Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@Gosleepriya 52

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@B24PT @JacobsBen

[willo2 @willo2_Poly]

I bet $500,000 on Polymarket that Microstrategy sold Bitcoin in May.

Evidence came out while the market was open. Legally confirmed. Then Polymarket changed the rules, and refused to pay.

Last chance to do the right thing @shayne_coplan. Where's my fucking money?

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@PositionsFi Did he sell or not? 🤔

Just another scam from Poly

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@linda6248130564 Scam of the year!

[haych @haych_que]

so @Polymarket just resolved “NO” on the saga we all know about and 85M USD is on the line

did MicroStrategy sell BTC before 31 May?

A resounding yes!

Polymarket resolution? NO!

POLYSCAM!

solana:3f9eDiuMsPjPsUdQk1ArPSx9xTS1J7QpGdw6nJtdpump

[展展 Jhan @jhaninvest]

研究了 Polymarket 争议，发现这根本不是在预测「真实事件是否发生」，而是变���预测「事件是否会及时公告」。

简单事情经过：Polymarket 有个事件是「微策略是否会在 5/31 之前出售比特币｣，那公司在 6/1 发出 8-K 文档，说明已经在 5/26~5/31 卖出 32 颗比特币。

所以这题的答案，应该显示为 Yes，Microstrategy 是在 5/31 前出售了比特币。

但是到了 Polymarket 上变成了 No，因为他们认为，不可以使用到期时间后才出现的证据，否则很难定义时间界线，也会有严重的操纵风险。

在我看来就是毫无道理，完全诡辩。

1️⃣ 首先题目问的就是「有没有卖」而不是「在 5/31 前是否宣布」加上微策略公告在 5/26~5/31 这之间卖了，那就是卖了。这没有争论的地方。

2️⃣ 这事件的规则，Polymarket 原先列的是 「MSTR 官方信息 + on-chain data + 可信报导」那链上数据就可以成为判断标准。现在却弱��了链上数据，说「确认在期限后才出现所以不算」

3️⃣ 终局性还是真实性，我认为不应该为了容易结算事件资金，而忽略客观事实，等于牺牲正确性，这违背预测市场最基本的精神，预测真实世界的事件是否发生，我们不是在预测什幺时候发新闻稿。

4️⃣ 支持Polymarket 一方表示，这是他们常用的先例。但是这连法律上「类推适用」都过不了，规则文本就是没有这条。先例本就不能凌驾契约文本，你用先例去添加规则，我认为是不当类推，甚至更可恶算是法官造法了。

说一个更搞笑的是，部分支持者认为玩Polymarket 的用户，都应该进到 Discord 聊天，不然他们不知道这个先例，就是他们不够用功努力，活该亏钱。

不是本来就应该把规则放在网页上，供大家自行判断吗? 我就没听过哪个交易所说，玩合约还要来我们聊天室，我们这里还有更多规则，你不知道活该亏钱？

5️⃣ 支持方认为套用未来的证据，这样太难结算事件了，会导致资金卡住。你不知道 Microstrategy 固定每周一发布 8-k 报告的习惯吗？ 就Polymarket 平台上等过多少几周的财报，各种数据才结算，这个等一天就不行了啊？

6️⃣ 市场需要客观且可预测的标准，这是他们自己说的。那在5/31结束后，他们依然没有关闭事件，还可以买卖，他们说这是他们的失误，让人们误以为还可以进行下注，但其实事件是在等待结果。

最后还 PUA 你几句，这是个糟糕的系统吗？没错！但他们不是「故意」继续开放市场的。这不是他们事后添加规则，你只是不知道这些规则而已。是你对他们不够熟悉（又是���户的错）

你是一个平台新手啊，你不了解这些不成文的规定，被割一下很正常的？你阅读完网站所有规则，很认真以为自己找到 Alpha 其实你只是过度自信。

( 真是非常厉害的情绪操纵 PUA 呢）

7️⃣ Polymarket 的争议解决最终由 $UMA 持有者投票决定。那既然不能预测真实事件是否发生，那是不是只能预测这些持有 UMA 代币的人会怎么投票解决争议？那这些东西还有啥意义？

这就很像你是卖家，你把货物准时5/31 送到买家仓库，但买家 6/1 才去点收，他告诉大家他收到了。你会因此而被判定 6/1 才送货物吗？肯定不会嘛，道理很简单，真实事件发生了。

我的法律训练不管给我怎么推演，我都不觉得他这个类推是合乎法律逻辑的。

如果一个连真实事件真相都不重要的平台，那你还要去预测什么？在这样的预测市场，去做任何预测根本就是搞笑。

到目前为止 Polymarket 都还没有制定并公开明确的解决指南，他们只是任由这些事情发生，不断的有人损失钱。他们只是告诉你，有争议就 UMA 持有者解决，所以这一切都是操纵的游戏。

我支持这只鸟，上法院吧。

[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.

