True to the market, intern for @Trueo_
Base
Joined January 2025
- Tweets3.4K
- Following389
- Followers296
- Likes6.6K
Pinned Tweet
But the core problem with most prediction markets isn't the trading.
It's who decides what happened.
prediction markets are supposed to settle disputes. right now they mostly just relocate them.
polymarket, kalshi, every market like them, they all hit the same wall eventually. the market resolves fine when the outcome is a clean number, an election result, a price on a specific date. but the second a question gets subjective, "did the policy actually get implemented," "was the ceasefire technically violated," the resolution process turns into a committee vote or an oracle operator making a judgment call off-chain. the market that was supposed to be trustless just outsourced the hard part to a handful of humans.
that's the exact gap @GenLayer is built to close.
genlayer's intelligent contracts can read the web, interpret natural language, and weigh evidence the way a person would, except the "person" is actually a randomly selected panel of validators, each running a different ai model. they independently judge the outcome. if they don't agree, the panel rotates and anyone can appeal until the network reaches consensus. that's not a single oracle's opinion. that's an actual adjudication process, on-chain, with no central party deciding what counts as true.
for a prediction market, that changes what kinds of questions you can even list. you're no longer limited to outcomes a price feed can confirm. you can build markets around whether a contract was breached, whether a product launch met its stated spec, whether a grant recipient hit their milestones, anything that currently requires a human being to read something and form a judgment.
this is also exactly what the agentic era needs. autonomous agents are starting to negotiate and transact on their own, and the infrastructure for that is being built fast, x402 for payments, erc-8004 for identity. but none of it handles what happens when two agents disagree about whether a deal was actually fulfilled. a prediction market running on genlayer isn't just a betting venue anymore, it's a dispute engine agents can query directly to settle their own contested outcomes, at machine speed instead of waiting on a human committee.
that's the difference between a market that predicts the future and one that can actually adjudicate it.
Truebie retweeted
“User created markets” means opening an app, asking the internet a question about the future, then receiving a rolling market-derived probability in return.
The unlock is epistemological.
The answer you receive comes with a bounty to correct it.
The bigger the bounty, the more likely the answer reflects reality.
But if the bounty is too large (excessively liquid), then it might end up influencing reality.
It’s really a fascinating phenomenon: a concept that’s fuelled by human curiosity.
The TAM is our collective imagination.
Now imagine the possibilities…
Polymarket users have raised a cluster of complaints over the past week, covering repeated outages, an undisclosed rebate program, and maintenance timing.
Here's a series of events that occurred around this.
🤖 Made with AI
Polymarket is experiencing its third outage in the past 24 hours.
the problem is of placed limit orders not showing up on the user's end despite being placed in CLOB
the problem is for sure some queue or memory getting overloaded as this issue arises every few hours and gets worse over time. it starts happening for a few limit orders initially and gradually spreads to all of them
they haven't been able to resolve this issue despite saying so in the previous two outages
polymarket should hire talent that are competent at building a product rather than folks who make stupid decisions such as providing 80% rebates to "preferred customers"
Then, the same morning, another user in Vietnam reported the exact outage independently, saying trading was paused while a fix was in progress.
xitter.cf/BeaconDesk/status/2094…
When it rains, it pours.
Anyway, how was your week?
trueo.com/en/market/0xa96ac0…
10 days after Polymarket quietly started handing an 80% taker rebate to a small group of accounts with no public announcement, a trader found one of those same accounts coordinating with a cluster of others to move prices against ordinary market makers.
A rebate nobody was told about is apparently now doing more damage than the original silence.
Here's how the story built over the following days.
breaking news ⚠️
one of the accounts that polymarket gifted the 80% rebate to was found to be manipulating a market.
all of these spam username accounts all took the same side, and they all have the same tier (gifted by poly lol)
they all belong to the same entity because when the rebate is gifted and you make a new account, it carries over.
and this is clearly not normal trading either, normal trading woudnt take the same side, from a spam username, with a lot of accounts all owned by the same entity, and have lots of "lucky" wins over and over again.
the big accounts on the otherside of the trade lost, with a few different big poly traders taking the same side as the losing,
(meaning that they saw big edge in the market, as would any fair value trading against a manipulation market.)
this is truly a tragic comedy for polymarket.
by the way, we still have not gotten a offical announcement on the ORIGINAL rebate scandal.
it just goes deeper and deeper, they have given a unfair advantage to a manipulator.
remember that the taker rebate comes from the pool of maker rebates, so not only are makers losing out on more rebates, but also being manipulated into losing postions from the people who are also taking their rebate.
