• Adding a competitive aspect to our site that all users can potentially engage in can be transformative for user retention and satisfaction
  • One problem with our site now is that it isn’t clear exactly what you should be doing on a day to day basis
  • adding an explicit competition clarifies things for users, making it easier to understand what to do and more fun once people understand how to progress
• the most important design goal is that participation in leagues be FUN
  • If leagues are accessible, easy to understand, normie friendly etc., but not actually fun, then they have failed.
  • [A] In my personal experience, it’s rare that the “meta-game” (leagues, leaderboard, climbing) is described as fun. It’s generally the case that the game itself is “fun” (playing rounds of Magic), and then climbing the ladder, your win rate motivates you to do better, shows progression and mastery of the game
• The best game on Manifold is competing on making trading profits, largely because this requires the most skill
  • It’s true that games of skill disadvantage bad players, which in a market context, is most people.
  • But nobody likes games where everyone wins
  • Having shorter league cycles can combat this, by giving them another chance to start over
• Just trying to increase portfolio value is less fun because it encourages activities like grinding out bonuses and creating low-quality markets
  • [J] Seems more fun to me. Might want to segregate market creator vs trader though
• Similarly, pay-to-win is bad because it reduces the competitive aspect and makes winning feel less rewarding
  • [J] True, could exclude purchased mana.
  • [i] what if we changed portfolio value to investment value? Bc on the profile we already have a balance graph, so we don’t need it in portfolio value. That way if people buy mana but don’t invest it, it isn’t counted.
• The duration of a league should be the minimum amount of time it takes to accumulate enough of a track record to make profits meaningful
  • In my view, that’s one month. A week is too short. A quarter too long.
  • Many of markets already resolve on a monthly cadence. Seems like a good pace.
  • Having monthly leagues, will also encourage people to create shorter-term markets
    • [J] +1
• We should only count profits for bets placed within the current league cycle
  • To give people a reason to engage with the platform today, instead of coasting on past profits
• League cohorts should be based on portfolio value (and possible profit as well)
• Promotion between leagues should only occur between cycles
  • otherwise, it’s unnecessarily complicated