Comment by manas96

The rules for each contract are provided when you bet, but ultimately there are plenty of markets that are settled in controversial ways and users have little recourse because the sites TOS's often say their rulings are final (this is the same for many sports books as well).

To give an example, I wagered on a market a while ago that Trump would say "Mamdani" before the end of the week. He responded to a question Mamdani where the reporter asked about the mayor by name and Trump said "Mandami" instead of "Mamdani" (switched the m and n). Kalshi ruled that that didn't count as Trump having said the word.

Trump ultimately said Mamdani correctly the next day so it ended up not mattering and I think the rules have since been updated to accept obvious mispronunciations, but I think it's a good example of how much gray area some of these markets can have.

There’s a lot of talk about corruption in UMA but I think it is oversold as a problem. UMA is just a scapegoat for Polymarket’s desired outcome.

Polymarket implemented the “independent” truth process with UMS following regulatory scrutiny but they still decide the outcome.

https://reticulating.substack.com/p/polymarket-isnt-a-predic...

https://docs.polymarket.com/concepts/resolution