Yeah, UMA recently lowered the reward incentives for all market types, but did so for Geopolitics too, which is just insane
Yeah, UMA recently lowered the reward incentives for all market types, but did so for Geopolitics too, which is just insane
2026-07-22 · Polymarket · 123 条相关讨论
Yeah, UMA recently lowered the reward incentives for all market types, but did so for Geopolitics too, which is just insane
Yeah, UMA recently lowered the reward incentives for all market types, but did so for Geopolitics too, which is just insane
Geopolitics is now $3.5 instead of $5
Geopolitics is now $3.5 instead of $5
Well I don’t think anyone proposes geopol for the $5
Well I don’t think anyone proposes geopol for the $5
i don't know if lowering $1.50 on a $750 bond makes much difference
i don't know if lowering $1.50 on a $750 bond makes much difference
> Geopolitics is disputed at 24× the rate of finance and 111× the rate of crypto. It's ~48× the platform-wide average. And it's not one troll market skewing it: 178 distinct geopolitics markets drew disputes, the worst repeat offender only 4 times ("Will Iran strike Bahrain by April 30?"; the Iran-airspace and US–Cuba families each got disputed on multiple deadlines).
> Geopolitics is disputed at 24× the rate of finance and 111× the rate of crypto. It's ~48× the platform-wide average. And it's not one troll market skewing it: 178 distinct geopolitics markets drew disputes, the worst repeat offender only 4 times ("Will Iran strike Bahrain by April 30?"; the Iran-airspace and US–Cuba families each got disputed on multiple deadlines).
I agree, but my point is that it's completely disconnected from reality to lower it in the first place
I agree, but my point is that it's completely disconnected from reality to lower it in the first place
Is this ai
Is this ai
Yes, it's Fable 5 who did the analysis
Yes, it's Fable 5 who did the analysis
I am not sure if a higher duspute rate really says anything to the reward demanded for proposing
I am not sure if a higher duspute rate really says anything to the reward demanded for proposing
The reward only really matters when you know it wont get disputed, controversial markets you are bound to get the dispute bond anyway
The reward only really matters when you know it wont get disputed, controversial markets you are bound to get the dispute bond anyway
1.5 usd wont change your incentive to propose
1.5 usd wont change your incentive to propose
If you're going to have an incentive system in the first place for proposals, that system has to make sense. There are 3.5k proposals for Geopolitics - that means at their new rate, they're paying $25k~ per year in rewards. Meanwhile the new rates for crypto and sports are 60c. These events are 100x less likely to be disputed. They're now paying like $700kish per year in rewards. $3.5 for a 7.8% dispute rate or $0.60 for a 0.08% dispute rate? The risk profile is so wildly different. Just mental mathing, it's $60 against $3.5 for the same risk profile (I know, it's not strictly random, but that *favors* sports, which is literally just numbers.)
If you're going to have an incentive system in the first place for proposals, that system has to make sense. There are 3.5k proposals for Geopolitics - that means at their new rate, they're paying $25k~ per year in rewards. Meanwhile the new rates for crypto and sports are 60c. These events are 100x less likely to be disputed. They're now paying like $700kish per year in rewards. $3.5 for a 7.8% dispute rate or $0.60 for a 0.08% dispute rate? The risk profile is so wildly different. Just mental mathing, it's $60 against $3.5 for the same risk profile (I know, it's not strictly random, but that *favors* sports, which is literally just numbers.)
I think you are thinking about this the wrong way
I think you are thinking about this the wrong way
The incentive on disputed markets was never the 5 bucks
The incentive on disputed markets was never the 5 bucks
The incentive on bonds was also just the ability to redeem, free up capital, get the extra 0.1c
The incentive on bonds was also just the ability to redeem, free up capital, get the extra 0.1c
Crypto is more of a constantly reoccuring thing
Crypto is more of a constantly reoccuring thing
What's the proposal reward for?
What's the proposal reward for?
Why does it exist? Is it to incentivize proposals?
Why does it exist? Is it to incentivize proposals?
The proposal reward is irrelevant to geopol markets
The proposal reward is irrelevant to geopol markets
For the most part
For the most part
It's *currently* irrelevant, yes. Well - it's even more irrelevant now.
It's *currently* irrelevant, yes. Well - it's even more irrelevant now.
Geopol just gets proposed to redeem positions nobody does it for the $5
Geopol just gets proposed to redeem positions nobody does it for the $5
No one proposes geopol for the 5 bucks, they want to redeem shares or bait a dispute
No one proposes geopol for the 5 bucks, they want to redeem shares or bait a dispute
Crypto & sports is wayyy higher frequency hence it becomes much more relevant
Crypto & sports is wayyy higher frequency hence it becomes much more relevant
My point isn't "RETURN TO $5 IMMEDIATELY!", my point is - the system, as designed, does *not* function for geopolitics markets, and that should be addressed. Either change those markets fundamentally in terms of how proposals work or increase the incentive massively.
