# Zvi's Manifold Markets House Rules

This document was updated August 11, 2024. Broad intent has not changed.

All markets created by Zvi Mowshowitz shall be graded according to the rules described herein, including the zeroth rule.

The version of this on LessWrong shall be the canonical version, even if other versions are later posted on other websites.

Rule 0: If the description of a particular market contradicts these rules, the market’s description wins, the way a card in Magic: The Gathering can break the rules. This document only establishes the baseline rules, which can be modified.

1.  **Effort put into the market need not exceed that which is appropriate to the stakes wagered and the interestingness level remaining in the question**. I will do my best to be fair, but I will mostly not answer clarifying questions if the answers are more trouble than they're worth. I'm definitely not interested in hypothetical nitpicks or complaints about objectivity unless the market gets economically meaningful action.
2.  If you are going to endlessly nitpick, or complain about the first rule, then please don't trade on my markets. It's not worth the trouble for either of us.
3.  If a market becomes too much of a headache I will hand resolution to the mods.
4.  Obvious errors will be corrected. If for example a date is clearly a typo, I will fix.
5.  If the question description or resolution mechanism does not match the clear intent or spirit of the question, or does not match its title, in an unintentional way, or is ambiguous, I will fix that as soon as it is pointed out. If the title is the part in error I will fix the title. If you bet while there is ambiguity or a contradiction here, and no one including you has raised the point, then this is at your own risk. 
6.  If the question was fully ambiguous in a scenario, I will choose resolution for that scenario based on what I feel upholds the spirit of the question and what traders could have reasonably expected, if such option is available.
7.  When resolving potentially ambiguous or disputable situations, I will still strive whenever possible to get to either YES or NO, if I can find a way to do that and that is appropriate to the spirit of the question.
8.  Ambiguous markets that have no other way to resolve, because the outcome is not known or situation is truly screwed up, will by default resolve to the manipulation-excluded market price, if I judge that to be a reasonable assessment of the probability involved. This includes conditional questions like ‘Would X be a good use of time?’ when X never happens and the answer seems uncertain.
9.  If even those don’t make any sense, N/A it is, but that is a last resort.
10.  Egregious errors in data sources will be corrected. If in my opinion the intended data source is egregiously wrong, I will overrule it. This requires definitive evidence to overturn, as in a challenge in the NFL.
11.  If the market is personal and subjective (e.g. ‘Will Zvi enjoy X?’ ‘Would X be a good use of Zvi’s time?’), then my subjective judgment rules the day, period. This also includes any resolution where I say I am using my subjective judgment. That is what you are signing up for. Know your judge.
12.  I reserve the right to change resolution from my subjective judgment to some objective criteria or to let the mods decide. That is a one-way transformation.
13.  Within the realm of not obviously and blatantly violating the question intent or spirit, technically correct is still the best kind of correct when something is well-specified, even if it makes it much harder for one side or the other to win.
14.  For any market related to sports, Pinnacle Sports house rules apply.
15.  Markets will resolve early if the outcome is known and I realize this. You are encouraged to point this out.
16.  Markets will resolve early, even if the outcome is unknown, if the degree of uncertainty remaining is insufficient to render the market interesting, and the market is trading >95% or <5% (or for markets multiple years in advance, >90% or <10%), and I agree with the market but feel it mostly reflects Manifold interest rates. Markets will not be allowed to turn into bets on interest rates. However if it could still plausibly resolve N/A, then I will hold off.
17.  I will not participate in subjective markets until the minute I resolve them.
18.  If I participate in a market and do not resolve it, I am stating that the market is fully objective, and I am locking any changes, and will offload judging the market in event of a non-trivial dispute to a neutral third party.
19.  I will definitely pick off the value right before a definitive resolution (e.g. buying to 99%+ when I’m about to resolve YES), but this will not be considered in the market price. I won’t do this when resolving to a market price.
20.  I will modify these rules continuously over time as I find better rules. I will do my best not to have this change the outcome of markets that had already been created and have substantial participation. 
21.  Others are encouraged to say they use ‘Zvi house rules,’ either in a particular market or in general, but I am not pledging to offer my verdict on any confusions that occur in such markets.

Suggestions for modifications are encouraged.