#24
Rank
314
Comments
198
Likes Received
374
Likes Given
EmpirePending
1 month ago
They will probably deduct massive points from city if they get found guilty before the season ends
SatanyahuDisciple
2 months ago
Manchester City No is probably the safest bet of all time. Problem is you have to wait half a year for the outcome.
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Some very weird comments here yall need to chill
EmpirePending
2 months ago
The website on phone has that glitch pretty often. Id recommend using a laptop instead, Ive never had that issue when using laptop
mr-guy
2 months ago
what the hell is going on? You can see I bought in my alerts but my position is taken away? https://imgur.com/a/ECUAQjP
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Pretty obvious shes pregnant just a matter of when she will go public with it. Now that the election is done I think she will announce it
EmpirePending
2 months ago
True
VC1640
2 months ago
Pretty sure his next speech will be in his best behavior in the Wite House next to Biden. No way he mentions crypto or elon in that context
EmpirePending
2 months ago
You guys realise this probably isnt going to be an actual speech. The next time he talks is probably going to be a short 5 mins of him answering a couple reporter questions
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Yea that would count
PadreMaronno
2 months ago
What if the next speech is an interview and he answers questions for 1h but not 180sec straight in a single answer?
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Happens me sometimes too the website is just a bit behind sometimes. Give it 10-15 mins and it should be good
mr-guy
2 months ago
what the hell is going on? You can see I bought in my alerts but my position is taken away? https://imgur.com/a/ECUAQjP
EmpirePending
2 months ago
.
CometoJesusMoment
2 months ago
trump's odds of winning only the popular vote is 0.22$, but here his odds of winning both the popular vote and the presidency is 0.28$. this is a big manipulation and many will lose their money. Otherwise, Please be careful, this market involves a great deal of manipulation. RD is supposed to be around $0.60.
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Yup these Israel markets can almost always be argued both ways so it just gets voted on whatever side the whales are on. I got burned twice already from it
Car
2 months ago
Even when 99.9% withdraws and 0.01% stays, this market wont resolve. Lol.
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Pretty sure it was sarcasm
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Zadok buying again. He’s either a total degenerate or an insider
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Maybe but that would be stupid, this isn’t stocks where they bounce up and down this is either going to 100 or 0
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Zadok buying again. He’s either a total degenerate or an insider
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Zadok buying again. He’s either a total degenerate or an insider
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Jamie if it is you don’t worry we won’t tell anyone 😂
Rayse
2 months ago
hmm the top insider bought more shares, it just happens to be the same time when the east coast wakes up
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Tbf Jamie is into crypto. He has a bored ape nft pic on her instagram back in 2021
Rayse
2 months ago
hmm the top insider bought more shares, it just happens to be the same time when the east coast wakes up
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Again, it’s not happening https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1852038805760438326?s=46&t=7FgnUqPp7Ji6mCENCN9pgg
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Troops aren’t gonna leave before December https://x.com/sentdefender/status/1851723612325052582?s=46&t=7FgnUqPp7Ji6mCENCN9pgg
EmpirePending
2 months ago
I agree it’s a stretch but if she’s truly wants to win she knows being on the podcast can boost her chances greatly
dav1
2 months ago
Nah, Vance is going on hahaha Rogan has no more time to take Kamala
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Joe isn’t going to reject Kamala because he has some random comedian lined up instead. If she wants on she will be on it doesn’t matter what joes schedule is
dav1
2 months ago
Nah, Vance is going on hahaha Rogan has no more time to take Kamala
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Joe could do 3 podcast in a day if he wanted to
dav1
2 months ago
Nah, Vance is going on hahaha Rogan has no more time to take Kamala
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Can anyone link articles about Israel withdrawing?
EmpirePending
2 months ago
hes joking bro
🤺JustPunched
2 months ago
SCAM!!!!!!!
EmpirePending
2 months ago
what's the point in holding equal of both players
PaeniscusKyu
2 months ago
As a bystander (equal shares on both): the absolute silence from Madrid social media makes me think it's Rodri; with CR, Modric, Benzema, they posted every 5 minutes and hinted at the win. Gala started and Madrid delegation is not there as confirmed by De La Fuente. Regarding the list, it is clear that something leaked, but the author could have purposely altered it. This is what makes most sense to me. Feels 70% Rodri.
EmpirePending
2 months ago
nobody is manipulating we're going off the leaks that have been accurate the whole time so far
Raad
2 months ago
guys don't let these people manipulate you into taking your money,do your own research .
EmpirePending
2 months ago
the guy that leaked it did the same thing last year and the whole list was correct
pkz
2 months ago
The list can be true up to some point, though. Maybe France Football leaked it to keep the excitement, after Madrid spoiled the surprise this morning...
EmpirePending
2 months ago
the leak correctly picked the first 15 in order, that's not just fluke
Chrissistar04
2 months ago
Sorry, fake news....
EmpirePending
2 months ago
bro this is the craziest market ive ever been in
EmpirePending
2 months ago
oh my god i think its actually real
EmpirePending
2 months ago
does anybody know the original source of this accurate leak? only thing i can see is a random guy on twitter
EmpirePending
2 months ago
are you certain its madrid and not just some random rich people?
Speculo
2 months ago
If we win this, expect me to flood the zone with comments because I am a sore winner guys
EmpirePending
2 months ago
do you know the original source of that leak?
SaarPlis
2 months ago
This leak has been accurate so far: https://x.com/Alexis92__/status/1850934281075626152?t=dQfXXSsYHnZQY3OobX6d7w -- so far it got everything correct before the official Ballon D'or twitter posted the rankings
EmpirePending
2 months ago
proof?
n/a
2 months ago
News say lie. Vini jr win ballondor
EmpirePending
2 months ago
how do you know this is theirs?
Speculo
2 months ago
If we win this, expect me to flood the zone with comments because I am a sore winner guys
EmpirePending
2 months ago
messi*
moneysniper
2 months ago
Americans thinking they know how the ballon dor cerimony works 😂😂
EmpirePending
2 months ago
i know its painful seeing some guys buying up mess even thoughs he's not nominated
moneysniper
2 months ago
Americans thinking they know how the ballon dor cerimony works 😂😂
EmpirePending
2 months ago
interesting statement
debased
2 months ago
No player or club knows on Monday afternoon who won" the Ballon d'Or, one of the organizers assured #AFP , after the announcement of the boycott of the ceremony by Real Madrid, convinced that its player Vinicius would not be crowned https://x.com/theMadridZone/status/1850927757204857074
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Actually I’m not sure because I think Fabrizio is just citing the other Fabrizio guy so he’s the only source. Not sure how reliable he is I’ve never heard of him
KEFUN
2 months ago
Free market is crazy, sold my Rodri-s to buy some Vini-s, too much fear atm
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Fabrizio is the only journalist I would trust 99% so that’s the reason I sold vini. If he didn’t post I would’ve loaded up
KEFUN
2 months ago
Free market is crazy, sold my Rodri-s to buy some Vini-s, too much fear atm
EmpirePending
2 months ago
I bought vini at 4c and thought the same but the fact he’s not going means he’s definitely not winning
KEFUN
2 months ago
Free market is crazy, sold my Rodri-s to buy some Vini-s, too much fear atm
EmpirePending
2 months ago
About 5
PanosMariolis2001
2 months ago
HOW MANY HOURS UNTIL THE ANNOUNCEMENT?
