• Many binary markets have two roughly equivalent primary outcomes. For example, whether a democrat or a republican president wins the election. Right now, we have to arbitrarily pick one option to highlight in the market, such as "Will a democrat win the election?". This is inelegant and skews the market, since it could bias how traders think about the result, and an unexpected result (like an independent candidate winning) will favor one side or the other. This can be solved by using a multiple-choice market instead and creating only two choices. However, multiple-choice markets have a worse UI; can't see limit orders in a single place, can't see positions in a single place, graph looks worse, etc. This could be fixed by improving multiple-choice markets and/or giving us the option to label binary markets outcomes with labels other than "YES" and "NO".

• Often there are colors associated with certain market outcomes, such as blue for democrats and red for republicans. But market graphs don't let us pick their colors; on binary markets we're stuck with green and white, and on multiple-choice markets we're stuck with a predetermined selection. Letting the market creators choose what colors represent which options would be a nice aesthetic improvement, and also make it easier for people to hold in their mind what option means what. This answer resolves based on the proportion of market types we get it for. e.g. If they add it for binary markets but not multiple choice, it resolves to 50%.

• Automatic market resolution defined in terms of data sources refers to something like Data Points or The Super Market.

Please suggest other improvements and I'll add them as answers. For last year's market, see /IsaacKing/will-manifold-give-us-more-finegain

Note that these answers have significant overlap. Any codebase change that resolves "Binary markets as an N=2 special case of linked multiple choice markets" to YES would likely (but not guaranteed) also resolve "Binary markets with outcomes other than YES/NO" to YES.