Will he have been working at openAI in this period, that is, attending meetings, performing duties, working on code, reading and reporting on things, interviewing, or any other similar duty which someone like him might do in a managerial or individual contributor way or any other way.

This does not refer to self-directed, personal, private, non-shared work which he might be doing on his own using all his own private resources, hardware, and software, without regular sharing with / review by / consultation with OpenAI staff. So these would not count: a private project or idea he is exploring, invented by himself, which may later on be shared w/OpenAI but which he isn't talking to them about now.

This is related to the question of what he was doing on Feb 1 2024; it may come too late to help resolution there, but at least will let us look back on this and know something, if enough information comes out to resolve this market.

This will stay open through mid 2028 in the hopes that someone writes a biography or an interview comes out which reveals whether or not he was actually "working for OpenAI" in the most colloquial sense, i.e. directly working for and at the company regardless of contract / legal status.

If he was doing this type of thing in a committed and full way, i.e. as a regular employee without any prohibitions (like: I'll join meetings but I won't speak up; I'll do reviews but not write code; etc.; he has to be a full-on employee) for at least 3 working days in that period (or we have confirmation he was full-on working, but the exact day count is unclear, but reasonable to believe it was at least 3 days) then this can YES. Otherwise stays open. If we reach the end and still don't know, it resolves 50%

This is completely unrelated to payment or contract status. If he was being paid but not contributing anything, that is not a YES. If he wasn't being paid but was contributing, that can be a YES since he was advancing the goals.

If he was allegedly or overtly working there, but then it's revealed that he was actually working against their goals and it's quite clear this was so, then that will also not be a YES. YES means "he was sincerely and actually, actively, and in personal contact with openAI staff and honestly attempting to advance the goals of the company as they were at that time". Also: the goals I refer to are the actual, official, as-of-that-time goals of OpenAI according to what Sam Altman, the alleged jan 2024 CEO thinks.