Prediction market drama just escalated. A research outfit dropped a bombshell claiming one major platform might be cooking their trading volume books—potentially doubling the numbers by tallying both sides of every single trade.
The accusation? Counting maker AND taker positions separately inflates volume by 100%. That's like counting a handshake twice because two people participated.
The platform fired back hard, calling it a semantic game. They pointed out the research firm has skin in the game—they're backing a direct competitor. Classic conflict of interest play.
Plot twist: the accuser's portfolio includes investments in a rival prediction marketplace. Makes you wonder if this is data-driven investigation or strategic FUD deployment.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
19 Likes
Reward
19
9
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ForkLibertarian
· 22h ago
Data fairness requires regulation
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-bd883c58
· 12-12 03:56
狗咬狗而已
Reply0
AirdropHunter
· 12-12 01:43
A new height in digging pits and burying people
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-9f682d4c
· 12-11 05:47
Double-dealing fraud turns into double standards
View OriginalReply0
faded_wojak.eth
· 12-09 14:58
Use flexible strategies as needed
View OriginalReply0
MetaMaskVictim
· 12-09 14:58
Insiders are really good at manipulating data
View OriginalReply0
WhaleMinion
· 12-09 14:53
Involution of Shorting Old Pals
View OriginalReply0
MevSandwich
· 12-09 14:44
Throwing dirt stops here
View OriginalReply0
NFTHoarder
· 12-09 14:42
Everyone just wants to make a living; it's not easy.
Prediction market drama just escalated. A research outfit dropped a bombshell claiming one major platform might be cooking their trading volume books—potentially doubling the numbers by tallying both sides of every single trade.
The accusation? Counting maker AND taker positions separately inflates volume by 100%. That's like counting a handshake twice because two people participated.
The platform fired back hard, calling it a semantic game. They pointed out the research firm has skin in the game—they're backing a direct competitor. Classic conflict of interest play.
Plot twist: the accuser's portfolio includes investments in a rival prediction marketplace. Makes you wonder if this is data-driven investigation or strategic FUD deployment.