Evolving Use of P4

P4 (Too Early) is intended for proposals made before a market's resolution deadline when the resolution criteria have not yet been satisfied. It effectively prevents resolution, returning the market to an open state until clearer conditions are met. Under this logic, proposals made after the deadline should not result in P4, only P1 (No), P2 (Yes), or P3 (Unknown / 50-50).

However, this dispute marked a shift: P4 was applied not because the proposal came early, but because ambiguity remained even after the deadline had passed. Historically, such ambiguity would have led to P1 or, less commonly, P3. While unprecedented, this reflects a broader change in how the option is being interpreted and used.

During the dispute, several users argued that the proposal did not meet the conditions for P4.

Incorrect Use of P4

JessicaOnlyChild spells it out clearly: the proposal may be wrong, but it's not early.

JessicaOnlyChild confirms that the clarification did not extend the deadline, and that information emerging after a proposal is submitted cannot be considered. Tomorrow agrees with some of this but argues that the proposal cannot be P1, presumably due to Polymarket's clarification. JessicaOnlyChild stresses the importance of adhering to the market's original timeframe; otherwise, the resolution deadline would be undermined.

P4 as a Schelling Point

Dropper maintained that the proposer should have waited, even though the deadline had passed.

Lee from Risk Labs believed that P4 was appropriate after a market's deadline in the case of ambiguity. However, several users questioned this.

Tomorrow suggested waiting and referencing the price action of the market. However, price action can be manipulated and might not reflect genuine consensus. Even if there is initial volatility or a sharp spike, a quick crash may indicate that traders ultimately rejected the evidence. In that case, high price action is meaningless if it fails to hold, as the market's final behavior better reflects consensus and expectations. A better metric might be the market's closing price.

Looking at the market share price, several hours before the deadline, the market was trading around 10¢. After the dispute, it twice surged to 35¢, each time falling back to 10¢ shortly after. This raises the question of whether there was ambiguity, and if so, whether it was enough to warrant waiting. That being said, the so-called ambiguity was mostly rejected by traders. The initial pump to around 65¢ from the Cambodia report on early July 25 clearly proved insufficient based on price action.

P4 then P2

One approach was for the vote to go P4 (Too Early), which would have paused the market and allowed it to be proposed again once more evidence emerged.

JessicaOnlyChild acknowledges the dispute was contentious but also notes that the Polymarket clarification effectively pushed it toward P2 (Yes).

JessicaOnlyChild also pointed out that the July 31 market resolved "Yes" and argue that the oracle should remain consistent. They stressed that the clarification was a one-time exception.

A Fixed Extension

Tomorrow and JessicaOnlyChild debated the nuances of the clarification. The clarification itself was written vaguely, whether intentionally or not.

The issue of ambiguity extending the market was highly debated. Whether ambiguity exists is subjective. One proposed solution is to resolve the market on time when there are no qualifying events. However, if credible sources report that something may have happened, the market could be given a fixed extension. A final deadline would ensure resolution regardless of remaining uncertainty.

Summary

This dispute showed how P4 is no longer being used strictly for early proposals. Instead, it has started to function as a fallback option in cases of post-deadline ambiguity. That shift marks a departure from earlier precedent and sparked debate over how and when the option should be applied. The outcome raised broader concerns about consistency, clarity, and whether traders can rely on resolution logic staying stable over time.

Coming Up

In the final chapter, we address the fundamental issue with war markets and how we can move forward as a reliable oracle.