[willo2 @willo2_Poly]

Here's my honest opinion on the MSTR market resolution.

It will close NO.

This is because UMA is forced to respect the rules as written by Polymarket. Polymarket changed the rules, and now the outcome is literally in the rules.

Even if UMA voters think that this outcome is ridiculous... they are forced to ratify it. They must abide by the rules that Polymarket wrote.

So really... in 5 hours, we simply receive confirmation that UMA is forced to follow centralized Polymarket decisionmaking. Polymarket can change the rules, at any time, for any reason, and UMA are forced to respect it. No voting needed.

So is UMA really that independent? Does UMA hold any power whatsoever? Not really. It's puppet decentralization so that Polymarket can shift dispute blame onto a separate entity.

This market most likely closes NO in 5 hours. But that doesn't change anything.

The scam already occurred. Clearly, the way that this gets solved will not be through Polymarket's internal processes. So let's take it to the next level.

In my opinion, Polymarket made a massive mistake here by changing the rules so brazenly. They fucked up... BAD.

If you're going to rely on a system that offloads dispute blame to another entity, you shouldn't take it upon yourself to cut that entity out of the resolution process. Now, the blame falls entirely on Polymarket's shoulders. This really isn't a difficult argument to make.

Any rational individual who looks at this market can conclude that Polymarket themselves now have the responsibility of this market's resolution. Big mistake, and that's what makes this case very different from prior UMA voting disputes. You can't hide behind UMA now.

Polymarket markets are resolved according to a set of pre-defined and stated rules. Polymarket themselves modified these market rules. The clarification materially changed the conditions for a Yes outcome after trading had already occurred.

Polymarket's own documentation says clarifications "cannot change the fundamental intent of the question."

Clearly, this one did.

Polymarket, your time is running out.

[Chou 周周周周周周ㄓㄡㄓㄡ （Be N Builder 版） @94cho94134]

【別再盲信去中心化預測了：50萬美金一夜歸零，看 Polymarket 如何上演最骯髒的「事後改代碼」】

上週才聊過不要交區塊鏈的智商稅，結果這兩天國際 Web3 社群直接炸開一個核彈級醜聞：
大戶 @willo2_Poly 在 Polymarket 押注了 50 萬美金，結果在事實 100% 成立的情況下，被平台用最卑劣的「事後追加規則」強行黑掉，血本無歸。

ㄧ、事情是怎麼發生的？（精準時間線）｜
Polymarket 開了一個賭盤：「MicroStrategy（微策略）在 2026 年 5 月 31 日前是否會出售比特幣？」

a. 原始規則寫得很白紙黑字：
只要在 5/31 晚上 11:59 前「實際有賣出」，判決依據是 MSTR 官方資訊、鏈上數據或公信報導。

b. 事實成立：
6 月 1 日微策略官方提交 8-K 法定文件，白紙黑字確認：他們在 5 月 31 日前的確賣出了 32 顆 BTC（這是該公司 3 年來首次賣出！）。

c. 市場瘋狂：
官方確認文件一出，Polymarket 該盤口並未關閉，YES 的價格瞬間從 20c 飆到 80c，大戶看到「事實已定，價格錯看」，決定發揮交易者本能，ALL IN ���倉押注 YES。

二、接下來：平台開始「拔插頭」|
如果按照區塊鏈智能合約的「Code is Law（代碼即法律）」精神，這局 YES 穩贏。

但 Polymarket 不是真合約，它是「人治」的。

平台為了不賠這筆大錢，竟然事後偷偷追加了一段原始網頁根本沒有的「澄清字眼（Clarification）」：

「在市場時限之外達成的『確認』，不具備資格。」

意思就是：
微策略你雖然在 5/31 前偷賣了，但因為你是 6/1 星期一才發公告「確認」，所以不算！
直接判定為 NO，YES 玩家 50 萬美金直接變歸零膏。

三、🕵️‍♂️這裡面有兩個極度可疑的權力黑箱：
1/
蓄意延遲結算，放任莊家收割如果「5/31 沒確認就不算」是鐵律，平台理應在 5/31 當晚直接關閉盤口。但他們沒有。他們特地等到 6/1 官方文件出來、看著 YES 暴漲時，讓內部的「精明交易者（ Sharps/莊家 ）」在高位大量掛單倒貨給不知情的新手，最後再祭出「新規則」一網打盡。

