Brian T. Edwards

Senior Product Manager, Clinical AI @IMOHealth #Algorithmovigilance 🇺🇸🇺🇦🇹🇼🇵🇸🍉

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

If a machine was called upon to save your life would you prefer it to be biased in your favor or with as little bias as possible? Negative #bias in AI only exists because we insist on using a thing even when we know it's not the right thing in advance.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@0xevanbuilds @Polymarket Anyone who traded before June 1st didn't read that line because it didn't exist. They followed the rules as written when they bought and got straight up screwed.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@errolcart @Polymarket FYI https://t.co/A9z4X3oNAC

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@Autonomous_Chad I am currently recruiting philosophers and linguists and raising money for the ISDA of prediction markets. We are building a common domain model to standardize market language and propositional resolution logic to automate resolution.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

Here are simple prospective rules that could have prevented the entire @Polymarket Microstrategy controversy this week:
1 - Market will resolve Yes if Microstrategy sells any amount of bitcoin before 11:59pm on May 31st;
2 - Trading will close for all market participants at 11:59pm on May 31st;
3 - Microstrategy will file an 8-K with the SEC Monday June 1, 2026 which will include all bitcoin transactions from the prior week, so we will know with certainty at the time of the 8-K filing whether it resolves Yes or No;
4 - The market will resolve automatically by the end of business on June 1, 2026 upon verification of Microstrategy’s bitcoin transactions prior to 11:59pm on May 31st as reported in their 8-K filing.

[tism @errolcart]

After today and watching events past few days, I've lost absolutely all trust in @Polymarket.

Will be moving my weather bot and money out of the platform and my trading as well.

"Microstrategy sells any bitcoin by May 31st" has just resolved to "NO".

What I saw today is amongst a handful of the most blatant alleged frauds I've seen from a platform this big to its users in this space.

Would be genuinely surprised if somehow this doesn't end up with much worse consequences for them.

As things are standing, I have no option but to conclude this is the start of their downfall and that another platform will take it's place. I'll /c this later.

Put simply but accurately: they changed the contract (buying shares with a set of conditions/rules) AFTER the agreement (purchase) and AFTER the date chosen had already passed (changed on june 1st, date was may 31st).

Imagine buying a lottery ticket, winning, and when you go to claim they tell you they've decided to change the numbers.

Disgusting and shameless are soft words for this.

Some, as myself, would also say illegal, but that's still to be proven in front of a judge.

It simply makes 0 sense to attempt any type of predictions in Polymarket, as the results of these prediction markets are not grounded in real events nor reliable sources, no matter how much they SAY they are (@arkham had recorded the sale on may 27th I believe), but on what the UMA holders find the most convenient at the time.

Just reading that paragraph makes me even more disgusted.

I can attempt to predict real life events, but I can't predict on what side of the bed the biggest UMA whale wakes up today.

Might as well change every question to "Will UMA holders resolve/decide to...."

After almost a decade of legal training, it's simply impossible for me to think this doesn't end in 1 or more lawsuits, and/or a class action.

There's simply too much evidence and too much money lost.

Of course it's not the first time something similar happens, but it is hands down the biggest and worst one.

Many lost it all.

A platform with a system that can't reflect the truth of events is unfit to be a prediction market.

If a blockchain like Solana wasn't capable of reflecting the truth of its transactions, it wouldn't exist.

Polymarket, in its current state, CAN NOT provide the service they claim they can provide.

The fact $UMA holders (-98% in price btw) coincide with truth is just a matter of intersection of incentives. When they're misaligned (as it happened today), the truth changes, and real life events don't matter anymore.

This is true I believe for any and all prediction markets in polymarket.

What was the most alarming was the changing of the rule on june 1st. Changed from "occurred" (sale) to "announced".

Becuase it leads me to believe there's a high chance it's not only UMA whales in this fiasco, but polymarket changing the frame (mid bet!!!) to cater them as well.

I'm not leaving my money in the hands of a handful of UMA whales 1 minute more. I really wish it wasn't this way.

I didn't really lose anything, unlike others.

I'm just mostly disappointed, and I must embarrasingly admit a little heartbroken.

Seems like just another rigged game.

It would seem as if reality didn't matter in polymarket, only how much a handful of big players stand to gain.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@errolcart @Polymarket UMA should be absorbing the reputational damage for this disaster, not Polymarket. What is the point of a third party oracle if they are just going to use Polymarket brand as cover for their shady rug pull!?!

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@alphaenu @jdorman81 8-K filings are made on business days bro.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@udiWertheimer Better

[Udi Wertheimer @udiWertheimer]

@jdorman81 correct. it shouldn't have been tradeable anymore after may 25, in fact. the resolution date should always be a monday because that's when the announcement is made.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

If the market it open new information should be counted. Otherwise it's purely open to exploit people. If people with insider info can't possibly win what are we even doing? Anyone who bet Yes before 11:59pm on May 31st was indisputably right and followed the rules as written when they bought. No technicality can deny that fact. Companies literally can't report this info on a Sunday and we all knew this yet still let them bet. Outrageous.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

Anyone who was active on @ManifoldMarkets when Levi Finkelstein was around has long been familiar with the bad faith behavior of the colluding No bettors and UMA hivemind token holders today. Shameless scam executed by mostly anonymous chuds.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@CarOnPolymarket @Euanker Bad faith untrustworthy actor right here.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@BenniDaytime Polymarket clarified it too late for anyone who bought Yes before that clarification. Stop defending the wrong decision just because it happened. That's lazy and again a bad faith sign of being untrustworthy.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@BenniDaytime It's bizarre it's even possible to dispute this. Proper prospective rules are far superior to retrospective voting by conflicted traders who can secretly collude. This is the end of UMA for sure.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

UMA should have no role in resolving this market. Properly written rules and propositional logic could resolve this market automatically and fairly. Using a prior bad decision to justify obviously incorrect resolution and calling it "precedent" is so so bad. Polymarket needs to clean house immediately.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

Reading rules and betting YES on May 27th got hosed so you could fill limit orders on people who believe truth is better information that bad precedent contrary to reality. That is who got screwed hardest today. They are the victim. By the rules they saw this is absolutely not correct resolution.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

Anonymouscum right here. Untrustworthy bad faith actor.

[rb (prediction arc) @rb_tweets]

made $1100 on Microstrategy selling bitcoin because some people can't read the clarification issued by Polymarket.

sure you'll be a millionaire, keep buying YES👍👍

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

Such a ridiculous unforced error by Polymarket. I am starting to doubt @shayne_coplan has control because I believe he is a good faith actor, but whoever allowed this to happen is an irredeemably untrustworthy bad faith actor. Please clear house and rebuild with the right people!!

[Jeremy @Jeremybtc]

The MicroStrategy Bitcoin sale Polymarket officially resolved as 'NO' after final review

Over $400M in total volume on this pool

🥀🥀

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@BenniDaytime There is absolutely no reason for there to be a vote on this. ZERO. Less than zero considering the voters are 99.8% untrustworthy bad faith actors.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@BrokieTrades It's obviously the right move to wipe out the No bets and correct the early erroneous ruling that deprioritized the event for the announcement of said event. Total bad faith garbage.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@chubby1756 You are an untrustworthy bad faith actor if you defend this outcome. Should we extend the information gathering for presidential elections or resolve them at where the count stands at midnight on election day? Morons is too nice for your shameless bunch.

[Brian T. Edwards @LiquidData]

@BenniDaytime So your saying this is the car accident to my plane crash?