ABC Whistleblower report released by Sunday? | Polymarket Tracker

This market is closed and no longer accepting bets.

1461

Comments

1

Market

0

Comments per hour

Summary

The discussion primarily revolves around skepticism about the fairness and legitimacy of the market's outcome, with several users expressing doubts about the potential for a "No" resolution despite the overwhelming vote percentages. Participants discuss the substantial sums of money being wagered, the procedural delays, and the possibility of refunds if the outcome is disputed. Both optimism and frustration are evident among the bettors, with calls for buying more shares and others criticizing the market's integrity.

There is significant skepticism regarding the market's fairness, with many doubting that a "No" outcome is possible despite overwhelming voting percentages.
Participants express frustration over procedural delays and discuss the potential for refunds if the final result remains contested.

Comments

It's pretty ridiculous anyone thinks it's appropriate to ask a question of whether an affidavit will be released, then add an additional condition that it must also be verified by the initial deadline. It is what it is, but just reflects incredibly poorly on the people who run this website.

Liked by Rrrrrb, n/a and 12 others

Whistleblower warned Harris that she would be debating a dementia patient.

Liked by EricTheGre..., coconutPil... and 7 others

GG. And, i think it's the time for a screenshot with a quote from the Mountain Man: https://ibb.co/vXgJ1hf

Liked by BlueSky123, coconutPil... and 7 others

The argument for resolving this market to "YES" is that the key condition—releasing an affidavit by a whistleblower—was met by the deadline. While mainstream sources haven't confirmed it yet, the credibility of the outlets reporting it is subject to interpretation. If these sources turn out to have provided credible information, they would inherently meet the definition of "credible sources," regardless of personal opinions. This is based on the objective meaning of credibility, which would not be disputable if their information is proven accurate. The only fair course of action at this point is to wait for a definitive answer on the credibility of these sources before resolving the market.

says nothing about a name being required in the original market

LOL, the rules only say that the affidavit has to be released by today, not that the media has to confirm its authenticity today. And don’t lie by saying PM doesn’t do open ended market, just go to the “will trump appeal his hush money sentence” market, it doesn’t have a deadline either. The deadline at the top of the page is only an estimate (hover the mouse over it)

Join and get verified before the vote, it’s free to plead your case, https://discord.gg/uma

If this turns to Yes (thanks to Milky) and I win this one as well, snapping victory from the jaws of defeat, the level of hate I will get will be off the charts. It may be worth it for UMA to vote "YES" simply for the entertainment value. hahaha

Just noticed the clarification lol. That is total bullshit. Wtf? Lol.

It still does require authenticity, but the rules don't say that the authenticity has to be released on Sunday as well. This would be an absurd rule anyway, if the affidavit got release at 9pm, how on earth would there be instant media authentication?

I'm sure when I first read this it required authenticity. It's why I didn't bet early as this was the risk.