CPMX

No pedimos favores a bancos. No esperamos permiso de gobiernos. Venimos por lo que es nuestro.

[CPMX @cryptopesomx]

La narrativa oficial es de transformación, la realidad es que seguimos con bancos caros, gasolina cara e impuestos absurdos.

[Noryx @NoryxAlpha]

Yes didn't fall. It was pushed down.

Traders entered with real data. On-chain activity was there. The signal was clear. $400,000,000 in volume — people believed it.

Polymarket decided otherwise.

One oracle verdict — and Yes went from the top to the floor. Not in hours. In seconds.

This is not a market. This is a managed outcome.

[LiquidOracle 🔮 @cryptopresale21]

🚨 MicroStrategy SOLD 32 BTC May 26–31.
SEC filing: timestamped May 31, 4PM ET.
Polymarket resolved it: ❌ NO.
Why? The announcement came June 1.
Not the sale. The announcement.
$500K lost. $85M+ at stake.
This is theft with extra steps.
#StopPolyScam #Polymarket #Bitcoin #Crypto

[Hodlvault @Hodlvault]

@0xDinoCrypto @TheBlockCo @willo2_Poly @FinancialTimes & @business @markets @crypto should also catch this news!

https://t.co/VZfB7A2J2Q

[Evan @0xevanbuilds]

It really resolved "No"

Strategy sold the bitcoin. Everyone could see it. The token vote said no anyway.

This is what "The oracle is your conterparty" actually means. not a theory anymore. Just happened with so much money on the line.

[jez (equity perps era) @izebel_eth]

dont let a celebrity border collie with 1.5m followers being stolen and eaten distract you from the fact that polymarket stole hundreds of thousands from users on the may microstratregy market

[Hodlvault @Hodlvault]

Let me be clear, because softening it helps no one: this resolution was wrong.

The market asked whether Strategy SOLD any Bitcoin by May 31. It did. Strategy’s own 8-K, the primary resolution source @Polymarket named, dates the sale inside the window. The only way to reach NO was to bolt on an “Additional context” after the deadline that quietly swapped “did they sell” for “was it announced,” which is the exact move @Polymarket’s own rules say a clarification cannot make. The standard was broken, and real people paid for it.

But I am not here just to point at the problem. There is a solution, and it is one where both @Polymarket and the YES holders come out ahead.

Make every YES holder whole at $1, and pair it with a platform-wide review that cleanly separates two things the rulebook currently blurs: did the event happen by the deadline, versus was it confirmed by the deadline.

Why this is a win for @Polymarket, not a concession. The disputed amount is a rounding error against the volume you handle. The goodwill of being the platform that trades truth, not technicalities, is something marketing cannot buy at any price. Framed as a rules reform rather than a reversal, it kills the precedent worry: you are not caving to noise, you are fixing a genuine structural ambiguity and making the people caught by it whole. It slots directly into the integrity overhaul you have already announced.

The alternative only looks cheaper. Quietly clarifying the rules “going forward” with no payout leaves your users carrying the cost of your ambiguity, and it becomes the case study every regulator and competitor points to when they ask whether a Polymarket resolution can be trusted when money is on the line.

You wrote the rule that a clarification cannot change a question’s fundamental intent. Honor it. Make YES whole, fix the rulebook for everyone who comes next, and this stops being the week you lost trust and becomes the moment you earned it.

The right thing here is also the profitable one.

#Polymarket #PredictionMarkets #StopPolyScam @0xDinoCrypto @willo2_Poly

[will owens @wowens]

STRATEGY SOLD BITCOIN IN MAY
POLYMARKET SAYS IT DIDN'T

everyone who bought YES predicted the future correctly, and the market just told them they were wrong. that is a failure.

new @glxyresearch piece on what actually broke here

[TimStone @TimStone84]

Most annoying part with the @Polymarket situation is not the money they scammed from me in a market I clearly won based on rules.

It is all the little weasels with their badges coming out of the woodwork doing gaslighting and "acktually" posts while in reality every single one of them knows how full of shit they are...

despicable behaviour truly

[CPMX @cryptopesomx]

@poly_archive #POLYSCAM

[unpr0fitable @Unpr0fitable]

Polyscam about to go crazy, tweets are getting flooded

https://t.co/O20JC1eN01

[willo2 @willo2_Poly]

This market will resolve to "Yes" if MicroStrategy sells any of its Bitcoin by 11:59 PM ET on the date specified in the title.

Otherwise, this market will resolve to "No".

[The Prisoner @AlphaHunte19762]

$polyscam

[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.

[0xDinosaur @0xDinoCrypto]

$938,924.03 REKT by @Polymarket

97 traders affected.

They changed the rules after we bet.

MicroStrategy SOLD Bitcoin. Market resolved NO.

wtf?

Join us: #StopPolyScam

[CPMX @cryptopesomx]

@estoicc @Thecultof4 @PolymarketTrade @oraculofi JAJAJA Es lo mismo obtienes $ por recomendar su plataforma 🤡

[CPMX @cryptopesomx]

@estoicc @Thecultof4 @PolymarketTrade @oraculofi así o mas argumentos, vendido

[CPMX @cryptopesomx]

@estoicc @PolymarketTrade @oraculofi La Blockchain es pública. El evento no es " ..Anuncia venta..." es "ocurre una venta o no" imagínate como hubieran sido los libros de historia si se contaran los acontecimientos hasta que se "anuncian" lol , era un claro Yes.

[0xDinosaur @0xDinoCrypto]

As the initiator of #StopPolyScam, I am calling on @Polymarket to consider a fair remedy.

At a minimum, all YES purchases made after May 31 should be refunded.

By that point, the market was no longer operating under a shared understanding of the written rule. Traders were entering a market already affected by an active dispute over interpretation.

Many users bought based on the belief that the written rule still governed the outcome.

If Polymarket believes a different standard applies, users who entered after the dispute emerged should not bear the cost of that ambiguity.

A refund for post-June 1 YES purchases would be a reasonable first step toward restoring trust.

Rule before trade.

[sdy @0xsdy]

polymarket just scammed me for $30 on microstrategy bet

30 fucking McDonald's cheeseburgers

moving to kalshi

zero