#368
Rank
29
Comments
18
Likes Received
71
Likes Given
SureBet745
5 days ago
Holy crap. Big push on Hil dawg
SureBet745
5 days ago
After today's shit show, how is Yes above 1% jajajajajajaj
SureBet745
6 days ago
"Too early"
SureBet745
6 days ago
contract address?
D.J.Pump
6 days ago
If you play by the rules, it says that Donald Trump must be involved in deployment of a new token. This new token, World Liberty Financial, was NOT deployed. Come on.
SureBet745
6 days ago
They exchange gunfire all of the time. Its not really reported but border skirmishes are actually fairly common. South Korea actually fired shots at when NK blew up the road separating the two recently. Technically almost resolved https://x.com/nknewsorg
SureBet745
6 days ago
The fact that he has a 22.5% ownership stake in what? That would be an influential or potentially controlling stake if it were equity. Surely these are not securities. These are just internet tokens.
🤺JustClément
6 days ago
It's a compelling argument at first, but according to the gold paper, an LLC Trump controls will have a 22.5 percent ownership stake and will receive the majority of fee revenue. That definitely would make it his coin.
SureBet745
6 days ago
"Deployment"
🤺JustClément
6 days ago
It's a compelling argument at first, but according to the gold paper, an LLC Trump controls will have a 22.5 percent ownership stake and will receive the majority of fee revenue. That definitely would make it his coin.
SureBet745
6 days ago
This cant resolve to yes if the title is: "Will Trump launch a coin before the election?". He didn't. Someome licensed his brand name.
SureBet745
6 days ago
Be consistent with the other rulings please :)
SureBet745
6 days ago
The resolver should be the white paper and official disclosures. Not a news article headline. Particularly when the body of the article defers to the disclosures
SureBet745
6 days ago
:(
skrydismenulin
1 week ago
Only in your dreams I'm afraid
SureBet745
6 days ago
No, you can endorse something without being directly involved
SureBet745
1 week ago
50/50
SureBet745
1 week ago
Why does "Additional Context" sometimes not load the first time? If that is going to drive decision making it should load with rules without needing to refresh
SureBet745
1 week ago
Flimsy write-up. If you guys are going to stay in the market need to vet scope of the bet better. Dont need a 100 page legal agreement but be explicit and consistent
SureBet745
1 week ago
Locate actual written text from the event
SureBet745
1 week ago
If they added additional context to the rules then what is the point of a final review? If they have already made their judgment then resolve now, otherwise send it to dispute and remove the "additional context"
SureBet745
1 week ago
Why do they alternate between midnight and the afternoon when setting timelines
SureBet745
1 week ago
No.
n/a
1 week ago
have you tried to dispute this?
SureBet745
1 week ago
"Other" is ambiguous as it implies a third person that was not included on the list. We can infer this based on the context of "multiple". Both are separate and distinct from "inconclusive".
SureBet745
1 week ago
The rules say "The documentary depicts". That includes interviewee reaction. There is no clear language on how the interviee / interviewer opinions are weighted. If anything, BOTH are depicted and Todd's denial is a stronger claim
SureBet745
1 week ago
"f the documentary identifies multiple individuals, this market will resolve according to the individual which the documentary most directly depicts, or presents as most likely to be responsible for creating Bitcoin." Artistic choices to be considered?
SureBet745
2 weeks ago
that was the crux of my bet and mannnn...looking like the guy is a real idiot
Justifax
2 weeks ago
Part of the problem is that it was very hard to believe that the director was this stupid.
SureBet745
2 weeks ago
Yeah something about it just feels weird. If its a last minute stunt to add drama to the release then its kinda brilliant. The problem is the author gives himself an out in the title by leaving a "?" at the end. But later he asserts that Cullen "names" Todd. No deniability there. Either Todd or market manipulation. Not a stock exchange but may fall within market manipulation
Justifax
2 weeks ago
Though, it'd be super super fitting if the teaser to this doc was a hilarious and massive rug fueled by a fake forbes article. Performance art, let's call it..
SureBet745
2 weeks ago
he honestly has one of the most interesting stories
Justifax
2 weeks ago
Alrighty, you guys win. I'm out. You'll win for sure now. Well keep the Le Roux shares as a memento of my stupidity.
SureBet745
2 weeks ago
Perfect way to put it. "Planted" The Forbes thing just feels weird.
Justifax
2 weeks ago
My favorite BTC scam moment was the 'fake' gensler tweet. Lulz. That was a much bigger deal than a planted forbes article. If it is!
SureBet745
2 weeks ago
thank you JustLaura :D :D :D :D
Meow.Zedong
2 weeks ago
September was reviewed and voted Too Early and since the proposal was prior to the deadline it was reopened and has to go through the final proposal process again.
SureBet745
2 weeks ago
I followed Kole on twitter when he was alive and almost spit out my coffee at the crossover here to Polymarket hahahha
MonkeyDLuffy
3 weeks ago
He will not launch any coin before the election. It's written in the stars. - Kole World
SureBet745
2 weeks ago
Why is the final review for this ending before September?