Alexa now says that only 17 sites are linking to Metaculus. I think these link counts are quite erratic and unreliable; not sure it makes much sense to have a prediction with this resolution criterion.
@Tamay I hereby promise to fly to Westfield, Indiana to attend this important meeting, regardless of where in the world I happen to be on the previous day.
What? I pointed to a betting market aggregator website as evidence against the claim that there are only three major Democratic candidates.
As a measure of how ridiculous the current median value is (87%), consider that the probability assigned to SpaceX landing people on Mars prior to 2030 is higher than the probability assigned to a Mars landing prior to mid-2069 by SpaceX, NASA, or any other private firm or government agency!
Would you mind phrasing your comments in a less opinionated way? Imagine how much less pleasant Metaculus would be if everyone expressed their personal opinions on questions involving issues that they care strongly about.
FWIW, I am strongly in favor of this proposition. I just would like Metaculus to remain focused on forecasting.
@Anthony I interpreted the question as asking about the party that would control the Senate, and my performance in this tournament will be adversely affected by a negative resolution (to be concrete, I predicted 75%). However, the question text specified the resolution criteria very clearly, and if you look at the comments below, many predictors were interpreting the question based on this text. While I agree that the title was confusing, people (such as myself) could have avoided this confusion by reading the text carefully.