My point isn't "RETURN TO $5 IMMEDIATELY!", my point is - the system, as designed, does *not* function for geopolitics markets, and that should be addressed. Either change those markets fundamentally in terms of how proposals work or increase the incentive massively.
Why does it not? People propose just fine as is ?
Why does it not? People propose just fine as is ?
Because right now, the system as designed isn't working as it's supposed to work
Because right now, the system as designed isn't working as it's supposed to work
You need to propose like 850 markets correctly before making a mistake on sports now
You need to propose like 850 markets correctly before making a mistake on sports now
there are ambiguous cases sometimes where it should be disputed but it's very -EV to dispute
there are ambiguous cases sometimes where it should be disputed but it's very -EV to dispute
so it just passes
so it just passes
That doesnt matter in regard to the proposal reward though
That doesnt matter in regard to the proposal reward though
If anything a bigger reward would make that more likely
If anything a bigger reward would make that more likely
Bigger incentive to propose in the first place
Bigger incentive to propose in the first place
the issue is with the bond amount it's too high
the issue is with the bond amount it's too high
or rather the issue is with 500 going to UMA
or rather the issue is with 500 going to UMA
from dispute win
from dispute win
Not sure we have so many retards that think everything qualifies
Not sure we have so many retards that think everything qualifies
Its not just people here proposing
Its not just people here proposing
i do agree that geopol is higher risk, so I don't understand why reward is lower... maybe to disincentivize bs proposals?
i do agree that geopol is higher risk, so I don't understand why reward is lower... maybe to disincentivize bs proposals?
doesnt uma still pay a ton for gas
doesnt uma still pay a ton for gas
was bad enough for some markets to get them proposed will be even longer waits
was bad enough for some markets to get them proposed will be even longer waits
dispute risk isnt relevant for the proposal reward unless the reward was much higher (for geopol)
dispute risk isnt relevant for the proposal reward unless the reward was much higher (for geopol)
If this is your stance, then let's just remove all incentives entirely across all markets. Either you think an incentive structure matters or you don't. It seems like you don't think it matters. Oh, and additionally, even if you think the money topic is irrelevant, the dispute risk is a problem for people who don't want to risk whitelist, causing delayed proposals and potential misresolves. Geopolitics markets have an 8% dispute rate! That's massive!
If this is your stance, then let's just remove all incentives entirely across all markets. Either you think an incentive structure matters or you don't. It seems like you don't think it matters. Oh, and additionally, even if you think the money topic is irrelevant, the dispute risk is a problem for people who don't want to risk whitelist, causing delayed proposals and potential misresolves. Geopolitics markets have an 8% dispute rate! That's massive!
ok maybe polymarket understands that reward isn't really a factor in geopol so why give away the money
ok maybe polymarket understands that reward isn't really a factor in geopol so why give away the money
You clearly havent read what i said because i obviously said this only applies to markets like geopol, not high frequency categories
You clearly havent read what i said because i obviously said this only applies to markets like geopol, not high frequency categories
No one proposes geopol for the reward
No one proposes geopol for the reward
Whether it is 5 or 3.5
Whether it is 5 or 3.5
Why would geopolitics markets be any different to less disputed markets with your argument?
Why would geopolitics markets be any different to less disputed markets with your argument?
Because dispute rate is irrelevant to the argument for such small amounts
Because dispute rate is irrelevant to the argument for such small amounts
People bet on sports and crypto all the time, just let them propose.
People bet on sports and crypto all the time, just let them propose.
intern made a lot off it
intern made a lot off it
i think he's trying to say that even increasing geopol to $30 or $50 wouldn't make a difference
i think he's trying to say that even increasing geopol to $30 or $50 wouldn't make a difference
The incentive of redeeming far outweights the 5 bucks reward to the point that small reductions or increases change nothing
The incentive of redeeming far outweights the 5 bucks reward to the point that small reductions or increases change nothing
Increase it to a level where it *would* make a difference, then.
Increase it to a level where it *would* make a difference, then.
Or, again - change how those markets function.
Or, again - change how those markets function.
Sure, if thats possible
Sure, if thats possible
it doesn't for niche geopol like most Ukraine markets
it doesn't for niche geopol like most Ukraine markets
$150 would be nice lol
$150 would be nice lol
I've gone to whitelisted users and said "Hey, propose this, I'll give you $5k if it's disputed and we lose". This isn't how the system should function!
I've gone to whitelisted users and said "Hey, propose this, I'll give you $5k if it's disputed and we lose". This isn't how the system should function!
