defeats Graham Platner"

Reg Monkey 2026-07-07 06:56:36

gaeten derangement keeps people from seeing obvious kalshi mistakes, sad

gaeten derangement keeps people from seeing obvious kalshi mistakes, sad

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 06:56:50

not trying to bust anyone's balls but i reported it before the primary and suggested they freeze it at least

not trying to bust anyone's balls but i reported it before the primary and suggested they freeze it at least

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 06:57:28

i think i torched like $600-800 from not reading the fine print

i think i torched like $600-800 from not reading the fine print

tooeasy27 2026-07-07 06:58:37

yea i got GDS.

yea i got GDS.

tooeasy27 2026-07-07 06:58:45

but yea, market was poorly written. shoulda been fixed.

but yea, market was poorly written. shoulda been fixed.

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 07:01:36

they should have frozen the market and paid back losses

they should have frozen the market and paid back losses

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 07:02:53

kalshi has gotten way better in the past few months at fixing Title-Contract contradictions, and i want them to keep up that level of market integrity

kalshi has gotten way better in the past few months at fixing Title-Contract contradictions, and i want them to keep up that level of market integrity

carl 2026-07-07 07:11:01

i mean it was in first line of the short rules

i mean it was in first line of the short rules

nonsenseking 2026-07-07 07:16:39

this is the correct response

this is the correct response

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 07:23:09

thats true. but the title-rule contradiction is pretty bad in this instance

thats true. but the title-rule contradiction is pretty bad in this instance

carl 2026-07-07 07:23:49

they fixed this really fast though imo

they fixed this really fast though imo

carl 2026-07-07 07:24:09

fast clickers pay for the game they play yk

fast clickers pay for the game they play yk

OneOldHat 2026-07-07 07:24:15

No they didn't it was like that for weeks

No they didn't it was like that for weeks

carl 2026-07-07 07:24:25

bro

bro

carl 2026-07-07 07:24:28

after it became relevant

after it became relevant

carl 2026-07-07 07:24:34

due to likely drop out

due to likely drop out

carl 2026-07-07 07:24:44

they changed it when odds to drop out were like 15c

they changed it when odds to drop out were like 15c

carl 2026-07-07 07:24:46

lmao

lmao

carl 2026-07-07 07:24:50

that’s quick asf

that’s quick asf

OneOldHat 2026-07-07 07:24:52

It was relevant if you built into a large position over weeks to play this exact thing

It was relevant if you built into a large position over weeks to play this exact thing

carl 2026-07-07 07:25:20

oh nah you’re just regarded if you’re putting 5 figs without reading the first line of the short rules

oh nah you’re just regarded if you’re putting 5 figs without reading the first line of the short rules

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 07:25:51

... it was relevant from the time the market was created. platner's scandals were widely discussed, as was the possibility of him dropping out

... it was relevant from the time the market was created. platner's scandals were widely discussed, as was the possibility of him dropping out

OneOldHat 2026-07-07 07:26:02

I can read the rules. I can also read the UI plainly telling people it was Y or N Platner

I can read the rules. I can also read the UI plainly telling people it was Y or N Platner

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 07:26:21

it was irresponsible to create this market and advertise it as the "exact outcome" when people were considering this exact sequence of events

it was irresponsible to create this market and advertise it as the "exact outcome" when people were considering this exact sequence of events

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 07:26:33

and again it's a shame because i wanted to trade on this exact sequence of events

and again it's a shame because i wanted to trade on this exact sequence of events

white foldable chair 2026-07-07 07:26:36

just make every market republican v democrat at that point

just make every market republican v democrat at that point

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 07:26:39

and i clicked before reading the fine print

and i clicked before reading the fine print

OneOldHat 2026-07-07 07:26:55

Especially considering there was an exact outcome market posted with the supposed opposite intent of the main market

Especially considering there was an exact outcome market posted with the supposed opposite intent of the main market

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 07:26:56

the market was legitimately just a parlay on the primary on the general, which is dumb

the market was legitimately just a parlay on the primary on the general, which is dumb

OneOldHat 2026-07-07 07:27:20

Which they then hid in the UI

Which they then hid in the UI

@bernardbulletin 2026-07-07 07:27:20

im not crying about the money, but i do think it's a screwup worth owning up to

im not crying about the money, but i do think it's a screwup worth owning up to

OneOldHat 2026-07-07 07:27:47

You can't search for that market now without the exact ticker. Sucks for anyone in positions in that one!

You can't search for that market now without the exact ticker. Sucks for anyone in positions in that one!