EmpirePending
2 months ago
That chart is insane
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Fabrizio Romano tweeted it, he is 99% accurate he’s the gold standard
Speculo
2 months ago
ALL LEAKS ARE FAKE
EmpirePending
2 months ago
This market is crazy
EmpirePending
2 months ago
That*
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Not looking good for vini https://x.com/madridxtra/status/1850894611230638219?s=46&t=7FgnUqPp7Ji6mCENCN9pgg
EmpirePending
2 months ago
The ballon d’or has always favoured players to at won the euros/copa america/ World Cup. Vini didn’t come close to copa america and Rodri won the euros and got player of the tournament
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Not looking good for vini https://x.com/madridxtra/status/1850894611230638219?s=46&t=7FgnUqPp7Ji6mCENCN9pgg
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Not looking good for vini https://x.com/madridxtra/status/1850894611230638219?s=46&t=7FgnUqPp7Ji6mCENCN9pgg
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Yup and this is a Paris journalist (where the ballon d’or is always held) not a Madrid journalist pummeling Madrid propaganda
0x6146250C443B2a7a8eACDF560758165C4e068C2f-1722796416451
2 months ago
WOW https://x.com/FabriceHawkins/status/1850894351800353084 According to RMC, Vinicius inner circle is convinced he didn't won the balon d'or
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Tripled my position by mistake 😂 hopefully Rodri brings it home for me now
Speculo
2 months ago
Someone bought Rodri for 21.2 whereas No Vinicius is 15 cts lmao
EmpirePending
2 months ago
I fat fingered ffs I meant to put in a limit sell but put a buy instead
Speculo
2 months ago
Someone bought Rodri for 21.2 whereas No Vinicius is 15 cts lmao
EmpirePending
2 months ago
I think both are fake
debased
2 months ago
i think it is vini but the leaks are fake
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Vini will prob win but these are fake. Everyone knows daily mail is as fake as you can get. Also ballon d’or points are never as evenly distributed as these are. It’s always top 1-3 get 90% of points and the rest get a couple each
Porcoddio
2 months ago
Results are leaked: 1) Vinicius Junior - 630 points. 2) Rodri - 576 points. 3) Jude Bellingham - 422 points. 4) Kylian Mbappe - 317 points. 5) Harry Kane - 201 points. 6) Erling Haaland - 195 points. 7) Lamine Yamal - 128 points. 8) Phil Foden - 29 points. 9) Dani Olmo - 25 points. 10) Florian Wirtz - 24 points. 11) Dani Carvajal - 17 points. 12) Antonio Rudiger. Link: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-14008729/amp/Ballon-dOr-voting-results-leaked-ahead-Mondays-ceremony-Paris-three-Englishmen-eight-Erling-Haaland-SIXTH.html Enjoy the free money!
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Yes I agree leaks are definitely fake they originated from two Madrid newspapers that have faked ballon d’or results in the past. It’s still probably gonna be vini though
debased
2 months ago
i think it is vini but the leaks are fake
EmpirePending
2 months ago
If you don’t think it’s vini you should at least buy Rodri bro why tf you buying all the players that don’t even have a chance
Porcoddio
2 months ago
Smart guys will collect the free 14% now, and idiots will keep buying other players, like @TimeTraveler does.
EmpirePending
2 months ago
When Polymarket adds a clarification saying what the outcome should be then it’s over. This is the second time Polymarket have fucked me with this bullshit
n/a
2 months ago
Is it already decided? I didn’t see anything
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Is it just me or have 80% of comments been deleted?
EmpirePending
2 months ago
https://vote.uma.xyz/
n/a
2 months ago
Someone has a link to follow vote on UMA ? No should win, Israel didnt acknowledge any attack + no consensus by the media with al jazheera + jersulalem post + Iraqis officials saying no attack
EmpirePending
2 months ago
Yes holders are betting against Middle Eastern new outlets who are also storied institutions with good reputations and are actually more involved in the conflict than western outlets
Justifax
2 months ago
you're not betting against whales here, you're betting against the WSJ and NYT, two storied institutions with billions of dollars of goodwill based on their credibility.
EmpirePending
3 months ago
He said he sold his initials and keeping the rest
analyst
3 months ago
exactly, we know Syria get attacked when and where but Iraq nothing
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Good point. NYT rushed out one sentence and the other outlets just reused that same sentence. Any article that talks in depth about Iraq says there was no strike
n/a
3 months ago
Would like to add another point. People here call Iraqi government biased (true), but call media unbaised. The media’s clear incentive is headlines. If they can vaguely claim an Israeli attack in Iran they will do it. No further details from them because there are none at this time.
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Link?
Rock⭐
3 months ago
IRAQI govt official just confirmed on Telegram that there is NO attack on IRAQ.
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Somebody should repost that link again in the chat so it doesn’t get lost
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Comments from UMA verifiers: “ yeah u might be right actually good dispute alert its just a few articles saying they heard an explosion + IDF denies it so yeah” “ Israel only said it attacked Iran, also Jerusalem post says Iraq officials denied Iraq being attacked and said rather the attacks were in Iran border” “ Nothing official, I don’t think they have”
EmpirePending
3 months ago
It was posted by martink about 2 hours ago in the chat
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Comments from UMA verifiers: “ yeah u might be right actually good dispute alert its just a few articles saying they heard an explosion + IDF denies it so yeah” “ Israel only said it attacked Iran, also Jerusalem post says Iraq officials denied Iraq being attacked and said rather the attacks were in Iran border” “ Nothing official, I don’t think they have”
EmpirePending
3 months ago
I can’t link the convo I tried but it doesn’t post. You can find the link to the convo in the discord channel for this dispute
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Comments from UMA verifiers: “ yeah u might be right actually good dispute alert its just a few articles saying they heard an explosion + IDF denies it so yeah” “ Israel only said it attacked Iran, also Jerusalem post says Iraq officials denied Iraq being attacked and said rather the attacks were in Iran border” “ Nothing official, I don’t think they have”
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Comments from UMA verifiers: “ yeah u might be right actually good dispute alert its just a few articles saying they heard an explosion + IDF denies it so yeah” “ Israel only said it attacked Iran, also Jerusalem post says Iraq officials denied Iraq being attacked and said rather the attacks were in Iran border” “ Nothing official, I don’t think they have”
EmpirePending
3 months ago
To say what you think it should be a no (p4) you join the discord and type your rationale in the channel for this market
n/a
3 months ago
Can anyone explain about the UMA please?