這不是作弊，什麼是作弊？

2/ 預測市場的「Oracle（預言機）道德風險」我們做 Web3 數據工具的人最常講去中心化，但這起事件扯開了遮羞布：
Polymarket 的結算根本不是看鏈上數據（On-chain data），而是看平台的「社群決議（UMA 預言機爭議機制）」。
當利益大到一定程度，Web3 平台跟傳統金融的黑心桶店（Bucketshop）沒有任何區別 ——
贏太多，直接改規則洗劫你。

四、這不是什麼「投資失利」，這是平台赤裸裸的「拔插頭」與內部濫用 ｜
如果按照區塊鏈「Code is Law（代碼即法律）」的精神，這局 YES 穩贏。
但 Polymarket 的表現，卻像極了傳統金融裡最黑心的不透明賭場（Bucketshop）。

最讓我無法接受的，
是平台那種吃相難看的「時間差收割」：
如果「5/31 沒確認就不算」是鐵律，那 5/31 當晚就該關閉盤口。但他們沒有！

他們偏偏等到 6/1 官方 8-K 文件出來、看著 YES 價格因為事實成立暴漲到 80c 時，放任內部的精明莊家（Sharps）在高位把手上的 YES 單倒貨給像我朋友這樣的買家。

等籌碼收割完了，平台才在後台偷偷塞了一句原始規則根本沒有的「事後澄清」，把 YES 直接判死、強行歸零。

這不是作弊，什麼是作弊？?

I am not writing this for clout. I am writing this because I just watched a close friend of mine—someone who deeply trusted this industry—become a victim of a centralized black-box decision.
這篇文，不是為了蹭什麼流量，而是我親眼看著身邊信任這個行業的朋友，成為了這種中心化黑箱的受害者。

This incident completely destroys the foundational integrity of prediction markets. I am raising the gravest questions directly to @Polymarket :
這件事情完全打破了預測市場最根本的「公正性」，
我想向 Polymarket 提出最嚴正的質疑：

You preach about relying on on-chain data and official announcements. Yet, when the stakes are high enough, you change the rules and play word games faster than anyone. If an official, legally binding SEC 8-K filing doesn't qualify as proof of a sale, then your resolution mechanism is nothing but a centralized scam disguised as an oracle.
請不要玷污「去中心化」這四個字：
你們口口聲聲說看鏈上數據和官方公告，結果當利益大到一定程度時，你們改規則、玩文字遊戲的速度比誰都快。如果連白紙黑字的官方 8-K 法定文件都不能當作判決依據，那你們的預言機（Oracle）機制根本就是一場人治的騙局。

Polymarket must step up and resolve this
Polymarket 必須出來面對，給出合理的補償：這一次，平台必須為自己的規則不透明與蓄意延遲結算負責。這不只是我朋友 50 萬美金的血汗錢，更是全球無數 Web3 玩家對這個平��的最後一絲信任。如果這次官方不退錢、不��正這個卑劣的判決，那 Polymarket 就坐實了自己只是個套著區塊鏈外殼的黑心割韭菜平台。
The platform must take responsibility for its lack of transparency and intentional settlement delays. This is not just about my friend's $500,000 hard-earned money; it’s about the dying trust of countless Web3 traders worldwide. If the Polymarket team refuses to fix this rigged resolution, the platform proves itself to be nothing more than a predatory bucketshop wearing a web3 mask.

Technology should be a force for good, not a smokescreen for institutional abuse. Polymarket, do the right thing and fix this.
科技應該成為造福社會的力量，而不是掩飾體制濫用的煙幕。Polymarket，做正確的事，修正這個問題。

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@allywasreal @0xDinoCrypto Funny how you still put the blame on people. They should stop gambling, but the platform can proceed to scam everyone afterwards. Amazing!

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@senzer @Polymarket @PolymarketTrade Totally agree on that. This should go "void" at least. Shameful practice to alter the original rules, there is no point using Poly if this is the norm

[Sweep @0xSweep]

The wallets short on the "MicroStrategy sells any Bitcoin" pool would owe more than polymarket's entire $82M Q2 revenue if it resolves to YES

This is why they also happen to be the UMA voters

Decentralized they say

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@Polymarket But still won't settle markets according to factual outcomes and original rules...

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@eliottmea @0xDinoCrypto He trusted the rules described on the market title which were changed after the deadline

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@allywasreal @0xDinoCrypto Great argument, completely ignoring the truth that he sold BTC before 31st, this is a fact. New comers can't study 3 years of precedents in order to place a bet

Changing rules after the deadline is straight up scam. Good luck onboarding users after this scandal, straight to 0

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@allywasreal @0xDinoCrypto That's because they changed the rules after the deadline lol 🤡

[Dwde | ❤️ Memecoin @DwdeMir]

@noel05463412631 lol, the rules were added after the deadline 🤡