@bessarabov How does it resolve if both Harris and Walz are chosen? Thanks.

I feel that I did a very poor job with with creating this market.

Now I'm not quite sure that I understand how this kind of market works.

In market "type" tooltip there is info "Only one outcome can be chosen"

But it looks like UI allow me to resolve as percent for each option:

I'm not sure if there is an incorrect text in tooltip or there is a bug in UI shat shows me that it is possible to resolve as percents.

Now the most voted answer is "Biden/Harris again". I read it as "Biden OR Harris". So if Kamila (alone) is the Person of the Year I'm going to resole this option as YES (or as percent, below I'm going to explain the situation when this can happen). If the Person of the Year are 2 people at the same time Harris and Walz, I'm still going to resolve the option "Biden/Harris again" as YES (or percent)

The most challenging situation for me is how to properly resolve this market if there are 2 (or more) answers what suit the winner. For example if somebody adds the new answer "Kamala Harris" and she is Person of the Year—what is the proper way to resolve this market? I can imagine the situation that many people will vote for this new answer Kamala Harris", but choosing only this answer will be dishonest to the traiders who voted on "Biden/Harris again" meaning that Harris will be the Person of the Year. So in this case I feel that the best solution is to resolve this market with all the answers that suits what has happen in real life with the percent weighed by the percent that manifold shows.

@bessarabov just a quick note about resolving this type of market:

Dependent Multiple Choice (where you choose one answer and can't resolve any until you resolve the whole market) will allow you to choose multiple answers at a determined percentage, but all answers ultimately add up to 100%. so if you chose Harris and Walz you'd likely select 50/50. so not a bug, it's designed that way.

good note about the tooltip, though, I agree it's confusing in moments like this (which are less common but definitely not unheard of) and could maybe be reworded a little.

Agree that the market type isn't well suited for this kind of question where multiple people can get chosen. Splitting the 100% payoff amongst the potentially multiple persons/concept isn't ideal but we'll have to deal with it, as several other markets have.

In this case, you have a more inclusive "either/or" option for Harris/Biden, and intended to resolve 100% YES if either of them were chosen POTY (same as I interpreted), then given the market type, you must disqualify any duplicate/overlapping answers that anyone might add (see this pinned comment explaining why), in this case an option for Harris alone or Biden alone (or any that are already covered by the other existing options) should be edited and disqualified (resolve NO).

If someone added Tim Walz or JD Vance, which are valid since not covered by any of the current options, then the most likely scenario those would pay off is as a 2nd chosen POTY along with their respective Presidential partner, so that inevitably leads to the splitting of the payoff and traders must adjust the probabilities for such a split (max 50% each), including the probabilities for the respective Presidential partner. This "potential for adjustment" probability mass currently exists within "Other".