• Polymarket criticized for incorrect ‘Sure’ end result on $7M Trump/Ukraine deal wager.
• There are allegations of governance manipulation by a UMA Whale.
• Polymarket moderators have stated there can be no refunds.

Polymarket, the world’s main decentralized prediction market, is grappling with a wave of criticism following a controversial decision of a high-profile wager.

The market in query wagered on whether or not US President Donald Trump would settle for a uncommon earth mineral take care of Ukraine earlier than April.

Regardless of no proof of such an occasion occurring, the market settled as “Sure” on March 25, 2025, sparking outrage amongst customers and elevating questions in regards to the platform’s integrity.

With over $7 million in buying and selling quantity, the result has fueled issues over potential manipulation and governance vulnerabilities.

Polymarket “governance assault” tied to UMA Protocol oracles

The backlash facilities on allegations of a “governance assault” tied to Polymarket’s use of UMA Protocol’s blockchain oracles, which confirm real-world occasions to settle bets.

Crypto risk researcher Vladimir S. pointed to a single “whale” from UMA who allegedly wielded 5 million tokens throughout three accounts, representing 25% of the full votes, to drive the inaccurate settlement. This transfer, he argued on March 26, allowed the tycoon to revenue on the expense of different merchants.

A governance assault occurred on @Polymarket , the place a @UMAprotocol tycoon used his voting energy to control the oracle, permitting the market to settle false outcomes and efficiently revenue.

The tycoon forged 5 million tokens via three accounts, accounting for 25% of the… pic.twitter.com/FYZmmFK2Fq

— Vladimir S. | Officer’s Notes (@officer_cia) March 26, 2025

Polymarket has since pledged to stop such incidents, however the harm to its repute has already taken root.

Not everybody agrees on the manipulation narrative, nevertheless. Pseudonymous Polymarket person Tenadome provided a distinct take, suggesting negligence somewhat than malice was in charge.

In a March 26 X publish, Tenadome claimed the choice got here from UMA’s typical voting whales—many affiliated with the protocol’s crew—who don’t commerce on Polymarket. Ignoring the market’s clarification, they opted for a fast decision to safe rewards and keep away from penalties, he argued.

There was no governance assault. This was simply excessive negligence from each @Polymarket and @UMAprotocol.

What truly occurred was:

1. A person submitted a Sure proposal for “Ukraine agrees to Trump mineral deal before April?” (https://t.co/HeHC6775K2) and this proposal was… https://t.co/49bGhEAwrZ

— tenadome (@tenad0me) March 26, 2025

This competing perspective has solely deepened the talk over accountability.

Polymarket guidelines out refunds

Including to person frustration, Polymarket moderators have dominated out refunds. Moderator Tanner acknowledged the decision defied expectations and the platform’s personal steering, however maintained it wasn’t a “market failure” warranting compensation.

This determination has left many merchants feeling betrayed by a platform that prides itself on transparency.

In response, Polymarket vowed to implement new monitoring techniques to deal with what it known as an “unprecedented scenario,” although specifics stay unclear.

Notably, the controversy comes amid a broader increase for prediction markets, fueled by the 2024 US presidential election. Knowledge from CoinGecko exhibits betting volumes throughout the highest three platforms soared 565% in Q3 2024, reaching $3.1 billion—up from $463.3 million the prior quarter.

Polymarket, commanding over 99% of the market share as of September, has been a key driver of this development. Nonetheless, as this incident reveals, its fast rise could also be exposing cracks in its decentralized framework, leaving observers to surprise if tighter oversight is required to maintain belief within the platform’s future.

The publish Polymarket faces scrutiny over Trump Ukraine mineral deal wager manipulation appeared first on CoinJournal.