Volodymyr Zelensky’s Clothing Has Sparked a Polymarket Rebellion

Polymarket did not respond to a request for comments.

Launched in 2020, Polymarket was gaining importance last year as a means for people to bet on the outcome of the American presidential election. During the electoral cycle, Polymarket and its defenders presented prediction markets as a higher method to predict the results that traditional survey – as a more effective “source of truth”. But this proposal was disputed by the debacle of the Zelensky combination.

“Everyone knows the answer, but the system is currently broken,” says Defipolice. “It’s a damn situation.”

Polymarket reserves the right to reverse a UMA result. Last year, the company rejected UMA voting on a bet to find out if Barron Trump was involved in a cryptocurrency project on Trump’s theme. At the time, Polymarket reimbursed the bettors and explicitly described Uma’s conclusion as “erroneous”. However, the company did not intervene every time. In March, a bet of $ 7 million on the question of whether Ukraine and the United States would conclude an agreement on mineral access was resolved prematurely with the wrong result. At the time, in a discord message addressed to affected users, an employee of Polymarket described him as “unprecedented situation” but said that she would not reimburse the bettors.

Users of polymarkets injured by the probable result of the Zelensky prediction market are gathering on the discord of the messaging platform to coordinate a response, including the continuation of a trial against Polymarket and UMA, they say.

“I intend to join the trial,” explains a Polymarket Bettor by the opponent of the username, who, at one point, won $ 300,000 on their bet, before withdrawing funds in response to confusion. “I have suffered moral damage to this debacle, and the additional context caused me a large amount of stress.”

The residents of the Discord channel of UMA are also wound by the controversy, the members of the community accusing mutually of “transactions of backchannel” and scams. Some consider it as an inexpensive referendum on the entire project. “It is not only a vote on a costume – it is the vote on the future of the UMA,” wrote a member.

The final resolution is expected in the evening of July 8. The co -founder of the UMA, Hart Lumbur, said that the organization planned to adjust to the process of settlement of disputes in the light of the controversy of the Zelensky pursuit, but rejects the allegation that the vote was manipulated in any way.

“There is no proof of manipulation of Uma. I really don’t like these accusations without merit,” Lambur told Wired. “After dust sets in this market or not, I can’t wait to have a productive conversation on improvements and design compromises.”

Others see this kind of disagreement as a natural element of the process: “For me, it was a jacket that looked like a costume but which was not a suit,” explains Lancelot Chardonnet, who voted as a delegate in the Uma.rocks token pool, which controls approximately 0.1% of the total supply. “This controversy simply reflects that the truth is complex and differs from one person to another.”

All this warmth arrives at a critical moment for Polymarket, which is in the middle of an aggressive fund collection lap led by Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund; According to Reuters, the prediction market will be estimated at $ 1 billion. This is not an ideal time to alienate some of its most active users, or so that the integrity of its markets is questioned. “The silence of the polymarket was deafening,” explains Defipolice.