Peter Wong

[Troll Football @TrollFootball]

CABO VERDE 🫡

[0xDinosaur @0xDinoCrypto]

I have officially filed an FBI IC3 complaint regarding Polymarket’s handling of the “MicroStrategy sells any Bitcoin by May 31, 2026?” market.

Submission ID: 1d37377ddf04f2d91c7a19aa3e8517d

The written rule did not require public disclosure before May 31. It only asked whether Strategy sold any Bitcoin by the deadline.

Adding a new disclosure requirement after users traded is not fair market resolution. Prediction markets cannot work if rules are rewritten after the fact.

I will continue pursuing every available regulatory and legal channel until this is properly reviewed.

[willo2 @willo2_Poly]

I was just scammed for $500K by Polymarket.

I am "willo2", the top holder of YES on "MicroStrategy sells Bitcoin by May 31st".

Here's what happened:

[Eternity @ParetoPrincipl]

We have 2 markets. Same rules - different clarifications.

Traders get screwed over. Let's sink into it.

First market — "What will Trump say during Fox Business interview on April 15?".

We have rules - "The resolution source will be video of the events. Only remarks which are broadcast or streamed live will count toward this market's resolution."

And we have clarification - "Prerecorded footage from this interview will qualify toward this market's resolution if it is aired within timeframe."

Second market - "What will Trump say during bilateral events with Xi Jinping?"

We have rules - "The resolution source will be video of the events. Only remarks which are broadcast or streamed live will count toward this market's resolution."

And we have clarification - “only remarks which are broadcast or streamed live will count toward this market’s resolution.”

Markets have the SAME rules, but a different clarification.
It's a serious violation of market integrity.
It's impossible to traded fair when no can predict how rules of market is has to be meant.

The clarification on the market "What will Trump say during bilateral events with Xi Jinping?" was issued WRONGLY, without due diligence.

We got totally ghosted by the Polymarket team.

Draw attention to this matter.
We expect Polymarket to refund the YES-holders of the market "What will Trump say during bilateral events with Xi Jinping?".

[Rep. James Comer @RepJamesComer]

🚨More than 80 suspiciously timed trades were placed ahead of Iran military operations.

🚨Politicians and government officials with inside information are placing bets and taking profits.

This insider trading must end.

I’m demanding info from @Polymarket & @Kalshi.👇

[Eternity @ParetoPrincipl]

Polymarket needs to manually review the Trump-Xi Iran/Nuclear/Strait dispute before binary NO finalizes.
Trump said the words. The event qualified.

Q&A counted under the rules.
C-SPAN gave real-time live attribution.
Multiple completed live-broadcast archives exist. YouTube metadata shows live status.
PTS/AP evidence shows raw pool-feed infrastructure.

If this is not enough for YES, then the rule is impossible to apply consistently and the fair fallback is P3. This is now a ~$50M market-integrity issue, not just a trader complaint.

[kaulboy @kaulboy]

@shayne_coplan @Polymarket your oracle just resolved the trump-xi iran/nuclear market NO

trump's exact quote: "we did discuss iran. we don't want them to have a nuclear weapon"

- WH pool note #5, filed 11:55 AM Beijing (Danny Kemp, AFP, on-camera real time)
- TVB Hong Kong yt metadata: was_live, timestamp 11:56:11 AM Beijing
- every major broadcaster ran LIVE chyrons
- kalshi resolved the same market correctly

UMA voted NO because the pavilion was "closed press." brother the broadcast happened. on live tv. it's on youtube right now with was_live attached to it.

and this is not the first time we're doing this:
- ukraine mineral deal: $7M market, resolved YES with no deal signed, one wallet swung it with ~5M UMA
- zelensky suit: $160M+ market, every outlet AND POLYMARKET'S OWN ACCOUNT called it a suit, resolved NO, ~$25M staked by whales to make it happen
- now this: $31M currently, the most active market on your platform, flipped by a low-turnout governance vote

UMA's market cap is smaller than the volume of a single disputed market on your venue. top 10 wallets control >50% of voting power in disputes. ~95% of supply held by large holders. you are running a $9B platform on top of an oracle a handful of retards can rug for eight figures

you already override baseball payouts when umpires fuck up. add a human/AI last resort layer for high volume markets with primary source evidence. it's not philosophically harder than what you're already doing

kalshi is eating your volume every week because of exactly this. traders don't want to gamble on whether a UMA whale woke up short. fix it or watch the centralized competitor win the entire prediction market category

ngmi

[The Wall Street Journal @WSJ]

Polymarket’s system for resolving disputes is drawing scrutiny from traders. In nearly 20% of disputes reviewed by the Journal, accounts deciding the outcome were tied to bets in the same market. https://t.co/riR6tPy9kt

[Eternity @ParetoPrincipl]

This time we should protect market integrity!
Endless times we can see how UMA rocks manipulate market outcomes (farming UMA tokens rewards and simultaneously trading on polymarket).

Two big problems with this market:

1.) Vague rules and inconsistent polymarket clarification.

By rules we have: Only remarks which are broadcast or streamed live will count toward this market's resolution.

By polymarket team clarification: Footage that was not broadcast live, even if filmed during the relevant events and released during market timeframe, will not qualify toward resolution.

They subverted their own rules. There is a BIG difference in meaning:

(broadcast) OR (streamed live) != (broadcast live) or (streamed live)

Polymarket's clarification is trying to manipulate the semantics - we need urgent attention to this.

2.) A lot of evidence of live translation, or at least of broadcast.

We have a lot of evidence of live translation of time-frame that clarify to market resolution on YES side.

And we also have overwhelming amount that clarifies that video fragment is broadcasting and should resolve to YES.

WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO?

"If you believe you've witnessed potentially manipulative or prohibited trading activity on Polymarket, we want to hear from you."

Send letter with complaint here - [email protected]

[Peter Wong @PeterWo93010642]

Check out my P&L on @Polymarket. https://t.co/NZ2YJk8T6K

[Peter Wong @PeterWo93010642]

@fslweb3 @fslweb3 #GMTPay #GMTReady

[Peter Wong @PeterWo93010642]

@fslweb3 GMTAy64if
gogogo