Traders have the option, where a question is ambiguous, of asking the resolver how they would resolve it in some hypothetical scenario. This is true on Manifold as on Metaculus. I find this is normally more profitable for me than trying to get inside the head of the resolver.
There is a separate issue of resolver reputation, where some resolvers have a history of being biased in favor of their own positions, or just getting wrong. Definitely a weakness of current Manifold.
This post has a lot of good advice that I agree with, thanks for writing it.
I find this is normally more profitable for me than trying to get inside the head of the resolver.
If you ask in the comments, then the information about how the reviewer is likely to answer becomes public knowledge. There’s more profit to be made if you are able to correctly predict the behavior without it being public knowledge.
Good point. Sometimes I do both. First I bet based on my attempt to get inside the head of the resolver. Then I ask them a question. When they respond I bet further (in one direction or another) based on their answer. When the market catches up with the new information I can slowly exit the market and bet elsewhere.
You’re right that someone else can move the market based on the response first, but the site gives me a small assist: I get a notification when someone replies to my question, whereas nobody (yet) is subscribed to every comment thread. Maybe that will change with more volume. Also, since I asked the question, I probably have already thought about how different answers should move this and other markets.
Someone who was better at psychology-prediction than me has some better strategies, especially if someone else is betting on the market who thinks they are good at psychology-prediction and is not. There’s lots of profit to be made that way, but also lots of loss.
Traders have the option, where a question is ambiguous, of asking the resolver how they would resolve it in some hypothetical scenario. This is true on Manifold as on Metaculus. I find this is normally more profitable for me than trying to get inside the head of the resolver.
There is a separate issue of resolver reputation, where some resolvers have a history of being biased in favor of their own positions, or just getting wrong. Definitely a weakness of current Manifold.
This post has a lot of good advice that I agree with, thanks for writing it.
If you ask in the comments, then the information about how the reviewer is likely to answer becomes public knowledge. There’s more profit to be made if you are able to correctly predict the behavior without it being public knowledge.
Good point. Sometimes I do both. First I bet based on my attempt to get inside the head of the resolver. Then I ask them a question. When they respond I bet further (in one direction or another) based on their answer. When the market catches up with the new information I can slowly exit the market and bet elsewhere.
You’re right that someone else can move the market based on the response first, but the site gives me a small assist: I get a notification when someone replies to my question, whereas nobody (yet) is subscribed to every comment thread. Maybe that will change with more volume. Also, since I asked the question, I probably have already thought about how different answers should move this and other markets.
Someone who was better at psychology-prediction than me has some better strategies, especially if someone else is betting on the market who thinks they are good at psychology-prediction and is not. There’s lots of profit to be made that way, but also lots of loss.