We have not heard anything from polymarket for 10 days now. This was found yesterday.
Finally, community digest tracking the platform daily confirmed the team had gone sometime without a statement, choosing to ignore the situation instead of providing usful oversight.
xitter.cf/predictdigest/status/2…
POLYMARKET DIGEST — 28 AUGUST 2026
⚠️ Bugs & Issues
X/Twitter tracker has been broken for 2+ days, affecting resolution of tweet-based markets. kurwamach. confirmed the team is aware and working on it, but as of early Aug 28 the issue persists — with at least one market reaching resolution day while still broken.
Persistent WebSocket lag on BTC 5m up/down markets, with delays exceeding 25 seconds observed. nateh90 reported the issue in detail; multiple users confirmed instability.
API endpoints /positions and /trades throwing persistent 429s — 01010100b reported that even backing off 7 seconds after a 1-second retry-after header still results in repeated 429s. Also noted: API docs contain incorrect field descriptions.
CLOB went down for scheduled maintenance around 04:20 UTC Aug 28, causing order cancellation failures. Multiple unplanned maintenance windows occurred this week, including during live MLB games. Users are requesting maintenance windows be moved back to 12:00 or 09:00 UTC.
Combo market graded as a win but hasn't paid out for a week — reported by notmin., no response from team.
Rewards not sent out on Aug 27 — reported by multiple users, no team response.
Public profile page not showing trades for accounts that switched from EOA to Deposit Wallet flow — reported by forbes456654.
skulldoom97 published a post-mortem for Wednesday's downtime. Community reception was mixed — ohanism and tobi_meow_meow appreciated it, while vader17 criticized the quality, noting it appeared LLM-generated. The post-mortem does not address the rebate controversy.
🔥 News & Announcements
"Rebategate" — 9 days, still no official statement. ~20 accounts reportedly received 80% taker rebates. richlb_predict claims the recipients include known market manipulators who were also gifted Obsidian status. lostgorilla24 suggested this was compensation for manipulators agreeing to stop ghost fills, queue jumping and other exploits. Community sentiment is increasingly hostile; mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm_ directly called out the team for silence despite visible KPI deterioration. Multiple market makers are actively evaluating or migrating to Kalshi.
A teased announcement ("something you'll love") is expected within ~3 days. lostgorilla24 pointed to a tweet hinting at cross-platform functionality. Community expectations are low.
📋 Clarifications
Climate markets — WU fallback rules: ak504111 clarified that Weather Underground is only a fallback when an entire day's NWS data is missing or NWS goes down — not for individual missing hourly observations. When WU is used, resolution will reference the Daily Observations table (not the Day High & Low). Rules text will be updated for clarity. hans32312 raised the question of timing — how long to wait before switching to WU — which ak504111 acknowledged as a valid gap to address.
5m TWAP methodology: bullbear_95834 raised a detailed concern that using the previous candle's final 60-second rolling TWAP as the next candle's open price creates directional bias and produces outcomes inconsistent with Binance spot candles (~10 mismatches found in a few hours). ohanism noted the TWAP design was deliberately mirrored from Kalshi. phoenyx69 and szhizhi agreed the core issue is a UI problem — the methodology itself is disclosed, but the visual presentation is confusing. No team response.
Given the 9-day silence on rebategate and ongoing platform issues, do you think the teased announcement in 3 days will actually address the core trust issues, or is it just a distraction?
Kim Jong Un must be pissed, cos he prob said FOMO and their guys hit FOGO instead
SECURITY WATCH 🚨
LAYER 1 BLOCKCHAIN FOGO HALTED ITS MAINNET AND RESTRICTED ADDRESSES AFTER AN ATTACKER RECEIVED 400 MILLION FOGO TOKENS, ABOUT 10% OF CIRCULATING SUPPLY, ROUGHLY 15 HOURS AFTER THE FOGO FOUNDATION SAID AN EARLIER $3 MILLION COMPROMISE HAD NOT AFFECTED CHAIN OPERATIONS.
A Polymarket community post accused the platform of quietly giving one large trading account an 80% taker fee rebate while regular users kept paying full fees.