EmpirePending
3 months ago
You stake uma tokens and use it to vote what the outcome should be here: https://vote.uma.xyz/
n/a
3 months ago
Can anyone explain about the UMA please?
EmpirePending
3 months ago
yea no matter what side im on for disputes i always feel uneasy, you can never tell what uma will choose
Justifax
3 months ago
CFO unstaked half his UMA I believe so another added risk to bonding. I dunno how people can trust UMA these days. Fair price is around 95%, but medium confidence. I wouldn't size your bet that large..
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Have the yes holders forgot about the Israel attacks Iran market a while back? It was big up the high 90s because Israel killed that Palestinian leader while he was in Iran. That was disputed and resulted no because Israel didn’t confirm it. Everyone knew it happened but it resulted as no. This market is even more sided to no than that was
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Yea even domer is on the no side for that market and he commented saying it’s because the US haven’t said anything about the strike. Israel have not said anything about a strike on Iraq and Iraq have said there was nothing
0x4444Fc34bd252890cF24a10ce161e2ae9380C4FB-1729774461789
3 months ago
you can also see the situaition with the usa attack in yemen it hasent concluded becuse there isnt any officall statment of such attack\
EmpirePending
3 months ago
This isn’t a market on what will nennou do
Demon1512
3 months ago
People like nennou are using you as exit liquidity.
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Even if the recent strike isn’t confirmed there’s a good chance they will strike again and confirm because they’ve been striking Yemen almost every month this year
EmpirePending
3 months ago
guys ive just come across this market i had/have no position, but theres countless news articles saying it happened so what's going on with this?
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Denizz is also advocating for a yes vote on that market, so looks like taking the opposite side of him is a good idea (he was a top holder here too before he sold)
EmpirePending
3 months ago
There is a similar market to this but about US strike on Yemen. Many news articles have said it happened but the US have not said anything, that one failed to resolve yes:
EmpirePending
3 months ago
That’s the same as this market as Israel have not confirmed and Iraq have even denied anything happened
EmpirePending
3 months ago
There is a similar market to this but about US strike on Yemen. Many news articles have said it happened but the US have not said anything, that one failed to resolve yes:
EmpirePending
3 months ago
https://polymarket.com/event/us-military-action-against-yemen-in-2024?tid=1730026036099
EmpirePending
3 months ago
There is a similar market to this but about US strike on Yemen. Many news articles have said it happened but the US have not said anything, that one failed to resolve yes:
EmpirePending
3 months ago
There is a similar market to this but about US strike on Yemen. Many news articles have said it happened but the US have not said anything, that one failed to resolve yes:
EmpirePending
3 months ago
In that case I salut your work sir
Karim123
3 months ago
Man this is funny bet but dont waste your money its gonna be a YES for sure just see some news and you Will know yourself
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Unless this is one of your alt account since you joined this month and only hold this market lol you probably have another account with a couple thousand no
Karim123
3 months ago
Man this is funny bet but dont waste your money its gonna be a YES for sure just see some news and you Will know yourself
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Maybe it will be voted yes but it’s still a risk you’re taking when you’ve already double up and don’t have much more to gain
Karim123
3 months ago
Man this is funny bet but dont waste your money its gonna be a YES for sure just see some news and you Will know yourself
EmpirePending
3 months ago
M-Y honest question, you’ve double your money, why hold on for an extra $20 when it’s a risk like this?
Karim123
3 months ago
Man this is funny bet but dont waste your money its gonna be a YES for sure just see some news and you Will know yourself
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Guys let’s just all be friends
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Yes holders have one single sentence from one NYT article and have bid it up to 80c. Crazy stuff happening here
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Ngl just didn’t want the comment section litter with my posts I realised I was posting too much
M-Y
3 months ago
'EmpirePending' seems to be folding too. Deleted his comments. Probably waiting for an oppurtonity to sell his "No" shares.
EmpirePending
3 months ago
I’m here bro no sales
M-Y
3 months ago
'EmpirePending' seems to be folding too. Deleted his comments. Probably waiting for an oppurtonity to sell his "No" shares.
EmpirePending
3 months ago
only because denizz is constantly buying more yes. without him the prices would be flipped
auns
3 months ago
This market is flipped..
EmpirePending
3 months ago
no it doesn't read it again. the caption underneath the thumbnail pictures explicitly states no iraqi targets were struck
EmpirePending
3 months ago
somebody link me an article about radars in iraq being hit
EmpirePending
3 months ago
first one you sent is the same thing you linked 2 minutes earlier. the elaph article mentions no strike, just say israel flew over iraq airspace. try again
EmpirePending
3 months ago
somebody link me an article about radars in iraq being hit
EmpirePending
3 months ago
one sentence from one news source? not exactly the definition of consensus lol
EmpirePending
3 months ago
somebody link me an article about radars in iraq being hit
EmpirePending
3 months ago
i asked for a link
EmpirePending
3 months ago
somebody link me an article about radars in iraq being hit
EmpirePending
3 months ago
somebody link me an article about radars in iraq being hit
EmpirePending
3 months ago
guys ive just come across this market i had/have no position, but theres countless news articles saying it happened so what's going on with this?
EmpirePending
3 months ago
Buy it then
aaliyah
3 months ago
Vinicius is confirmed to win btw so you can claim your dollars for .94¢ right now
EmpirePending
3 months ago
it probability will be vini but the odds are way too high. people bidding him up because marca and diario as have reported he will win. both those outlets have a history of false reports about football transfers and ballon d'or winners.
EmpirePending
3 months ago
he will only have trump if he also has kamala. ive been a long time listener and that's my view of it
EmpirePending
5 months ago
CNN has not mentioned that it is live. Just that it “will air at 9pm ET on Thursday”
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Knowing Kamala and CNN this could very well have been recorded last week to allow them to edit out any bad footage to make her look as good as possible.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Knowing Kamala and CNN this could very well have been recorded last week to allow them to edit out any bad footage to make her look as good as possible.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
CNN announced Kamala interview for release on Thursday (two days time). Market specifies the interview must be between August 26 and September 9. If this is a pre-recorded interview from earlier this week this doesn’t resolve yes.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
CNN announced Kamala interview for release on Thursday (two days time). Market specifies the interview must be between August 26 and September 9. If this is a pre-recorded interview from earlier this week this doesn’t resolve yes.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Insider buying for this market is insanely riskier than for the bieber baby market which is what I assume you’re talking about. Only people that know what will happen (if anyone) is those very high up in the French police and maybe a handful of lawyers. Neither of those fit the bill if somebody who would be betting 20k on Polymarket.
