If I email them about it, will the Open Philanthropy (OpenPhil) team think it is more positively impactful for me to spend mana creating prediction markets about Effective Altruism (EA) cause areas, like those I have created previously, at ~$1 each, rather than donating it to the EA Long Term Future Fund (LTFF) via Manifold Charity?
In the past, EA LTFF have given a grant to the founders of Manifold (https://funds.effectivealtruism.org/funds/far-future), and have also been one of the largest donation recipients via Manifold Charity.
OpenPhil have forecasting as a focus area, and have given grants to Metaculus before, but seemingly not to Manifold (https://www.openphilanthropy.org/focus/forecasting/). Therefore, they should hopefully be a more unbiased 3rd party.
1,000
1.00@traders Now that the 100 mana play tier markets have been introduced, even with the decreased 100 mana weekly market creation bonus, there is no longer a mandatory cost for creating markets, which for me is great news :)
Rather than resolving n/a, I have decided to instead ask OpenPhil whether paying for the extra liquidity, and thus possibly improved trader number/accuracy, of higher market tiers on the same EA questions would itself be more impactful than donation.
I have extended the market a few days to allow people to alter their positions.
@TheAllMemeingEye I think adding liquidity is quite different, and you can still ask the original question, (and price of markets can still change in the future).
@TheAllMemeingEye What I mean, is that you should still ask the original question (if it would be worth it for $1), or N/A (and maybe create another market for the other question).
I know there is not much mana involved so it isn't really important, but on principle I think markets should not change substantially like that.