Polymarkethttps://x.com/penguin_pmkt/status/2075319642973769766
https://x.com/penguin_pmkt/status/2075319642973769766
ice参与话题 5消息总数 115
该用户的聊天记录定位。
聊天记录
共 115 条，显示第 1-50 条<@529922957733003264> dm. add me
<@529922957733003264> dm. add me
how much longer added time
how much longer added time
who is this
who is this
someone pls propose trump visit south dakota. he's there rn
someone pls propose trump visit south dakota. he's there rn
interesting
interesting
is 73 almost 80?
is 73 almost 80?
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2072854478735266246
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2072854478735266246
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2072854478735266246
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2072854478735266246
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2071416148927898068
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2071416148927898068
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2070967415962210602
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2070967415962210602
v nice
v nice
i saw your pratt bet
i saw your pratt bet
<@845581203628490762> are u mainly tarding on kalshi now
<@845581203628490762> are u mainly tarding on kalshi now
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2070352752006320308
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2070352752006320308
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2070352752006320308
https://x.com/HiveLiveHQ/status/2070352752006320308
https://giphy.com/gifs/cmyYLp1maYNWkCU9nS
https://giphy.com/gifs/cmyYLp1maYNWkCU9nS
man it would've been such a good market :(
man it would've been such a good market :(
https://giphy.com/gifs/sadness-gorro-sad-boy-4V3RuU0zSq1SC8Hh4x
https://giphy.com/gifs/sadness-gorro-sad-boy-4V3RuU0zSq1SC8Hh4x
you know what i meant
you know what i meant
JULY 7
JULY 7
you guys know what i mean
you guys know what i mean
FUCK ME
FUCK ME
I MEAN JULY 7
I MEAN JULY 7
June 7 strike for Strait of Hormuz return to normal please <@1212792946341183578> <@1272383282687905939> <@1457826843766947977>
June 7 strike for Strait of Hormuz return to normal please <@1212792946341183578> <@1272383282687905939> <@1457826843766947977>
I haven’t used main poly site in over a month. the main site so bad that I’ve actually spent my own money adjusting my setup just so i can avoid using poly’s main site entirely…
I haven’t used main poly site in over a month. the main site so bad that I’ve actually spent my own money adjusting my setup just so i can avoid using poly’s main site entirely…
<@941405798096076880>
<@941405798096076880>
when was the last time they clarified against price?
when was the last time they clarified against price?
AND IRAN THEMSELVES
AND IRAN THEMSELVES
wait so then the other market is Y?
wait so then the other market is Y?
literally all of polyalpha is on N car is just pumping for more liq
literally all of polyalpha is on N car is just pumping for more liq
correct
correct
literally both are Y. trump has given them the right to enrich, but iran have pledged to not enrich
literally both are Y. trump has given them the right to enrich, but iran have pledged to not enrich
are nobros just banking on a scam clarif?
are nobros just banking on a scam clarif?
if this goes to UMA it will obviously be P2
if this goes to UMA it will obviously be P2
iaea is biased? cia is biased? jd vance is biased? iranian government is biased? you are writing off genuine reliable sources as "biased" (which btw, even if true (it's not), would not even disqualify them per rules)
iaea is biased? cia is biased? jd vance is biased? iranian government is biased? you are writing off genuine reliable sources as "biased" (which btw, even if true (it's not), would not even disqualify them per rules)
he admits that it's "freezing the status quo" and we have wide consensus of credible reporting assessing status quo as "no enrichment." i think it's pretty clear that this is a boomer who is confused. do you weight senator jack reed as higher than the US intel community? the cia? if we are going to take statements from both governments and try to deduce what the US government, and then what the Iranian government, have said on the matter, what would you say the US government's position is? what would you say the iranian government's position is? the iranian govenrment has *unquivocally* stated that "status quo" = no enrichment. there has not been a single iranian gov source that has stated the contrary. On the US side, we have the vice president, the CIA, and more, all saying "iran is not currently enriching" and then we have one senator who is confused saying "the deal doesn't explicitly say enrichment is over. the program is just frozen" (which, if we use a liiiiittttlllleee bit of thinking, we can see that frozen = no enrichment).
