Small sidenote that my guess is most people are modeling but still seemed good to make explicit: That market only resolves if Nonlinear does indeed file a suit. My current guess is it’s very unlikely for them to sue, and the world in which they sue are of course the worlds where it’s most likely they would win.
This means this market does not measure the probability of a libel suit against the original post succeeding, but only of it succeeding conditional on Nonlinear deciding to go ahead with such a suit, which I think increased the probability a lot.
I’m not a fan of the fact that this market resolves YES if there’s a settlement. A settlement is not an admission of guilt. Lawyers often tell defendants to settle lawsuits even if they’re completely innocent. So this market mostly captures whether NL would get some financial compensation from the lawsuit, not whether Lightcone/​Ben would be found liable for defamation.
The beauty of Manifold is that you can make your own competing market with resolution criteria you find preferable.
I am sympathetic to this view, but there is a settlement dollar figure at which I think a market should resolve to YES rather than N/​A. I don’t know what it should be, but treating (e.g.) the massive Fox News /​ Dominion settlement as N/​A doesn’t track the spirit of the market either. A big enough settlement is a de facto admission of very probable loss if trial happened.
Hard to discern what that threshold would be. In a field where damage claims are more grounded in facts (e.g., medical malpractice), I’d suggest a percentage of the damages claimed in the complaint. But alleged defamation damages tend to be hyberbole.
Place your bets!
Small sidenote that my guess is most people are modeling but still seemed good to make explicit: That market only resolves if Nonlinear does indeed file a suit. My current guess is it’s very unlikely for them to sue, and the world in which they sue are of course the worlds where it’s most likely they would win.
This means this market does not measure the probability of a libel suit against the original post succeeding, but only of it succeeding conditional on Nonlinear deciding to go ahead with such a suit, which I think increased the probability a lot.
Good point to make explicit!
I’m not a fan of the fact that this market resolves YES if there’s a settlement. A settlement is not an admission of guilt. Lawyers often tell defendants to settle lawsuits even if they’re completely innocent. So this market mostly captures whether NL would get some financial compensation from the lawsuit, not whether Lightcone/​Ben would be found liable for defamation.
The beauty of Manifold is that you can make your own competing market with resolution criteria you find preferable.
I am sympathetic to this view, but there is a settlement dollar figure at which I think a market should resolve to YES rather than N/​A. I don’t know what it should be, but treating (e.g.) the massive Fox News /​ Dominion settlement as N/​A doesn’t track the spirit of the market either. A big enough settlement is a de facto admission of very probable loss if trial happened.
Would there be a monetary settlement threshold which would capture the idea of LC/​Ben losing?
Hard to discern what that threshold would be. In a field where damage claims are more grounded in facts (e.g., medical malpractice), I’d suggest a percentage of the damages claimed in the complaint. But alleged defamation damages tend to be hyberbole.