Israeli forces enters Lebanon in September? | Polymarket Tracker

This market is closed and no longer accepting bets.

4301

Comments

1

Market

0

Comments per hour

Summary

In the discussion surrounding the market "Israeli forces enter Lebanon in September," users expressed significant frustration and skepticism about the fairness and integrity of the voting process and market resolution. Many participants speculated that large players, or "whales," were manipulating the market to their advantage, particularly through the use of emissions and overwhelming the voting process. Other comments referenced external sources, such as statements from Hezbollah and media reports, to argue that the market resolution should be "No," criticizing any potential "Yes" resolution as unfounded and damaging to the platform's credibility. Some users called for the platform to either redo the vote or resolve the market at a 50/50 split due to conflicting reports and the perceived influence of larger stakeholders.

Market Integrity Concerns: There is a clear demand from the community for greater transparency and integrity in the voting process, with many calling out potential manipulation by large stakeholders.
Resolution Criteria Disputes: The lack of agreement or clarity on what constitutes official confirmation for the market's resolution criteria continues to be a point of contention, highlighting the need for clearer guidelines.

Comments

I gave ChatGPT two pieces of information -- the title and rules of the market, and the WSJ article. I did not give it any further prompts to tilt it in any direction. This is how it assessed the market (which I agree with): "Based on the rules you've provided for the prediction market, this market should resolve to "No." The article states that Israeli special forces have conducted small, targeted raids into southern Lebanon, but these operations do not meet the criteria outlined in your market's rules. Specifically, the rules indicate that only "ground operations involving troops on Lebanese soil for combat operations" will count, and aerial and maritime operations are excluded. Since the article does not confirm that these operations qualify as a broader ground incursion or involve troops in combat operations, and considering the market's resolution criteria relies on official confirmations from Hezbollah and Israel, there hasn't been a definitive entry of Israeli forces for combat operations as specified. Therefore, the conclusion would be "No.""

Liked by n/a, n/a and 26 others

The elephant in the room: information after the dispute in this market does not count (UMA said so). Since this market was disputed yesterday morning already, any new information does not consider. So the only question is, does "intelligence gathering" imply "forces entering Lebanese soil for combat operations"? Definitely not.

Liked by n/a, n/a and 15 others

Even if you do want to state that these "raids" were "combat operations". There is absolutely no credible reporting that states they have happened between September 18 and September 30, 2024, 11:59 PM ET. There have only been vague claims. The Wall Street Journal reported that Israeli forces have carried out cross-border raids in Lebanon "recently, as well as over the past months". Extremely vague, is "recently" a week ago? Two weeks ago? A month ago? No names, no date, no time. You can't resolve a market to "Yes" based off claims like this.

Liked by Porcoddio, n/a and 10 others

Lebanon army source says force has observed no Israeli ground incursion -AFP

Liked by n/a, n/a and 10 others

Fellas it might be over, UN onsite in Lebanon said no incursion

Liked by n/a, n/a and 10 others

Just got word from Zohan that Israel stopped their troops an inch away from Lebanon's border

Liked by n/a, n/a and 10 others

Officially, Israel has not entered the territory of Lebanon

Liked by zynyz, n/a and 10 others

The rules explicitly state that the market will resolve to “Yes” if Israeli personnel enter Lebanese territory for combat operations. The intent behind these actions matters significantly—if the primary purpose is intelligence gathering or probing, then it doesn’t qualify as a combat operation under the market’s criteria. For those who think intelligence gathering counts as combat operations: the rules are pretty clear. Entering enemy territory just to gather intel or probe isn’t the same as entering for combat. If you’re counting every covert raid as combat, then by that logic, every recon mission would also be a battle, which it clearly isn’t.

Liked by n/a, NotJustKen and 9 others

notinventedhere

if this resolve to yes this will be fraud

Liked by n/a, monom and 9 others

It's not enough for me to just win. I need 50-Pence to lose everything.

Liked by n/a, NotJustKen and 9 others