(no description)
Mod Edit (Oct 30, 2025 - @Stralor):
I've changed the option "Never" to "Not before the end of 2025 (previously: "Never")". It was somewhat clear that anything that wasn't in any of the other buckets would resolve here, but I'm making this change to reduce any ambiguity.
"Never" implies a paradox if he does resign after 2025. It's also a whole can of worms if he leaves for any other reason than resignation or removal (such as a failed election or death) at any time and would basically force this market open indefinitely.
Note, this is a Set market (independent MC) and not a sum-to-1, so "Other" isn't as valid a category here, and market sentiment currently reflects that. That means this is a minor change to the resolution criteria. It's possible for both of these to resolve NO simultaneously if he leaves for any other reason than resignation or removal before the end of 2025, however with the end of 2025 so near it's more likely that one or the other will resolve YES.
In all cases, this market can now resolve after close rather than at some potentially unknown time in the far future.
1,000
3.00@DanielTilkin No need to N/A. It's poorly worded, but easily salvageable. "Never" is the "Other" category for any case that isn't in or before 2025. No new options can be added to this market, so there's no risk of a gotcha in that regard. I'll rename it 👍
@Stralor I'll note, there's plenty of ways for Mike Johnson to cease being Speaker that don't fit in "resign" or "removed", and it's a good category for that too
edit: I actually think that's wrong. the market is clearly trading as if that isn't the case, so if he leaves for ANY OTHER REASON that still won't resolve YES. I'll clarify in the desc
@traders please see the updated description for info about the changed option. I've tried to retain the intent of the creator and adhere to what I believe were the existing market forces while fixing any ambiguities, but this might have had a small impact on any assumed criteria.
@Stralor good thing I did not have that much invested in NO on this option - but this change was extremely unfair to those who had... I interpreted "Never" as "the manner in which he stops being the speaker is neither removal, nor resignation, regardless of when it happens" which is what the literal reading of "Never" in this context is...
@AnonUser yeah but it breaks the market, wasn't clarified sufficiently, and has confused traders. I hope the compromise is satisfactory
@AnonUser Do we want to reopen trading!??! Isn't this a timely topic right now? Is there any reason not to reopen trading on the remaining answers?
@Eliza I think it's sensible to reopen trading, as the close date was most likely set incorrectly (best guess given context). Just did that.
@OmarB Should be January 3, 2025 assuming we don't get a repeat of 2023 with multiple ballots