Arguments for "Yes"

Arguments in favor of a "Yes" resolution generally fell into three categories: Byron being placed on leave, the appointment of an interim CEO, and the interpretation of the "any length of time" resolution clause.

Being Placed on Leave

Several users argued that Byron had been effectively sidelined, and that being placed on leave was the company’s way of signaling an impending resignation.

The central point was that Byron no longer functioned as CEO during this period, regardless of title.

General Obligation offered a sports analogy, saying that a benched player is technically on the team, but no longer playing on the field.

Ittttz pushed back on that analogy, suggesting it was more like being on vacation. Still, the analogy was widely considered to miss the mark.

Domer made a distinction between being placed on leave for misconduct, as in Byron’s case, versus taking leave for medical or personal reasons.

The Appointment of an Interim CEO

Daniel raised the question of whether a CEO on leave retains any actual authority compared to an interim CEO.

Alrehn responded that in practice, the interim CEO is the one leading the company and making decisions.

Car summarized the point bluntly: Byron was not only on leave, he had been replaced.

GuyWhoTrades highlighted ambiguity in the market language, asking whether being on leave with an interim replacement qualified as having "ceased to be CEO for a period of time."

OpenAI Precedent

Aenews pointed to a previous Polymarket related to OpenAI, where an interim CEO was treated as the acting CEO for market purposes.

Denizz responded that it is possible for two people to hold the CEO title at the same time.

Domer criticized this line of reasoning, calling it overly convoluted and at odds with the intent of the market. He argued that appointing another CEO should reasonably imply a change in role.

Any Length of Time Resolution Clause

Alrehn emphasized that the inclusion of the "for any length of time" clause was deliberate, and meant to account for temporary removals such as a leave of absence.

He explained that this clause was added specifically in addition to the resignation or firing condition, suggesting that either would be sufficient to resolve the market as "Yes."

Looking closely at the resolution criteria, the clause about ceasing to be CEO for any length of time stands apart from the resignation or termination condition.

Several users agreed that this reflected the spirit of the market and that Byron’s leave and interim replacement satisfied the condition.

Alrehn argued that objections based on Byron still being part of the company relied on a technicality.

Summary

Arguments in favor of a "Yes" resolution focused on the idea that Byron had effectively ceased performing the duties of CEO. Supporters pointed to his leave of absence, the appointment of an interim CEO, and the inclusion of the "any length of time" clause in the resolution criteria. They argued that these factors, taken together, met the conditions of the market even without a formal resignation or termination. The discussion also drew on comparisons to prior markets and emphasized the practical shift in leadership at Astronomer.

Coming Up

Having reviewed the arguments for a "Yes" resolution, we now turn to the case for "No."