> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://polymarketguide.gitbook.io/polymarketguide-archive/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://polymarketguide.gitbook.io/polymarketguide-archive/basics/examining-a-resolution-argument.md).

# Examining a Resolution Argument

### Strong Resolution Arguments

In the previous section, we covered the key elements of a strong discussion argument. For example, effective arguments often include evidence, references to the resolution criteria, and consideration of precedents or opposing viewpoints. \
\
In this section, we'll look at an example of a strong resolution argument and break down why it works.

#### Example Argument

Market: [*Trump announces end of military operations against Iran before July?*](https://polymarket.com/event/trump-announces-end-of-military-operations-against-iran-before-july)

[Vote-Contributions Thread](https://discord.com/channels/718590743446290492/1387506825196470313)

<figure><img src="/files/jjkihBg0I98FSh9WWII9" alt=""><figcaption><p><em>Jaroslav's discussion argument for P2 (Yes)</em></p></figcaption></figure>

#### **Argument Evaluation Summary**

{% tabs %}
{% tab title="Strengths" %}
Cites the resolution criteria directly at the start.

Uses multiple sources, including the Department of Defense and Secretary of State.

Anticipates counterarguments, such as whether other operations might still be active.

Draws a clear conclusion that the operation has ended.
{% endtab %}

{% tab title="Weaknesses" %}
Uses an informal tone (e.g. "Let's use our brains"), which reduces credibility.

Some evidence is vague ("was a success") or may not qualify (Trump's statement).

Doesn't confirm whether the evidence was available at the time of the proposal.

Lacks structure and doesn't clearly connect each quote to the resolution criteria.
{% endtab %}

{% tab title="Improvements" %}
Use a neutral, professional tone to maintain credibility.

Clarify which sources are formal government statements and whether they meet criteria.

Confirm and state that all evidence was available when the proposal was submitted.

Present arguments clearly and cohesively, tying each piece of evidence back to the resolution criteria.
{% endtab %}
{% endtabs %}

In discussion threads, participants may change their stance after reviewing new evidence. Since each user is allowed only one message per vote-contributions thread, they typically do this by editing their original post.

#### What's Next

With the discussion phase complete, let's look at how the final outcome is decided through the voting process.