This market will settle as YES if there is one or more significant riots related to the US presidential election between October 28, 2024, and midnight Eastern Time on January 20, 2025.
To settle as YES, the following criteria must be met:
One or more incidents referred to by credible news sources as riots, involving at least 500 participants across one or more cities motivated by the same grievance, leading to either:
A) The death or hospitalization of at least 10 people—including rioters, police, bystanders, targets, or others,
or
B) At least $1 million in property damage.
All criteria must be met by the same side. For example, if Harris supporters cause $500K in damages and Trump supporters cause another $500K in damages in different cities, this will not be sufficient to settle the market as YES. Edge cases with ambiguities under the resolution criteria will be settled in accordance with the spirit of the market.
1,000
3.00@NicoDelon presumably thats when the last one happened. i am out on this happening though. i just havent sold cause im lazy
@NicoDelon Of all the probability mass for riots, they are either the week of the election or on inauguration day. So if it was 9% chance november 28th, Jonathan is just saying it should still be like 7% now.
I don't think a riot major riot is likely, Trump being the one elected and there haven't been major rumblings, but I do think more than 3% given we still have inauguration day. General reason, US political instability.
@NicoDelon You are not asking a question lol you are just stating your political leaning/opinion. Which is fine, but I think more honest/transparent communication is warranted on your part.
Fedor is being very charitable to you. The idea you couldn't conceive as that being a possible rationale yourself is unthinkable to me lol
Apart from Fedor's rationale though is a bonus point that the resolution criteria are not steep. Election responses even back in 2016 Portland(? Seattle? i don't remember) would have met this criteria.
again, I view it as exceptionally unlikely now. But the rationale is simple
@Fedor Sure, but even if the remaining probability mass is clustered around inauguration date there should still be time decay given that we have had absolutely no indication of unrest (unlike in 2020-2021, which furthermore was an one-off event as far as I know).
@No_uh There were protests in Oregon three days after the election in 2016, which does in fact speak in favor of time decay since we haven’t had any so far.
are demanding that Senators support the Joint Resolutions of Disapproval to block weapon sales to Israel.
Not seeing anything here about the election.
Obviously one can "relate" anything to the election via a sufficiently long chain of steps if you want to, but that's clearly not what's meant here.
`