pull down to refresh

This was kind of inevitable when betting markets went from concrete things with clear definitions (sports scores, even high/low weather temperatures) to more general actions. Bet we'll see a lot more situations like this moving forward.

537 sats \ 1 reply \ @Arceris 7 Jan

This seems fair.

  1. it wasn't an invasion. At best it was an incursion. Invasion implies the conquering and occupying (holding) of territory.
  2. There was a separate market that said "US Forces In Venezuela" which they did pay out - that seems to be describing an incursion.

The US hasn't invaded Venezuela in the literal sense of the term.

reply

I agree

reply
76 sats \ 1 reply \ @Aardvark 7 Jan

According to the DoJ it was a law enforcement action, not an invasion. Congress definitely disagrees. That's definitely a murky situation to call a bet on.

reply

Resolution criteria matter

reply

They tried to make a quick buck off the poor gamblers, and now they’re screwed! Ahaha

reply

I thought insider trading was good?!

reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @anon 16h

Oracle problem…

reply

Man what a scam!! They should pay out

reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @OT 7 Jan

Not yet

reply

ROFL, that's funny, insider cheats got cheated by an unregulated betting system run by cheaters who don't like the results of a rigged prediction game.

reply

Even in some small markets on predyx the resolution has been murky. Needs to be very specific and traders need to read it and fully understand it. Some of these might say "resolves to yes if xyz government agency confirms it". Well the government agency might be full of shit and everyone knows it but that doesn't matter because you thought you were betting on x but you were really betting on xyz confirming x whether they were full of shit or not.

reply