Community Reaction
After the Zelenskyy suit market resolved to "No", there was significant social media backlash from the "Yes" side.
UMA Whales
BornTooLate, a whale with three wallets holding around 2 million UMA each, voted with all three but revealed the vote from only one. This has led to speculation that they may have voted differently across wallets and selectively revealed the outcome that best fit the emerging consensus.
X Posts
Defipolice and GrindingPoet discussed the possibility that Polymarket and UMA were colluding.
Mak criticized UMA’s slashing mechanism and supply distribution. However, some have countered that whales taking oversized bets on outcomes they help decide are still incentivized to vote honestly, since manipulating the process would undermine the value of the token they hold. Additionally, UMA’s token price history has reflected long-term underperformance, raising further questions about the effectiveness of its incentive design.
Atlantislq continued reaching out to several key figures, including UMA, Polymarket, and Polymarket CEO Shayne Coplan, pressing for clarity and accountability. He criticized their apparent strategy of ignoring the problem and hoping the community forgets.
Legal Action
Several users threatened to take legal action against Polymarket.
Adversary continued updating his case study investigating potential corruption and cybercrimes involving Polymarket, UMA, and other relevant parties.
He also drafted a settlement offer template, offering a potential path forward for dispute resolution.
Here is a preview:
Stefan compiled several thoughts in a document titled Fraudulent Resolution of the Zelenskyy Suit Market, outlining concerns about how the market was handled.
Here is a preview:
Key Crypto Figures
Several prominent crypto figures discussed the controversy at the Coinbase Institutional Summit.
It was brought up that the market had resolved to Yes on UMA, when in reality it had only been proposed as Yes. This misconception was echoed by several crypto influencers, contributing to broader confusion about how resolution on Polymarket actually works. Proposals suggest an outcome but do not determine it, and treating them as final misrepresented the true status of the market.
Haseeb Qureshi also noted speculation that some traders were buying Yes shares at 1 cent, then using social media to stir backlash and push the price up to 3 cents. This raised questions about whether the backlash against Polymarket was legitimate or manufactured and highlighted concerns about potential manipulation from both UMA-aligned voices and opportunistic social media actors.
HALFSHADOW agreed with this claim.
Ethos Network Slashing
HakResearch issued a slash against UMA on Ethos, a peer-reviewed reputation and credibility network for crypto secured by staked ETH, citing manipulation in the Zelenskyy suit market on Polymarket.
They also slashed Polymarket for ignoring the alleged manipulation and trapping users on its platform.
Coming Up
In the final chapter, we reflect on what the Zelenskyy suit market revealed about decentralized governance, community dynamics, and the challenges of resolving symbolic or ambiguous markets.
Last updated