Tenebrus7
5 months ago
Sold my No shares for now again -maybe a bit paranoid, but as I was screwed once by insider knowledge here, don't know. Top Yes holder only signed up for this market on poly and keeps buying yes. Either just a Telegram/Pavlov fanboy who is optimistic or buying Yes with knowledge (but for that 20k is not much oo). Sus or not sus? On the other hand on the market will Biden resign a whale came in the day of the press conference blew 500k, buying the entire market empty and lost it all. Sometimes hard to tell if Fish or Insider :D
EmpirePending
5 months ago
FBI if you see this I’m just joking
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I love assassination markets
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I love assassination markets
EmpirePending
5 months ago
They want him on terrorism charges bruh that’s not white collar
babendums
5 months ago
Hes a billionaire, he will bond out after they charge him
EmpirePending
5 months ago
They should release him but they won’t that’s why I bet no. In a fair world and a fair system I would be betting yes
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Baal I’m on your side I had 14k no in that market but please keep it to that markets comments stop spamming every single market about it
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Says page not found
Remontada
5 months ago
https://www.tribunal-de-paris.justice.fr/sites/default/files/2024-08/2024-08-26%20-%20CP%20TELEGRAM%20.pdf Here are all the charges. The investigate was opened on the 8th of July.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
They want him on terrorism chargers there’s no way they let him out in 3 days. They won’t get him on bail because he will be a flight risk.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Sucks that this lost out but it’s a lesson learned. Never bet assuming a fair market, always side with what Polymarket and UMA will vote despite if it’s wrong. We’re all in this for the same reason, the only difference is yes holders have figured the lesson out already. (I held 14k no shares)
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The vote is over it’s already P2
itsok
5 months ago
.1 is to cheap! If there’s a 1% chance D4 resolves in “No”/“to early” as it should. (No)should be 10x
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Ya some guy market bought $1.8k worth. It’s a brand new account and his first trade so he probably didn’t know
Arbiter-of-Truth
5 months ago
I'm confused why somebody market bought so much... i thought he had been released or something lmao
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Feels good to be on car’s side this time
Car
5 months ago
keep them market YES buys coming guys
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Schizophrenia
41-17™askDomerWhatImean
5 months ago
🌊🌊🌊carSCAMLOSELOSE 😭😭😭
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I’m still waiting
Justifax
5 months ago
The real scammers in this market were the pumpers and dumpers, the ones who bought under 1c, pumped it up to 5c, and sold. They are by far the worst. The secondary scammers are the traders who buy and sell and feed off the scam, sucking up rewards as well. They want these scam markets. It's trading profit. The final scammer is Polymarket who thinks this volume is a good thing and doesn't shut it the ffffck down.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Baal and blue both hate Chinese people at least the yes and no side can agree on something
baal
5 months ago
Cant really do shit about anyone in china realistically but everywhere else baal has reach
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The guy that’s currently holding 56k shares and 8th largest holder has dumped?? Why has his position not updated wtf? It’s still showing he owns 56k shares?? It’s crazy how you can dump your position but still own 56k that’s so strange right?
Justifax
5 months ago
Look at aenews profit in this market. You got scammed big time by him. He is by far the worst of everyone in this market. He bought low, went in UMA and pumped it up, and then dumped on you. Polymarket facilitates his scamming with these vague rules. This is not what prediction markets are for. This shit has got to stop.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Name one person who bought below 1c and sold above 5c
Justifax
5 months ago
The real scammers in this market were the pumpers and dumpers, the ones who bought under 1c, pumped it up to 5c, and sold. They are by far the worst. The secondary scammers are the traders who buy and sell and feed off the scam, sucking up rewards as well. They want these scam markets. It's trading profit. The final scammer is Polymarket who thinks this volume is a good thing and doesn't shut it the ffffck down.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
No will not win. It’s either a yes or the market keeps going until August 31. But realistically if it’s voted p4 (keep going until August 31st) it’s basically a no and no price will go to 90-95
politicschange
5 months ago
if NO wins, does it resolve NO, or does it just go back to normal?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Again, send Reuters article please!
Pidor🐓
5 months ago
thx scammers. believe polymarket and reuters
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Lies both markets have been equal since both disputes started, both move up and down together
BlackSky123
5 months ago
RFK: You should vote for Trump. Notards: Not an endorsement!
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Send Reuters article please!
Pidor🐓
5 months ago
thx scammers. believe polymarket and reuters
EmpirePending
5 months ago
If you truly believe your own comment you would buy yes for the easiest 4% of your life.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Buy yes then? You sold your yes bets yersterday? What are you scared of if you’re so confident?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Buy yes then? You sold your yes bets yersterday? What are you scared of if you’re so confident?
BlackSky123
5 months ago
RFK: You should vote for Trump. Notards: Not an endorsement!
EmpirePending
5 months ago
This has to be a troll. Headlines don’t count it’s been posted about a thousand times already
Justifax
5 months ago
The rules are just guidelines and not meant to be literal. They can't be. They never defined 'formal' or 'endorsement'. So what are we left with? Just go with the headlines and call it a day. Poly staff are not reporters. They have no clue what qualifies as endorsement or doesn't. Let the experts at wsj/reuters/ap do their job.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Headlines don’t count as resolution sources read the rules
Justifax
5 months ago
you can't binarize truth, it's too complex. you can however binarize / create prediction markets for headlines. Did he endorse? Yes / No. The headlines said yes.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I say it is a no assuming there is no formal endorsement within the next week
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Polymarket didn’t foresee this happening. Nobody did. But as per the pre-determined rules it is a no. Polymarket wrongly added false context. Yes voters should be refunded their stake.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Polymarket didn’t foresee this happening. Nobody did. But as per the pre-determined rules it is a no. Polymarket wrongly added false context. Yes voters should be refunded their stake.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The fact you can actually bet after the “added context” says yes means the added context is false. If the added context was the true outcome they should have stopped all betting as soon as it was posted
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Yes voters are assuming that any hint of support is an RFK endorsement and him telling everybody to vote Trump. That is clearly not the case. Polymarket failed to foresee this outcome and that’s their fault. It is a no. Unless of course he formally endorses within the next week.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
RFK clearly told voters he still wants them to vote for him in the 40 states where he is on the ballot. Trump is also on these 40 states’ ballots. So from this RFK is saying in 40 states he wants people to vote for him over Trump. How in the name of god is this a trump endorsement??
EmpirePending
5 months ago
RFK clearly told voters he still wants them to vote for him in the 40 states where he is on the ballot. Trump is also on these 40 states’ ballots. So from this RFK is saying in 40 states he wants people to vote for him over Trump. How in the name of god is this a trump endorsement??
