This market resolves based on the outcome of: Will Trump announce strategic Bitcoin reserve. Resolution follows credible public reporting before the end date.
Why did so many of you guys think this announcement wasnt happening? I figured it was sealed when Trump said he would be going to the Bitcoin Conference.
Can I get a link for the newly created bitcoin reserve? Or it still doesn’t exist? lol
doesn't exist
Thanks for playing, caveat emptor.
Ahhhhh, victory...
I just bought 46k NO-shares out of principle.
can someone explain what the next steps are from here, and whether there is any defined timeline?
it will resolve in a few hours
was told that days ago
second vote shows 135% of the tokens voted as having been revealed....
and what's the conclusion? did we take an L or a W?
btw; how can 135% be revealed, genuine question.
I just checked the UMA vote and 100% of people voted Yes and quorum was reached. this should resolve yes
well.... that's an L hahaha
I 7x my money playing "No", lmao 220 K guy here hoping to become billionnaire. Cant fo anyrhing but respect your decision of holding and hoåing to achieve financial freedom this way lol
More more mooooreeeee
Hi, completely new to this. Is the "additional context" from Polymarket, the resolver, or the community?
Polymarket. The vote is done, YES won, the settlement is just delayed because UMA (the decentralized judge) is bad.
That's wild.
Betting $1 to win $300 where the condition for winning is that they make reasonable decision isn't too bad
That is true and the reason I bet only 1$. But from a purely semantic and pragmatic standpoint the outcome should be NO
Yes is the correct outcome
If Trump's remarks were linked to the fraud lawsuit, I believe the Democrats would be happy and would be negative about him.
Guys the only way to win for NO here is for Trump to release a statement that he meant a strategic bitcoin "sock"-pile, i.e a pile of socks with BTC logo on it. Anything less is a "YES". And even then it is running out of time.
This is not about whether this is settled or not, but about the fraudulent solution
Do you agree that Trump came much closer to promising it than not?
I suggest you sue him for losing tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of dollars. This market settlement is obviously unreasonable.
Guys, the strategic part really means that it will be used to sereve US stability and national interest. Maybe Trump does not expect the need to sell it in the max 4 years he has as president, but that doesn't change the strategic nature of the stockpile aka reserve. He could promise to never sell from the strategic gold reserve for 4 years, that would not convert it to "strategic HODL" or something.
So where is the CREATING part?
He can rely on further confiscations, or start government controlled mining, or he could buy BTC into the strategic resereve to increase or refill its volume. Did he also promise to never buy/mine/confiscate any more BTC?(I don't think so) Even if that was the case he will pass on a strategic BTC reserve in 2029 for future presidents to use for US national interest.
He could, he would, but said nothing about that
He only had so much time. Most people understood what he said(Those who have no interest in not understanding).
Funny how YES needs arguments for the solution, but NO is just implied by the words he spoke. Makes the solution very reliable haha
Ask an AI or a friend. These things really mean 99.9% the same thing. If we had a bet with 3 outcomes: Will he promise a "stockpile" or a "reserve" or "none", then you would be right. But if poly made such bet everyone would be confused, whats the difference. In that case that would become an exact word bingo market. But this is not it.
AI says it's a NO. Stockpile is something completely different.
Then go and ask the court. But the lawyer will need the money upfront, and THAT will be the real scam if he takes this case.
I guess we'll see about that haha
AI says whatever you make it say. I could easily get ChatGPT to agree with me too. You people are literal baboons.
The market value is several million US dollars. It is recommended that those who are familiar with the legal process in the United States file a fraud lawsuit against the platform and sue it for suspected fraud.
I'm already on it.
you lost $20 buying this lottery ticket, chill
You won 3$ buying this lottery ticket, chill
You can't trade on this platform as a US citizen so by default your argument is invalid. If you are from the US, well you're committing a crime trading on here so your lawsuit would once again, be invalid.
This is just sad to see, why are people still buying?
So he used the word stockpile instead of reserve, For all intents and purposes this is the same thing.
It's not even close. Yes = fraud
You're biased.
I can't be biased since the words strategic reserve weren't mentioned. Truth isn't bias.
you mean the word reserve was not mentioned. Strategic was most definitely mentioned. and also the meaning of strategic stockpile has the same meaning and purpose as strategic reserve. at least that is what most newspapers around the world are saying. how is a strategic reserve different from a strategic stockpile?
Lol this is obviously a yes.
Oh yeah, bitcoin price action really "confirms" it. The richest country wants to create a strategic reserve of bitcoin? DUMP IT HARD, LET THEM BUY IT CHEAP. Ahahah ridiculous
I don't care about my small losses on this market. It is the principle of the matter. Markets should not be resolved in a fraudulent way. This market MUST resolve as NO because Trump didn't suggest buying, and furthermore he specifically said he would "never sell". Both of these facts independently prove it is not a "reserve".
Yep. It's not about the money, it's about the bona fides. Poly should be reliable and preditable, not manipulable.
Yes is the reliable and predictable determination, in line with past resolutions. Every platform will have a resolving style and preferred ways of interpreting rules.
Not really. Predictable means resolving by objective criteria, not by biased whatiwannahear kind of criteria.
Yes is the only valid answer to anyone who knows what they're talking about on the subject.
19.24% of votes have been released at a 100% yes. Fraud.
Vibe killer. Losing being right
Have you not read the Additional context - it is obviously YES
This doesn't make it less of a fraud
Agreed this is literally fraud
the additional context is literally wrong. A key part of a reserve is that it is sold if needed. The additional context points out that because it won't be sold (which proves it isn't a reserve), that it must be a reserve. It does not make sense. It is wrong on the facts.