When Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy came out with a black demand last month, the world saw it, except Polymket Oracle voters. Now, a $ 160 million bets of bets depends on whether the truth can overcome the manipulation weighted by the Token.
On June 24, the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, arrived at the NATO summit in The Hague with a black military -style jacket, neck and matching pants, an attire described immediately as a “suit” of Reuters, BBC, The New York Post and even the Polymarket social networks account.
The outfit, a rare deviation from military fatigue, Zelenskyy has favored since the invasion of Russia, caused headlines, memes and, unexpectedly, a high -risk cryptographic dispute.
In Polymarket, the prediction market asking if Zelenskyy would wear a suit before Julio attracted tens of millions in volume and a growing multitude of merchants that bet on what seemed like a direct resolution. However, in the days after their appearance, pocket merchants flooded the market with “no” bets, exploiting a peculiarity in the UMA Oracle system that rewards the consensus on objective precision.
How UMA Oracle incentives created a reality distortion field of $ 160 million
In the heart of the problem is the UMA Oracle, the mechanism used to solve the markets in the Polymarket. The UMA system encourages participants to vote in alignment with the majority to obtain rewards.
Crucially, the votes are not the same. Its weight is determined by the number of stakes, not the number of voters. This creates a powerful asymmetry: a single whale with enough chips can balance the result, regardless of the facts or the intention of the market.
The Zelenskyy market exposed this defect in high resolution. Despite NATO’s official images, the confirmation of Reuters of a “Style Jacket” and even the Polymarket tweet declaring “President Zelenskyy on a lawsuit last night”, UMA’s voters initially leaned towards “No.” Its justification: an earlier market had been solved similarly for a military -style outfit in May, ignoring the fact that this time, more than 50 main publications explicitly used the word “demand.”
The merchants who bet “yes” exploded when the official Polymarket (@polymarketintel) account was retroactively qualified “directed by the community” after recognizing the demand.
The reaction intensified as Martin Shkreli live accusations of market manipulation, while Polywhale repellent, a group of aggravated merchants, began to compile evidence of Oracle’s misconduct.
As the resolution deadline of July 8 progresses, the consequences could redefine the future of prediction markets. A “no” result would validate the fears that Ballena capital can cancel verifiable events. A “yes” could restore faith, but only if combined with significant Oracle reforms.
Anyway, the suit saga has already presented a question of billion dollars: can decentralized platforms handle the truth, or will they become casinos where the house always wins?