Higher rewards would require bigger bonds prob
Higher rewards would require bigger bonds prob
The reduction from $5 to $3.5 just shows how out of touch UMA/Polymarket are re: geopolitics markets
The reduction from $5 to $3.5 just shows how out of touch UMA/Polymarket are re: geopolitics markets
And I guess that's my central point
And I guess that's my central point
Even if you don't think it matters in practice, the optics suggest they're not even looking at the data
Even if you don't think it matters in practice, the optics suggest they're not even looking at the data
Whether its 5 or 3.5 or 7 it doesnt matter as long as it is not sufficiently large to outweight the incentive of redeeming
Whether its 5 or 3.5 or 7 it doesnt matter as long as it is not sufficiently large to outweight the incentive of redeeming
Crypto and sports are different because we have new markets constantly
Crypto and sports are different because we have new markets constantly
Incentives should be adjusted based on proposal risk.
Incentives should be adjusted based on proposal risk.
That would require a huge reward that is probably not sustainable
That would require a huge reward that is probably not sustainable
If they can't even afford to spend 20-30k a day on proposals idk what to say
If they can't even afford to spend 20-30k a day on proposals idk what to say
lol, yeah but an intern would never know so it’s obviously bs.
lol, yeah but an intern would never know so it’s obviously bs.
Generates the most $ in fees tho
Generates the most $ in fees tho
how sure are you that the dispute rate is 8% ? that seems a lot higher than I would expect
how sure are you that the dispute rate is 8% ? that seems a lot higher than I would expect
If you believe this, then it's not just "Oh well", it's "So therefore, this should happen instead"
If you believe this, then it's not just "Oh well", it's "So therefore, this should happen instead"
how, out of curiosity? People are still incentivized to propose given their positions in the market.
how, out of curiosity? People are still incentivized to propose given their positions in the market.
Sure, but if this is the logic, remove all proposal incentives
Sure, but if this is the logic, remove all proposal incentives
Thats what im saying for the past 15 minutes <:ICANT:1306491472417263636>
Thats what im saying for the past 15 minutes <:ICANT:1306491472417263636>
That only applies for lower frequency categories
That only applies for lower frequency categories
proposal incentives are still good for markets where there is less ambiguity/uncertainty. Keeps proposals coming quickly
proposal incentives are still good for markets where there is less ambiguity/uncertainty. Keeps proposals coming quickly
Why?
Why?
With big liquidity
With big liquidity
Big positions + fewer markets = higher incentive to redeem
Big positions + fewer markets = higher incentive to redeem
Without a reward
Without a reward
You think the crypto and sports markets don't have enough liquidity for proposals to go through without an incentive?
You think the crypto and sports markets don't have enough liquidity for proposals to go through without an incentive?
It would delay then for sure
It would delay then for sure
The part of the platform that makes up, what, 80% of the volume?
The part of the platform that makes up, what, 80% of the volume?
Thats just an aggregate
Thats just an aggregate
They have way more markets
They have way more markets
You cant zoom out like that to understand how things function
You cant zoom out like that to understand how things function
all i know is charts like this should not be allowed to exist:
all i know is charts like this should not be allowed to exist:
Some sports/Crypto dont have enough liquidity to get proposed without a reward
Some sports/Crypto dont have enough liquidity to get proposed without a reward
My point is very simple: if people proposing geopolitics markets are only doing so because they have purchased a position on the market, that structure needs to change. Right now, there's minimal incentive to propose a market you're not a part of, simply because the dispute rate is so high and carries meaningful risk.
My point is very simple: if people proposing geopolitics markets are only doing so because they have purchased a position on the market, that structure needs to change. Right now, there's minimal incentive to propose a market you're not a part of, simply because the dispute rate is so high and carries meaningful risk.
they should make elastic bond size, the bigger the volume of the market, the bigger the bond, with some minimal margin like 100-150 for low liq and not frequently disputed category of markets
they should make elastic bond size, the bigger the volume of the market, the bigger the bond, with some minimal margin like 100-150 for low liq and not frequently disputed category of markets
Due to the dispute rate another incentive is to bait a dispute for geopol
Due to the dispute rate another incentive is to bait a dispute for geopol
you can't change the fact that geopol is inherently uncertain -- even if rules improve
you can't change the fact that geopol is inherently uncertain -- even if rules improve
Brilliant system we have then, isn't it?
Brilliant system we have then, isn't it?