Lets see what happened.
xitter.cf/ohiobug981/status/2090…
Breaking news
so heres what happened today after poly rebate scandal (see other post)
1. Suhail came and said:
"gm all - first off, sorry for the delay in commenting. there’s been a lot going on and i should’ve given you a clearer update sooner. to address the rebate stuff directly, we’re testing custom rebates as a way to generally lower fees and see if it helps volume. it’s not just for one person or anyone "we’re in contact" with. it’s for top takers and people who’ve been very active on the taker side. we’ve talked with these users and each got something based on their requirements. i know most of you here are makers, so fees don’t really impact you much anyway. and to be clear, we’re talking to these users directly - they’re not some firm or big players you might assume have a special deal with us. in fact, if you’re an active taker here, you most probably already got an email from me about taker rebates to help with fees. happy to answer any questions, but i hope that clears it up.
"
1. This makes no logical sense. Giving a toxic taker 0 fees, which TAKES IT FROM THE MAKERS (remember rebates come from pool, as STATED IN THE DOCS) and BONEREAPER for fucks sake DOES NOT BOOST LIQUDITY. complete illogicalness.
2. Then he said: "no, it is not secret. what do you mean?" His argument for this was ONE MEMBER saying "Bro Suhail emailed me". What type of announcement is that?
3. Then he claimed that this rebate scandal was "not for big accounts at all" and that its to help the users, which we know thats not what it does at all.
Also, while writing this post i realized that he deleted a good amount of messages lol.
Apart from suhail being complelty wrong here, it also shows that polymarket literally does not care at all. they will hand a huge account like bonereaper even mode edge (comes from the pool) then claim it helps the users. they are just giving the toxic takers more and more edge.. suhail just deflected and gaslit the community the entire time.
Then reactions started rolling in from traders following both threads.
It might be time to move to another platform.
xitter.cf/prathwik0/status/20903…
And another post tied the rebate back to a fee change from earlier this month, when Polymarket raised sports trading fees by 66% during the World Cup.
xitter.cf/Payne_1337/status/2090…
Be like Suhail Kakar:
> Increase sports fees by 66% during the World Cup
> Destroy retail trading volume
> Destroy dozens of strategies used by small market makers
> Realize you fucked up
> Give some SPECIAL users 80% rebate so they can keep doing the same volume as before
Instead of lowering fees for everyone, they decided to give huge rebates to selected users only
Just imagine the advantage these SPECIAL users have
While you're paying massive fees, they're basically paying nothing
Polymarket devs, you're turning what was once a great Web3 project into just another Web2 platform where special users get special treatment
Great job!
Polymarket's own fix gives the exploited 5-minute Bitcoin contracts, tied to $8.2M in manipulated settlements, just a 30-second window.
Does the new rule actually protect the contract that lost the money, or just the one that didn't need it?
Put this on @Trueo_ as a resolvable market!
I don't think Polymarket had much of a choice here, and I actually respect that they did it fast
A Stanford and SMU study looked at 16,000 five-minute $BTC contracts and found the pattern was almost mechanical, Binance order flow spiking nearly 4x right before settlement, then reversing right after
That's someone paying to move the print for ten seconds because the whole payout hinged on one exact timestamp. 821 suspected accounts profited roughly $8.2M off it, largely at retail's expense
Switching to a 30-60 second TWAP through Chainlink makes the manipulation expensive enough that most people won't bother
The CFTC opened a probe into mention markets, the category where people bet on whether a public figure will say a specific word.
Kalshi responded by pulling every sports mention market until further notice.
Here's a series of events that occurred around this news.
NEW: The CFTC has launched a probe into prediction market "mention markets" as a category, where people bet millions on whether President Trump, sportscasters, executives on earning calls say a word or not.
Focus of probe is whether this kind of betting is susceptible to manipulation.
In response, Kalshi has taken down all mention markets for sports "until further notice"
npr.org/2026/08/13/nx-s1-593…
So of course, a founder at a rival prediction market platform used the moment to state a standing policy.
His platform says it avoids listing markets that create built-in information advantages for insiders.
xitter.cf/nikarpit/status/208811…
Finally! This shouldn’t be limited to CFTC-regulated pred markets.
Even unregulated pred markets should think twice before listing markets that create insider trading opportunities.
If insiders can profit from info they already know, you’re effectively creating a market designed for insider trading.
At @predofficial, our core philosophy is to never list markets that are inherently prone to insider trading.
Market integrity should be taken very seriously.
Mention markets pay out based on whether a resolver decides someone said a specific word, and whose recording or source gets trusted to prove it.
@Trueo_ commits the question, the criteria, and the resolution source onchain before a market opens. If a dispute comes up, it gets argued against that public record instead of rules that were never disclosed in advance.
The resolver still applies those criteria to the facts, and that call can still be contested.