he admits that it's "freezing the status quo" and we have wide consensus of credible reporting assessing status quo as "no enrichment." i think it's pretty clear that this is a boomer who is confused. do you weight senator jack reed as higher than the US intel community? the cia? if we are going to take statements from both governments and try to deduce what the US government, and then what the Iranian government, have said on the matter, what would you say the US government's position is? what would you say the iranian government's position is? the iranian govenrment has *unquivocally* stated that "status quo" = no enrichment. there has not been a single iranian gov source that has stated the contrary. On the US side, we have the vice president, the CIA, and more, all saying "iran is not currently enriching" and then we have one senator who is confused saying "the deal doesn't explicitly say enrichment is over. the program is just frozen" (which, if we use a liiiiittttlllleee bit of thinking, we can see that frozen = no enrichment).
lol WHAT. so you take bagehi's statement as the ONLY source of truth when he is the spokesperson for a man who LITERALLY SAID "status quo means no enrichment" and somehow you ignore that???? what the fucK???
lol WHAT. so you take bagehi's statement as the ONLY source of truth when he is the spokesperson for a man who LITERALLY SAID "status quo means no enrichment" and somehow you ignore that???? what the fucK???
yes it quite literally would lol
yes it quite literally would lol
well they weren't doing any enrichment at all when this deal was signed. i imagine they have the right to civilian enrichment, whatever that means, but they *are not* enriching and have publicly agreed to *continue not enriching*
well they weren't doing any enrichment at all when this deal was signed. i imagine they have the right to civilian enrichment, whatever that means, but they *are not* enriching and have publicly agreed to *continue not enriching*
uhhh if you currently are not enriching and you say "i will continue this status quo of not enriching" you are agreeing to not enrich
uhhh if you currently are not enriching and you say "i will continue this status quo of not enriching" you are agreeing to not enrich
yeah they aren't enriching any uranium whatsoever rn. this is well known. they *have* enriched uranium from when they used to enrich uranium but they have since stopped and have pledged to CONTINUE TO STOP while the negotiations happen.
yeah they aren't enriching any uranium whatsoever rn. this is well known. they *have* enriched uranium from when they used to enrich uranium but they have since stopped and have pledged to CONTINUE TO STOP while the negotiations happen.
they have assessed that the current state of iranian nuclear facilities is them unable to enrich
they have assessed that the current state of iranian nuclear facilities is them unable to enrich
IAEA has repeatedly assessed that the iranian facilities cannot/are not enriching uranium
IAEA has repeatedly assessed that the iranian facilities cannot/are not enriching uranium
it's not a very complex logical jump i am really just confused as to why N is so insistent here... >they agreed to status quo PUBLICLY and FOR THE PERIOD OF NEGOTIATIONS >rules don't require permanence >iran gov, US gov, IAEA, nabavian, consensus of credible reporting, all confirm that current state (and as such the "status quo") is no enrichment what is going on?
it's not a very complex logical jump i am really just confused as to why N is so insistent here... >they agreed to status quo PUBLICLY and FOR THE PERIOD OF NEGOTIATIONS >rules don't require permanence >iran gov, US gov, IAEA, nabavian, consensus of credible reporting, all confirm that current state (and as such the "status quo") is no enrichment what is going on?
they publicly agreed by signing the MoU in which they agree to "maintain the status quo of their nuclear program", which, by definition means continuing to not enrich
they publicly agreed by signing the MoU in which they agree to "maintain the status quo of their nuclear program", which, by definition means continuing to not enrich
this is insane
this is insane
u realize the same guy literally said that they are not enriching
u realize the same guy literally said that they are not enriching
you realize aragchi literally defined status quo as no enrichment, but you decide to take his spokesman's claim (which doesn't even disprove aragchi's claim) and say that this means aragchi never made his claim? what in the world? talking to you is like talking to a goat
you realize aragchi literally defined status quo as no enrichment, but you decide to take his spokesman's claim (which doesn't even disprove aragchi's claim) and say that this means aragchi never made his claim? what in the world? talking to you is like talking to a goat
the market isn't about never agreeing to shit again fwiw. (or ig never agreeing to enrich again) it's literally jsut for the next 60 days during negotiations
the market isn't about never agreeing to shit again fwiw. (or ig never agreeing to enrich again) it's literally jsut for the next 60 days during negotiations
第 1 / 3 页
下一页 →