I agree that the potential for this exists, and if it was an extended practice it would be concerning. Have you seen people who claim to have a good forecasting record engage with pseudonym exploitation though?
My understanding is that most people who claim this have proof records associated to a single pseudonym user in select platforms (eg Metaculus), which evades the problem you suggest.
You couldn’t know who is and is not engaging in this behaviour. Anyone with a good forecasting record may have shadow accounts.
I’m not familiar with proof records. Could you elaborate further? If this is verification such as identity documents, this could go some way to preventing manipulation.
If someone is doing the shadow account thing (ie, a boiler room scam, I think), there will be exponentially fewer forecasters for each number of successful bets. I don’t think this is the case for the well known ones
I agree that the potential for this exists, and if it was an extended practice it would be concerning. Have you seen people who claim to have a good forecasting record engage with pseudonym exploitation though?
My understanding is that most people who claim this have proof records associated to a single pseudonym user in select platforms (eg Metaculus), which evades the problem you suggest.
You couldn’t know who is and is not engaging in this behaviour. Anyone with a good forecasting record may have shadow accounts.
I’m not familiar with proof records. Could you elaborate further? If this is verification such as identity documents, this could go some way to preventing manipulation.
If someone is doing the shadow account thing (ie, a boiler room scam, I think), there will be exponentially fewer forecasters for each number of successful bets. I don’t think this is the case for the well known ones
I mean rankings like https://www.metaculus.com/rankings/?question_status=resolved&timeframe=3month