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Is that a real quote? If so can you link it please
5to5000
5 months ago
RFK: No. There's been no commitments. ... We just made a general commitment we will work together.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
What happened
432
5 months ago
Some big positive vibe came from a UMA voting whale ;).
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Same if this was an official court I would put my life savings on it
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Nobody is salty most of us are in profits because we bought lower. We realise how good value the bet is at 4% when the odds are like 90%. Only reason it’s at 4% is distrust of UMA decision making
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Nobody is salty most of us are in profits because we bought lower. We realise how good value the bet is at 4% when the odds are like 90%. Only reason it’s at 4% is distrust of UMA decision making
DeboBets
5 months ago
“No” gang is just salty they will lose money.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
All sources from Kennedy’s team say no endorsement. Yes voters only have the false added context as evidence. Polymarket employees are not gods they are capable of making mistakes they are human.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Not saying it’s the right thing to do but if you were a UMA whale that is planning on insider trading, wouldn’t it make more sense to vote P4 and buy up no because the reward is so much higher. And there is substantial evidence to back up a P4 vote.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
True I guess there are some markets where you can buy 90% when true odds are like 99%. This markets definitley isn’t one of those
PeterNh
5 months ago
People overestimate rare events. So if you can bet .90 on something like the VP not switching, you are going to be right more than 90% of the time. A vp candidate dropping out at this point is probably a less than 1% chance. For this market with the facts backing up a "no", I do not get buying at .95 at all.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Trying to have a civil convo about risk to reward.
Pidor🐓
5 months ago
can't believe ppl buy HYSA and it returns less than 100000%? I can buy lotto ticket and it returns 1000000000000X? smartest no holder
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Curious what yes buyers have to say about it. This isn’t a debate specific to this market.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I don’t understand people that buy yes on all markets at like 95-99 for a couple few percent gain. I understand most of these markets are very likely to go in your favour so you built up 1% here 3% there and it snowballs. But one bad result and you lose everything you’ve been working towards. Losing a 95% market will happen eventually so to me it’s not worth the risk of losing everything?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I don’t understand people that buy yes on all markets at like 95-99 for a couple few percent gain. I understand most of these markets are very likely to go in your favour so you built up 1% here 3% there and it snowballs. But one bad result and you lose everything you’ve been working towards. Losing a 95% market will happen eventually so to me it’s not worth the risk of losing everything?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Also your post on the discord sites a cnn article that is supportive of p4. You say they filed a court document mentioning endorsing Trump which is true but you failed to read the second part of the article which says that the lawyers withdrew that document as it mistakenly mentioned an endorsement and quickly after filed an amendment document removing all reference to an endorsement.
Bitcoin1776
5 months ago
Yes campaigners - here is a DETAILED account of the SUBSTANTIVE evidence in support of yes - YOU WILL BE VICTORIOUS! I have already made my post on UMA - please cite further examples, as my post length is limited - WE WILL IN! FIGHT! https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Cw7AT70OZIfiJhvp4PJ8QNi8PfJLJC06xy93-Eaor9I/edit?usp=sharing
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Your doc is for the dropout market this is the endorsement market
Bitcoin1776
5 months ago
Yes campaigners - here is a DETAILED account of the SUBSTANTIVE evidence in support of yes - YOU WILL BE VICTORIOUS! I have already made my post on UMA - please cite further examples, as my post length is limited - WE WILL IN! FIGHT! https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Cw7AT70OZIfiJhvp4PJ8QNi8PfJLJC06xy93-Eaor9I/edit?usp=sharing
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I’ve they voted p4 it wouldn’t be going rogue, it would be correcting a Polymarket error, which is exactly what UMA is there for
Vulture
5 months ago
If UMA goes rogue, then Polymarket will just drop them. Because UMA is dead in the water without Poly, they have strong incentives to comply.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I agree. Which means the low price really shows the distrust of UMA rather than the markets belief of a formal endorsement
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I feel like that’s why no is only at 4c too. If the UMA process was as reliable as a court this would probably be at 50/50
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I feel like that’s why no is only at 4c too. If the UMA process was as reliable as a court this would probably be at 50/50
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Tbh I really do not trust the UMA process
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Tbh I really do not trust the UMA process
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Do they have to provide evidence? I don’t know how it works
LMNOP
5 months ago
I assume they'd have to provide rationale behind their decision. And there is simply no evidence to resolve this to Yes currently.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
UMA will likely vote to agree with Polymarket on both disputes not because they agree with Polymarket, in fact a majority may disagree with Polymarket, but because they want the financial reward of agreeing with Polymarket.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Added context was a clear mistake. UMA exists to fix any centralized polymarket mistakes.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
UMA voting yes because of polymarket context defeats the whole point of UMA
Gena🐊
5 months ago
The two walles are saying the'll be voting yes, and I think they'll do that because this time Polymarket has made a clarification. Also be carefull because probably first UMA votes will be NO so they can do some inside buying. But really polymarket, you should et ride of UMA, whats the point? Anyways after reading both arguments I'm neutral, just gonna play the "What UMA will decide" game.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
It wouldn’t be in doubt if Polymarket didn’t issue a rushed added context. Without that the market would probably be like 60/40
Robyratto1
5 months ago
I'm surprised that this is even in doubt. It's very clear that there's no formal endorsement, just an informal political support. Also, additional context has no relevance whatsoever, since it was issued AFTER many many people had already betted millions of dollars.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
RFK’s lawyers went out of their way to remove any mention of an endorsement. It’s clear as day this is not a formal endorsement.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
It’s so obviously a no but I can understand why yes holders see it as a guarantee yes because of the polymarket context. It’s an error from PM and they should refund yes buyers
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Hahaha that quote is golden
JanSobieski3
5 months ago
Despite actions that could be interpreted as supportive, the evidence indicates that resolving the market now would be premature. The requirement for a "formal endorsement" has not been unambiguously met, and official sources and actions activeley contradict this.This ambiguity was present in the market before additional context was give as seen by the huge volatility in percentages: the market was clearly undecided. To quote Polymarket "The most important thing to us is truth," "People are incredibly conditioned to only believe media that confirms their biases and desired outcomes, Polymarket tells people the true odds regardless of what anyone wants to happen" https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2024/07/31/election-uncertainty-in-venezuela-turns-polymarket-into-an-oracle/.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I agree they need a team of lawyer writing these rules not some discord geek
HsB34sgg
5 months ago
They shouldn't if they are written by unqualified dyslexics who don't understand the laws of the land.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
They shouldn’t count as rules though. What kind of betting platform creates rules after people have already bet millions of dollars? And how rules literally say “this market should resolved to yes”
TimeQuestion
5 months ago
If Polymarket clarifications count as rules, then that is all that matters.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
https://apnews.com/article/trump-harris-vance-walz-election-dnc-93dc79917053d8c97db4bb9cd6b0130d
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Not sure if this was posted but more evidence that it was not an endorsement: “ RFK Jr. says he is suspending, not ending his campaign. His campaign says he ‘has not endorsed Trump’”
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Not sure if this was posted but more evidence that it was not an endorsement: “ RFK Jr. says he is suspending, not ending his campaign. His campaign says he ‘has not endorsed Trump’”
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Bluesky sold right after talking all the shit
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The risk is defo not worth the 4% gain
scattering
5 months ago
gonna sell my yes shares while i can
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Pretty crazy I would’ve assumed as soon as people saw that it would shoot up above 30c at least
JanSobieski3
5 months ago
Yes was pretty big when this dropped
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Was gonna delete it but I guess everyone has already seen how slow I am hahahaha
JanSobieski3
5 months ago
Yes was pretty big when this dropped
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Lmao
homosexual
5 months ago
more embarrassing for the guy who only read the first document in the article and sent the link as if it supported the YES case
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Shit that’s embarrassing I’m late to the party sorry lol I was afk for a while hahahahaha
homosexual
5 months ago
We did already post it. Yes votes don't care becasue they don't know what an endorsement is
EmpirePending
5 months ago
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/08/23/politics/read-rfk-jr-pennsylvania-court-filing/index.html
EmpirePending
5 months ago
This is the biggest piece of evidence and nobody here has posted it. A CNN report detailing the exact court filings RFK’s lawyers filed which originally stated it was an endorsement and was later retracted and edited to make it clear it was not a formal endorsement. This is the single biggest piece of evidence and this market must be resolved as no!
