Each answer contains a question: Do you think the person/character/concept is more Right-Wing (YES) or more Left-Wing (NO)? Bet YES, or NO, according to your opinion. 1 person = 1 vote (per answer), so having more shares does not make your vote count for more.
Heavily inspired from @Joshua's excellent market,
/Joshua/good-tweet-or-bad-tweet-which-contr
You can submit any person/character/concept (shortened to p/c/c for the rest of the description), as well as a link / short phrase to give traders some context. If other people trade on your submission, you'll get mana off of their transaction fees (edit may 29: currently not true, but I believe it is being implemented currently).
I may N/A options for quality control, or edit them to provide a more neutral summary.
As a trader, you should buy any amount of YES in p/c/c you think are Right-Wing, buy any amount of NO in p/c/c you think are Left-Wing. I will leave the definition of those terms up to you. The amount of shares doesn't matter for the resolution, one share of yes is one vote and one hundred shares of yes is also one vote.
If I think you are voting purely as a troll, such as buying no in every option, I may block you or disregard your votes. Please vote in good faith! But hey, I can't read your mind. Ultimately this market is on the honor system.
Note that market prices will be a bit strange here, because this is simultaneously a market and a poll. If you sell your shares, you are also removing your vote.
The market will close every every week; See the close date to know on what day. I will then check the positions tab on options that have been submitted.
If there is a clear majority of YES holders, the option resolves YES.
If there is a clear majority of NO holders, the option resolves NO.
If it's very close and votes are still coming in, the option will remain un-resolved.
The market will then re-open for new submissions, with a new close date the next week. This continues as long as I think the market is worth running.
It does not matter what % the market is at, and bots holding a position are also counted.
Some guidlines:
I encourage you not to bet options to extremes (1% or 99%) before a quite clear majority has been established. Otherwise, it prevents others from betting toward that extreme, and can bias the results.
I may update these exact criteria to better match the spirit of the question if anyone has any good suggestions, so please leave a comment if you do.
See:
1,000
3.00@Qoiuoiuoiu Carl Sagan’s territory. There’s no oil or possible broctatorships to be made on it. Totally leftie.
@logaems I feel like a lot of people support him in a vague apolitical way (he sent experts across the empire and helped his people), and of course there Nomadic Warriors for JB Pritzker.
First VS second quantization gap: imho the field concept is right wing because it implies space is a real entity. (Absolute) space is the sensorium of God. Hard to get more right wing than that. First quantization brings up images of Schrödinger smoking pot in his pipe, so left wing.
@mariopasquato Give or take my thoughts, yeah. Also you can't tell me that Lattice Gauge Theory isn't inherently right wing deep down in the collective subconscious. We all know it.
I was going to joke that this changes every few weeks based on who's ahead in the polls, but then I though about it for a second and realized it's obviously wrong. Democrats decide to engage in polling denial when they're behind, but Republicans just engage in it 24/7, even when they're ahead.
@PlasmaBallin Nah, there's been a Dem contingent that have been poll denialists even when ahead for over a year. (Reporting for duty!)
Though they're not so much against polling in principle as against the current practices of pollsters and think that pollsters are undergoing a methodological crisis that they're not taking seriously enough and aren't being honest enough about. Which is really a different sort of thing altogether than how Rs think about it.
@BrunoParga The Iowa +3 one doesn't have the methodological problems they/we object to, largely. It may be right or wrong or w/e, but its status is independent of the larger problems in the polling industry.
@Najawin I wonder how you'll update if the polls are generally spot-on, except for the Iowa outlier.
@BrunoParga Me, personally? Probably not by much, because I don't think consequences are the most important thing, but how you got there is. The pollsters have spent months herding and explicitly saying in some articles that they don't even trust their own results. If by sheer luck they manage to get decent results, that doesn't change my mind that they need to adjust their methodology. 1/100 chances still happen 1% of the time.
@Najawin oh yeah, I think you've told me before that you treat differently consequences that happen earlier from others that happen later.