Part of the EV of proposing geopol is the possibility of getting the dispute bond
Part of the EV of proposing geopol is the possibility of getting the dispute bond
yes but unless market itself is bonded you are better off buying shares
yes but unless market itself is bonded you are better off buying shares
Yes in which case you want to redeem your bond whether it has a reward or not
Yes in which case you want to redeem your bond whether it has a reward or not
I'm not complaining it's uncertain, I'm complaining that *if* a market is uncertain, the proposal system as-is creates problems. Those problems are genuine loss of bond and risk of whitelist. You'd be crazy to propose these markets, and if the 3~ people who bother to take on that risk because they're involved in the markets go elsewhere, the platform gets a lot worse
I'm not complaining it's uncertain, I'm complaining that *if* a market is uncertain, the proposal system as-is creates problems. Those problems are genuine loss of bond and risk of whitelist. You'd be crazy to propose these markets, and if the 3~ people who bother to take on that risk because they're involved in the markets go elsewhere, the platform gets a lot worse
yes, but there isn't really a practical solution here. Dispute rate super high due to uncertainty and opposing views. What are they gonna do, give $250 rewards for each proposal?
yes, but there isn't really a practical solution here. Dispute rate super high due to uncertainty and opposing views. What are they gonna do, give $250 rewards for each proposal?
We were literally in a group chat 24 hours ago dividing proposal risk, I tipped because I appreciated the inherent risk
We were literally in a group chat 24 hours ago dividing proposal risk, I tipped because I appreciated the inherent risk
could you rerun this and enumerate how many of those sports disputes are on tennis? Im really curious about that
could you rerun this and enumerate how many of those sports disputes are on tennis? Im really curious about that
Strikes are horrendous to propose
Strikes are horrendous to propose
(As no)
(As no)
I mean I can come up with some solutions, but also - that's not a me job, that's a Polymarket-in-charge-of-the-product job. It's partly a practical "Hey, this should change", but it's also a retrospective "Why are you guys reducing incentives from $5 to $3.5 for such an obvious outlier category?"
I mean I can come up with some solutions, but also - that's not a me job, that's a Polymarket-in-charge-of-the-product job. It's partly a practical "Hey, this should change", but it's also a retrospective "Why are you guys reducing incentives from $5 to $3.5 for such an obvious outlier category?"
I love how Bel’s clarifs tell you Guys, it’s really not that fucking hard to understand
I love how Bel’s clarifs tell you Guys, it’s really not that fucking hard to understand
It speaks to how out of touch the person who made the incentive structure rework is
It speaks to how out of touch the person who made the incentive structure rework is
this is the pnl one person has made in 6 weeks on uma alone
this is the pnl one person has made in 6 weeks on uma alone
why are we paying ppl 13k a month to propose markets
why are we paying ppl 13k a month to propose markets
They've clearly scaled down the rewards with some amount of logic, and what I'm saying is this category is 10x more disputed than any other, so it shouldn't carry the same proposal incentive. <:shrugeg:986075701683838986>
They've clearly scaled down the rewards with some amount of logic, and what I'm saying is this category is 10x more disputed than any other, so it shouldn't carry the same proposal incentive. <:shrugeg:986075701683838986>
Wizard made 200k in 3 months lol
Wizard made 200k in 3 months lol
the ppl saying how important it is to incentivise a proposal race are the same ones who added whitelist to make sure that they lock out the people who would actually win it
the ppl saying how important it is to incentivise a proposal race are the same ones who added whitelist to make sure that they lock out the people who would actually win it
Tennis is one of the least disputed markets per capita
Tennis is one of the least disputed markets per capita
the issue is UMA eating 500$ from the dispute win it's very -EV to dispute in most scenarios unless you have a huge position
the issue is UMA eating 500$ from the dispute win it's very -EV to dispute in most scenarios unless you have a huge position
Nominally it's the #1 disputed category
Nominally it's the #1 disputed category
can someone tag <@79608178202914816> and get him to ask his clanker how many sports disputes are P4 followed by a successful proposal within the next 5 minutes
can someone tag <@79608178202914816> and get him to ask his clanker how many sports disputes are P4 followed by a successful proposal within the next 5 minutes
So it's just the sheer quantity of tennis games that causes the increased frequency
So it's just the sheer quantity of tennis games that causes the increased frequency
and these sports disputers are retards btw
and these sports disputers are retards btw
they tried to argue that a successful goal was actually saved on a WC semi
they tried to argue that a successful goal was actually saved on a WC semi
UMA is probably working on a proposal bot which will probably launch in a few months
UMA is probably working on a proposal bot which will probably launch in a few months
waoww so true let's keep giving them all millions a year
waoww so true let's keep giving them all millions a year
If someone is getting a million they have 500k proposal
If someone is getting a million they have 500k proposal
i wont tolerate this uma glazing
i wont tolerate this uma glazing
imagine doing 500k proposals per year
imagine doing 500k proposals per year