TLDR NASA predicts that a star will go nova this year between the time of this posting and September. In what week this year do you think we will see the new star?
I'll close this poll as soon as I get the news...
1,000
3.00@Crazypedia how will this resolve if it does not go nova in 2024?
Seems you could either resolve NA, or to the last bin.
@Crazypedia, would very much appreciate clarification on this (feels like an increasingly important detail haha)
@Crazypedia FWIW (and you're more than welcome to ignore this), my suggestion would be to resolve N/A unless @Paulf4db is happy for it resolve to last bin
General consensus seems to be that N/A resolutions should be avoided where possible (which I'd agree with), and it's generally better to put people's mana to work than roll it all back. Would also make the market more valuable as a predictive tool (effectively allows the market to assign a probability to it not happening in 2024).
However, @Paulf4db (the sole NO holder on week 53) presumably bet based on the understanding that week 53 would only resolve YES if it actually happened within that week. And to change the resolution criteria for week 53 to now effectively include weeks 54+ would be quite unfair. Hence I'd suggest N/A is probably best (again, unless Paul is okay with it resolving to last bin).
Also should mention that I don't have a stake in this market myself so I'm fine with either decision
@Nat I really don't know what options I have, I'm not really familiar with the manifold voting systems or what to do about a missing option after the vote starts.
@Crazypedia (Note the following is not based on any official info or anything, just what I've gathered from using the site for a year, so take with a grain of salt) (Also, apologies if I went too basic (or not basic enough), always difficult explaining something online without knowing how much the recipient already knows 😅)
Generally, whenever you notice an edge case where how to resolve the market might be ambiguous, you (the market creator) make a ruling on how the market should be resolved in that situation, and ideally edit the description to clarify how that situation would resolve.
If it's something minor that likely hasn't played a factor in what trades people made (eg if you wanted to clarify what time zone you're using on the off chance it matters), you're pretty safe to just make that call and edit the description. OTOH, if it's a more significant judgement call that people may have traded based on their interpretations of, it can be good to ask in the comments for feedback before deciding on a ruling.
Generally whatever the creator says, goes; but creators can be overruled if they modify resolution criteria in a more significant way after people have already traded based on the initial criteria, or if they resolve the market differently to the criteria outlined in the title and/or description.
In dependent multiple choice markets with no 'Other' answer (like this one) it's not possible to add new answers due the maths underlying the market structure. So if there's a possible edge case where none of the answers will be correct - you'll have to make a ruling for how you'd resolve the market in that situation. Your two main options for how to resolve the market if none of the answers are correct are to resolve the market N/A, or to resolve to the closest answer (in this case that'd be 'week 53').
Resolving a market as N/A is sort of the undo button of market resolution, it effectively makes it as though the market never existed, undoing every bet made on the market, taking back any fees you earned as a creator, and giving you back the mana you spent to create the market (see here for more info). As I mentioned, general consensus is that N/A resolutions should be avoided where possible, but sometimes there really isn't any valid way to resolve a market and N/A is a useful tool for those situations (and also for conditional markets but that's besides the case).
The other option is to rule that you'd resolve to the closest answer, this avoids the many negatives of N/A resolutions, and in this case extends the predictive value of the market by allowing people to place a probability on whether it happens post-2024 or not ('week 53' would become 'week 53 or later'). However, it would also expand what would allow 'week 53' to resolve YES, which means that anyone who had already bet NO on it expecting that it would only ever resolve YES if it happened in that week (a reasonable assumption) would have effectively had the resolution criteria changed on them unfairly. As such, I wouldn't recommend going with this option unless you can get the express permission of everyone who holds a NO stake in 'week 53' (which is still just @Paulf4db).
To summarise: neither of your options are great here unfortunately. Given that @Paulf4db hasn't responded my personal suggestion would be to rule that if it hasn't gone nova by Jan 6th, you'll resolve the market N/A; but ultimately it's up to you.
If you do decide N/A is the right option, simply edit the description to add something like 'If it hasn't gone nova by the end of week 53, the market will resolve N/A', and if you feel like it's necessary, you can also make a comment tagging @ traders (no space) letting people know the change. Then, best case scenario is that the star goes nova before then and you can resolve it to whichever week as you initially intended. And in the worst case scenario where it still hasn't gone Nova by Jan 6th, simply resolve the market N/A instead; or if the negative payouts that would result from undoing trades are too large, N/A will be greyed out and you'll have to ping @ mods to ask them to resolve it N/A market on your behalf (this is done so that N/A resolutions can't be abused).
Hope that helps!
Side note: This is why good market design is important! If you can think of and account for all the edge cases during market creation you can avoid situations like this in the first place. Ambiguity and undefined edge cases are your worst enemies as a market creator! (That and not having enough mana haha)
Brightened by 1.3 magnitudes in the last 24 hours according to TheSkyLive -- from 11.1 to 9.8.
Our guest star is checking into the hotel...