EmpirePending
5 months ago
This is the biggest piece of evidence and nobody here has posted it. A CNN report detailing the exact court filings RFK’s lawyers filed which originally stated it was an endorsement and was later retracted and edited to make it clear it was not a formal endorsement. This is the single biggest piece of evidence and this market must be resolved as no!
EmpirePending
5 months ago
So there’s only alpha here if you believe the correlation between swing state results is less than 30%
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Zero’s logic is correct but it fails to account for the correlation between swings states. If you put correlation to 30% the probability of winning all swings states at their current PM probability is exactly 17% which is exactly where the market is right now
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Zero’s logic is correct but it fails to account for the correlation between swings states. If you put correlation to 30% the probability of winning all swings states at their current PM probability is exactly 17% which is exactly where the market is right now
NowItsMyTime
5 months ago
I betted no, if Trump has 50% chances in each state, that would mean less than 1% chance all together.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Signing could be interpreted as a loan deal? These are Americans running this website they probably don’t even know what a loan deal is
n/a
5 months ago
This market will resolve to “Yes” if it is officially confirmed that Victor Osimhen has signed for Chelsea F.C. during the transfer window. Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Can we please clarify if a loan deal counts as yes or no?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Yea you’re right only person I can think of is somebody who knows what the result of the dispute will be…
Mitochondria
5 months ago
I dont understand what kind of person would risk 130k on this. hooly.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
No is clearly the right answer here. But no matters what happens Polymarket fucked up bad and need to refund whoever is on the losing side.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I’m not invested but this is the most obvious no ever, daylight robbery if this resolves yes
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Just scratch it off as an employee mistake and refund yes buyers and everyone is happy
nola72324
5 months ago
I understand that the No holders are pumping, but you all do realize that this resolving No after Polymarket says it will be Yes would be an existential disaster for them.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Yea the media never posts anything without 100% validating the story…
n/a
5 months ago
A screenshot posted on twitter has no validity at all. It contradicts EVERY single media publication. No journalist has verified or even acknowledged what is in that screenshot. Until it is verified by the Journalistic Community and the dozens of articles about his endorsement are redacted that holds no weight. I highly doubt Nicole would claim every single media outlet is publicizing false information and only correct one single person on X
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Refunding yes holders is definitely fair I don’t wish bad on them this is a polymarket error
WolfOfPolymarket
5 months ago
Wrongful clarification, it happens. Maybe the Yes holders will be refunded.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The drop out market resolved as yes… polymarket have a giant mess on their hands
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Rfk also confirming he is not dropping out in an email to supporters: https://x.com/giggitytitties/status/1827397843579011550?s=46&t=7FgnUqPp7Ji6mCENCN9pgg
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Rfk also confirming he is not dropping out in an email to supporters: https://x.com/giggitytitties/status/1827397843579011550?s=46&t=7FgnUqPp7Ji6mCENCN9pgg
EmpirePending
5 months ago
That’s gg congrats to team no https://x.com/giggitytitties/status/1827388701481299983?s=46&t=7FgnUqPp7Ji6mCENCN9pgg
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Her pinned tweet
LMNOP
5 months ago
link?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
It was 50/50 before polymarket added context. Added context is not additional rules and therefore should not determine the outcome of a market. Yet that is what polymarket did. Everyone knows it was a rushed and mistaken added context that’s fine everyone makes mistakes. But the only reason this market went to 99 is because the rushed and mistaken context said it was a yes. If there was no added context this market would still be at 50/50 waiting for Kennedy to come out with an official formal endorsement.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
If this is resolved as yes it opens the door for polymarket to add whatever kind of “context” aka rules they want even after millions of dollars has been bet and the outcome has been determined.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
If this is resolved as yes it opens the door for polymarket to add whatever kind of “context” aka rules they want even after millions of dollars has been bet
EmpirePending
5 months ago
“Added context” is not there to determine the outcome. It is there to clear up any ambiguity in the current rules. Polymarket failed to correctly define the outcome that occurred and therefore it should be no resolution. You cannot add context after the fact to change the outcome.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Added Context just means describing the rules more clearly but not changing them. This specific “added context” did not actually add any context it just quoted the speech and said this counts as yes. Added context only applies before the outcome is determined, otherwise it is not context.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Context just means describing the rules more clearly but not changing them. This specific “added context” did not actually add any context it just quoted the speech and said this counts as yes
isaidway
5 months ago
If Polymarket had not added their additional context, we’d still be around 50-50. That in itself shows you the endorsement, if any, was not FORMAL (as required by the rules).
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Wouldn’t surprise me if they are
isaidway
5 months ago
Pardon my naive question, but do we know for sure that whoever adds those additional contexts is not a stakeholder?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Exactly and added context is not extra rules therefore context should not affect the outcome
isaidway
5 months ago
If Polymarket had not added their additional context, we’d still be around 50-50. That in itself shows you the endorsement, if any, was not FORMAL (as required by the rules).
