Please try to avoid making duplicate markets. It splits liquidity and clutters the feed.

@EvanDaniel @mods

@EvanDaniel but it’s fun? And adds liquidity?

@EvanDaniel I don’t think it’s against TOS

@JasonMendoza2008 It is not fun, and does not add liquidity to the other market. It looks like an attempt to burn the commons of a high quality feed in an attempt to game the trader bonus system and split liquidity in a way that your bot can benefit from arb trades. You're not putting in the work to write high quality markets, you're just copying the work other people did.

If your goal was to "add liquidity" you'd just be adding it to the existing markets; since that part is obvious, I infer you have some different actual goal, and am currently interpreting your statement about it "adding liquidity" as being in bad faith.

moreover it's not even a new take on a challenging market. this market is literally "resolves to kalshi". we absolutely do not need a second one that does that.

this whole thing feels gross. it's absolutely against the guidelines to be a nuisance and cynically rig things in your favor. playing 'oh oopsy doopsy I was doing a distasteful thing because I thought you couldn't punish me for it' is not a good look.

yesterday I almost unlisted your catalog. today this makes me want to just restrict you from market creation outright. I don't see the utility in letting you make them. clearly a good trader but no respect for the other side of the coin.

@Stralor I’ll stop but it’d be nice to have clear guidance from the staff on where’s the limit, people have been creating duplicate markets (and on top of it spamming the comment section of the original market to advertise their duplicate) a lot - so I thought it was legal. And obviously I want to profit from it, but it adds also some fun to everyone AND liquidity (which I would never add to an already existing market since it wouldn’t benefit me)

@JasonMendoza2008 The goal isn't "be legal" it's "be excellent to each other and make Manifold better". The search sucks; people routinely try to find a market, fail, create it, and then find it. I've done this myself. If I notice it immediately, I just n/a (or ask if mine has usefully different resolution criteria). But I don't always, and I assume lots of other folks are in the same boat. Part of "be excellent to each other" is mods cutting people slack when that happens. Duplicates aren't prohibited.

That is not what I think happened here.

@EvanDaniel I will have to strongly disagree on the use of rules that are based on vibes and interpretation

@JasonMendoza2008

liquidity (which I would never add to an already existing market since it wouldn’t benefit me)

If you cared about the markets or answers, it obviously would benefit you -- that's a big part of the point of how AMMs work, they are a way to pay for answers to questions! The fact that you clearly don't care about these answers should be a clue that you're not participating in a way that helps build a good community.

@JasonMendoza2008

the use of rules that are based on vibes and interpretation

fwiw that is a guiding tenet of this place and explicitly the way the rules are written. every attempt at putting each edge case in stone has resulted in bad faith rules lawyering and loophole seeking, which is a culture the general user base has indicated they don't want