Why is this still open? The imbalance is gone already, and the "because" is fully known.

Requesting @MartyDettmann to resolve please

Currently yes

Costs:

• 100 mana play tier market creation cost

Revenue:

• 100 mana weekly market creation bonus

• Small amount of trader fees

• Automated-market-maker (AMM) share payouts upon resolution, <100 mana if it resolves in same direction as odds, >100 mana if opposite direction, exactly 100 mana if odds are 50%

@TheAllMemeingEye I see what you're getting at but nahhh, this question only talks about question creation, not question resolution, and seems clearly to be comparing the quest reward with the creation cost - NOT considering how profitable markets end up being.

@TheAllMemeingEye "As of market creation" direct quote of first words of the body, which clarifies the potential title ambiguity of "by" in "by creating questions"

@TheAllMemeingEye You do have a point that creating a market and getting refunded the creation cost is effectively still free mana, but this market was about mana earned at market creation. Apologies if this wasn't sufficiently clear.

Weekly quest payout has been decreased to match the cost of a Play market

"As of market creation, there is a weekly quest to create a question which pays out M500"

Has this already been changed or is this a bug?

(Or am I misunderstanding?)

@Nat LOL manifold's founder saw this question, bet the option "No, because of a decrease in the weekly quest payout" up to 75%, and reduced the weekly question creation bonus to 100M to remove this loophole

@Bayesian Hahaha that would explain it lol

many reasons can resolve YES, right? @MartyDettmann I'm asking in case it's something like "resolves to the one that most directly applies" or something.

@Bayesian The options on this market are deliberately not linked. I should have clarified this in the description.

The other No options may still resolve Yes based on future changes, for example if the creation bonus is bumped back up to M500 but capped at the amount of liquidity you provided to your market the option 'No, because cheaper questions will not/partially be eligible to complete the quest' would also resolve Yes.

@MartyDettmann Wait I was on board with "multiple things can happen" but to go with multiple different things spread out over a year really stretches the usage of "because" doesn't it? If it's already not true "because of X" and then Y happens, is it really "because of Y" at that point?