EmpirePending
5 months ago
According to the Federal Election Committee, an endorsement is done by letter. Where is RFK’s letter? https://www.fec.gov/help-candidates-and-committees/making-disbursements-ssf-or-connected-organization/endorsement-examples/
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Trumps Instagram is not a source for resolution according to the rules
princess4trump
5 months ago
On trumps Instagram he says rfk endorsed him
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Polymarket specifically said “formal” in the rules so that there would be no debate. If there is a debate it therefore means it was not formal.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The price was 50c after RFK finished his speech, essentially stating the market didn’t know if it was a formal endorsement. That ambiguity therefore means it was not formal. It only went to 98/99 when polymarket added the false context. The fact that the market didn’t go to 99 after RFK stated his support for Trump proves it’s not a formal endorsement.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Polymarket made a mistake, they should just own it now which would then set the record straight for any future situations. If this is resolved yes it muddy the waters for future markets since the Bernie one was resolved no
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Literally everybody is saying p4
Pogpogpog
5 months ago
The same morons who are whining over the market being “rigged” for YES want to try to end the market early as a NO instead of voting P4! It’s the 24th! What does that tell you?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I also missed where RFK said he formally endorses Trump do you have a link
Pidor🐓
5 months ago
you might have missed 'this market should resolve to "Yes."'
EmpirePending
5 months ago
News sources are irrelevant as they are not in the rules so this dispute boils down to whether support equals formal endorsement. US have sent $700m in aid to support Palestine but they do not endorse Palestine. Therefore support ≠ formal endorsement.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Pointless posting articles when news sources are not mentioned in rules. Only RFK and reps statements matter
Pidor🐓
5 months ago
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/rfk-jr-suspends-us-presidential-campaign-endorses-trump-2024-08-23/
EmpirePending
5 months ago
All “No” arguments summed up:
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The only news articles that matter in this market are ones that contain quotes from RFK or his representatives. Any article that has a quote from them states that it is not a formal endorsement
EmpirePending
5 months ago
RFK will vote for himself not trump.
ElonMuskin
5 months ago
Announcing support is declaring to vote.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I formally think you’re dumb for holding something with this much risk for a 2% gain
Alexander343
5 months ago
Because you no bag holders refuse to accept reality.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Agreed. There is no rush for this just leave it play out for the next week. If yes holders are so confident they will have no problem with it
PeterNh
5 months ago
The best option right now is to resolve this to "no outcome yet". That would give seven days where the campaign could put out a more clear statement. If this resolves "yes" and the campaign then says it is not a formal endorsement- bad. If this resolves "no" and in a few days there is a post on the website saying RFK formally endorses- also bad. Best to give it until then end and then make decision.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The pure fact that there is this much debate about the resolution proves that it is not a formal endorsement. Formal definitively means that there is can be no debate, yet here we are debating.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Exactly and that will bring on more attention from the government and regulation or even a shut down of polymarket, which is something none of us want
Vulture
5 months ago
Indeed. Their mistakes are increasing both in gravity and frequency.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Exactly and that will brings more attention and regulation or even a shut down of polymarket, which is something none of us want
Vulture
5 months ago
Indeed. Their mistakes are increasing both in gravity and frequency.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I agree they need to put much more time and resources into determining unambiguous rules. You cannot leave these things up to votes.
LMNOP
5 months ago
This is an issue not just with this market but many others. The Rules sections need to be more robust calling out specific criteria for resolution, i.e. "RFK must use the word 'endorse' or 'endorsing' for this market to resolve to Yes. Use of other words like 'support' will not count towards a Yes resolution." It would avoid so much confusion here.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Whatever side you’re on you will agree that this so called endorsement is extremely ambiguous. Therefore, by definition, it is not formal.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The added context is totally wrong. The context is right for the Friday market but they add it to this market and the November market too without realising the wording of the rules is different. Some polymarket employee mistakenly didn’t read the rules for each market he was adding context to.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The probability of RFK saying this is not a formal endorsement is not zero and therefore this market cannot be resolved yet
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Congrats maniac but how did you know?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Also email the press team asking is this a formal endorsement. press@teamkennedy.com
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Also email the press team asking is this a formal endorsement. mailto:press@teamkennedy.com
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Everybody tweet at RFK’s Campaign press secretary asking has RFK formally endorsed Trump. If she replies to us it’s game over. https://x.com/stefaniespear?s=21&t=7FgnUqPp7Ji6mCENCN9pgg
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I don’t have either of those options
IAmHarold
5 months ago
#voting-discussion & #evidence-rationale
EmpirePending
5 months ago
What channel are we supposed to talk in?
IAmHarold
5 months ago
everyone is encouraged to speak their voice in the discord: https://discord.com/invite/uma
EmpirePending
5 months ago
1. Did RFK say he will vote for Trump? No. 2. Did RFK say “I endorse Trump”? No. 3. Did any RFK representative say that he endorses Trump? No, one representative actually explicitly states there was a lawyer’s filing error regarding an endorsement, which suggests again that there is no endorsement. News reports are immaterial to this market as they are not mentioned in the rules.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Genius
XiJinPing
5 months ago
advice for YES holders -- take profit on YES, buy NO for cheap, then vote for NO, profit
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Another way to look at how support does not equal formal endorsement. The US have sent $700m in aid to “support” Palestine during the war. But you sure as hell can agree that the US don’t endorse Palestine or hamas
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Saying you’re “throwing support” couldn’t be further from “formal”
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The only thing that counts as “formal” is if he stands in front of a camera and says “I am formally endorsing Trump” and that hasn’t happened
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The only thing that counts as “formal” is if he stands in front of a camera and says “I am formally endorsing Trump” and that hasn’t happened
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Thanks
IAmHarold
5 months ago
Make sure to join the UMA discord server and speak your mind!
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Link to the discord?
IAmHarold
5 months ago
Make sure to join the UMA discord server and speak your mind!
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Anyone holding yes is insane. The risk of this being overturned is not worth the extra 2% gain.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
It’s got disputed but now waiting for a second dispute, same situation as this market is in
asdf4
5 months ago
wow! did that one get disputed successfully? If I remember correctly, he said verbatim that he does not drop out, just suspend his campaign in key battleground states
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Polymarket fucked up bad today. They also resolved “will RFK drop out by Friday” market to yes even though he clearly hasn’t dropped out.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Polymarket fucked up bad today. They resolved “will RFK drop out by Friday” market to yes even though he clearly hasn’t dropped out.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Support ≠ formal endorsement it’s very simple
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Can somebody explain who UMA actually are?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
hilary2win will go down in the history books
hillary2win
5 months ago
I will dispute it again in both markets, just waiting for the timer to countdown more, to buy an extra hour for raising awareness for NO holders and UMA discussions and comments here.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
If this is disputed again it might even be enough time for RFK to answer the question he will inevitably get: “do you formally endorse Trump” in which he will not say yes
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Nobody is denying RFK’s support of Trump. But within these markets the wording is vital. The wording of this specific market does not warrant a yes outcome
EmpirePending
5 months ago
An endorsement means you are voting for the person. It’s very clear RFK will not be voting for Trump.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
If this said “Will RFK express his support for Trump” it would be a yes. But it doesn’t. It specifically states formal endorsement.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Fat 270k profit waiting on the other end for you
hillary2win
5 months ago
I know I'll have to now dispute each one again, it sucks, but its worth it
EmpirePending
5 months ago
They lumped all endorsement markets in the same pile when the wording of them is different. In the speech one it said “support” is enough for yes but in this one it does not say that and thus should be no
EmpirePending
5 months ago
What’s the point of the first dispute then?
