PolymarketDoes anyone else's limit sell orders just keep randomly disappearing?
Does anyone else's limit sell orders just keep randomly disappearing?
bis参与话题 0消息总数 14
该用户的聊天记录定位。
聊天记录
共 14 条，显示第 1-14 条Would be interested to know what <@665633842723553283> and <@1289090798238957581> think about this
Would be interested to know what <@665633842723553283> and <@1289090798238957581> think about this
This Reuters article (publised today) says Iran agrees to just downblend.. this would be the most recent reporting we have on the issue of enrichment: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-official-says-parties-can-still-walk-away-iran-deal-sequencing-will-be-key-2026-06-17/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
This Reuters article (publised today) says Iran agrees to just downblend.. this would be the most recent reporting we have on the issue of enrichment: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/us-official-says-parties-can-still-walk-away-iran-deal-sequencing-will-be-key-2026-06-17/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Again, this might be correct if users weren't financially incentivised to compete. There's no certainty that Y shares would get cheaper. Under this model, an incentivised user with credible evidence would propose before that happened to secure the winnings.
Again, this might be correct if users weren't financially incentivised to compete. There's no certainty that Y shares would get cheaper. Under this model, an incentivised user with credible evidence would propose before that happened to secure the winnings.
Users are financially incentivised to compete to propose resolutions.. the absence of a resolution by definition indicates that the resolution criteria has not been met.
Users are financially incentivised to compete to propose resolutions.. the absence of a resolution by definition indicates that the resolution criteria has not been met.
No it does. Again, assuming all actors in this market are rationale, it should already have happened. For it to happen at T+1, would more likely be indicative of the idea that that actor has obtained a piece of credible reporting to support a resolution.
No it does. Again, assuming all actors in this market are rationale, it should already have happened. For it to happen at T+1, would more likely be indicative of the idea that that actor has obtained a piece of credible reporting to support a resolution.
The only thing I think of regarding this is resolution uncertainty that's spooking sharper capital.. But the closer we get to June 30th without a proposed resolution, I think this will change.
The only thing I think of regarding this is resolution uncertainty that's spooking sharper capital.. But the closer we get to June 30th without a proposed resolution, I think this will change.
In that case, the additional liquidity is likely not sophisticated players, but copy traders..Suggesting that there's a market inefficiency that's occuring If anything it creates a strong investment thesis to buy N
In that case, the additional liquidity is likely not sophisticated players, but copy traders..Suggesting that there's a market inefficiency that's occuring If anything it creates a strong investment thesis to buy N
Because the market is still uncertain - no one is willing to propose and risk capital. I think at best two things are happening: (i) the market is favouring Y on the expectation that a piece of news will come out showing in clear terms Iran pledges / agrees to end enrichment or; (ii) there's latent liquidity that's tailing the large Y holders and is pushing the Y price up
Because the market is still uncertain - no one is willing to propose and risk capital. I think at best two things are happening: (i) the market is favouring Y on the expectation that a piece of news will come out showing in clear terms Iran pledges / agrees to end enrichment or; (ii) there's latent liquidity that's tailing the large Y holders and is pushing the Y price up
Why don't they just propose today?
Why don't they just propose today?
If it doesn't get proposed tomorrow, what do you think that means?
If it doesn't get proposed tomorrow, what do you think that means?
This is part of my point - if a market participant logically believes that whales being on Y, as well as nobody potentially disputing.. it's more of a reason to propose the resolution immediately, instead of waiting. I'm not really sure what you mean about whales making it Y and someone doing it then, I'm just inferring from market behaviour.
This is part of my point - if a market participant logically believes that whales being on Y, as well as nobody potentially disputing.. it's more of a reason to propose the resolution immediately, instead of waiting. I'm not really sure what you mean about whales making it Y and someone doing it then, I'm just inferring from market behaviour.
In theory, assuming prediction markets are perfectly efficient and there was already credible reporting, incentive structure suggests that a proposed resolution for the enrichment market would have happened by now. The fact that hasn't occurred, tells us there's still a level of uncertainty that's waiting for clear and irrefutable reporting consensus to make it obvious. So I think as we approach June 30th, without a proposed resolution, heavily favours N holders.
In theory, assuming prediction markets are perfectly efficient and there was already credible reporting, incentive structure suggests that a proposed resolution for the enrichment market would have happened by now. The fact that hasn't occurred, tells us there's still a level of uncertainty that's waiting for clear and irrefutable reporting consensus to make it obvious. So I think as we approach June 30th, without a proposed resolution, heavily favours N holders.
where's the evidence on this - can you share?
where's the evidence on this - can you share?