MineGuyBonds
5 months ago
Disputes don't get looked at until after dispute #2
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Why has the dispute not been looked at? Is that not supposed to go to a team to review the reasons for dispute and vote accordingly? It was only disputed for about 3 minutes
EmpirePending
5 months ago
You are a legend my friend
hillary2win
5 months ago
Disputed as promised. Working on getting usdc for disputing the November one also
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Polymarket must resolve this to no to keep faith in this system built on facts. When you resolve no for the Bernie market but yes for the RFK market everybody instantly loses trust in the system.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
They proposed yes for all 3 endorsement markets but the rules for this one is different. This one specifically states “formal” whereas the others don’t. This one also states that the resolution comes from the speech, whereas the others considered news reports as well.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
My source from Chelsea says they’re signing Antony instead
EmpirePending
5 months ago
This could be the most legendary polymarket moment ever if this works
hillary2win
5 months ago
At 40 minute mark I will start a dispute and pay the fee. I have almost everything ready. I need you guys to start writing good arguments for why this should resolve as NO. And I have no idea how UMA processes this. Lets be respectful and polite throughout the process and use logic to correctly resolve this market. I believe its sent to a vote for UMA to review manually? Lets see if we can also discuss this on UMAs chats and channels if they require it. Need your help! Lets win this! If i lose the $750 its okay, I just wanted to do the right thing for the smaller betters here as well as myself ofc. Lets WIN! Team NO
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Why are you buying more then
hillary2win
5 months ago
i know
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Yo hilary2win there’s no point in buying up more if nobody is gonna go in and dispute this thing. I don’t know how to do it
EmpirePending
5 months ago
His average cost is 1c
0x9387653E0135B40B320f01973a6524C6E07f6a91-1724450459869
5 months ago
23k ?!?!? Dam 🤣🤣🤣 there was whispers of this happening 2 days ago , didn't think to get out?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Brother we’re on the same team
Munners
5 months ago
kys
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Somebody dispute this I don’t know what to do
EmpirePending
5 months ago
“Throwing support” is not a “formal endorsement”. This is very simple.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Why would they add clarification rather than resolving it? Because they’re not confident themselves
EmpirePending
5 months ago
In a court of law this would not go down as an endorsement. Kennedy still wants to win the presidential race. Obviously it’s very unlikely but that is what he wants to do. If that doesn’t work out then he would be happy with Trump as president. Trump being RFK’s second choice for president is not an endorsement.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
A couple paragraphs down https://apnews.com/article/rfk-jr-trump-speech-arizona-a2638f89ddcb5de03edbe4574ca17d45
Scrounge
5 months ago
In the election matters filed the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania it stated in there that RFK Jr endorses Trump.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
And then his representatives came out and said it was a mistake and not an endorsement
Scrounge
5 months ago
In the election matters filed the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania it stated in there that RFK Jr endorses Trump.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I typed it out yes
L114
5 months ago
Do you hear yourself?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Exactly and his representatives specifically stated it is not an endorsement
hillary2win
5 months ago
News articles do NOT count for this market. only this, The resolution source for this market will be official information from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. or one of his representatives.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
You can argue he endorsed Trump but it’s definitely not a “formal” endorsement which is what this market is
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The market for “Will RFK say Endorse during his speech” has gone to zero. Theres no way this can resolve to yes
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Support does not equal endorse
EmpirePending
5 months ago
You can support somebody without endorsing them.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
“Before the speech, his campaign had said in a Pennsylvania court filing Friday that he would be endorsing Trump for president. A spokesperson for Kennedy said the court filing had been made in error and would be updated, though Kennedy himself reiterated his support for Trump shortly afterward.” - AP
EmpirePending
5 months ago
What the fuck is going on
EmpirePending
5 months ago
That’s what it should be but you can argue the rules would count it as 2. It’s just too ambiguous terrible wording
JeremiahPowell
5 months ago
Surely “Donald” is one, “Trump” is one and “Donald Trump” is one. Hmmm
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Yea like does “Donald Trump” count as 2?
ALevinson
5 months ago
The rules on the “Donald Trump” market are unclear. It’s says “resolve to yes if she says “Donald” or Trump” 5+ times. So if she says “Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Trump” is that 5?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Agreed. Buy more 45-60
StevenBonnell
5 months ago
Never in the history of RNC and DNC has an acceptance speech been less than 30 minutes long. That happened only with Biden because of COVID. less than 30 min betters are in for a lot of trouble.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
shut up susan
SusanWarren,HR
5 months ago
My door is always open if either of you ever need to talk.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Damn bro you’re taking it well I would’ve been filled with rage
naya
5 months ago
Miss click :/ Had voice call and clicked wrong button lmfao
EmpirePending
5 months ago
That’s crazy
Gregorius
5 months ago
someone bought 5k$ worth of Draws at 97% at last minute wtf. Missclick?
EmpirePending
5 months ago
The moment you switch sides to no is when it will happen
Justifax
5 months ago
I figure if I keep betting it will happen, it never will. This is how I will single handedly protect the world from global nuclear annihilation.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
https://x.com/bricsinfo/status/1824493447098798302?s=46&t=7FgnUqPp7Ji6mCENCN9pgg
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Hahaha I was joking I’m good
Donkov
5 months ago
Take it easy, man
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I have lost my life savings betting on Iran but I will not be stopped. Pay check has just hit my account and USDC is loading as we speak
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Welcome back my friends
EmpirePending
5 months ago
He could easily bang out 7/8 tweets within 20 minutes and shit on everybody here
EmpirePending
5 months ago
I agree
iforgot
5 months ago
Here's what I think will happen: the press conference will have a few decent moments that the team would want to post. At the very least, they might retweet some MAGA sycophants praising him for his "tremendously successful" press conference.
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Y’all 11-15 guys are finished 😂
EmpirePending
5 months ago
Need to be more specific. What if it’s a loan deal? What if he signs a deal in summer but only comes to Chelsea in January or next year?