Skip to content

Correct social-bet model: held stakes, not escrow/multisig - #20

Merged
PhantomCapAI merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
correct-social-bet-rails
Jul 17, 2026
Merged

Correct social-bet model: held stakes, not escrow/multisig#20
PhantomCapAI merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
correct-social-bet-rails

Conversation

@PhantomCapAI

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Why

SKILL.md instructed BankrBot to do three things it cannot do: deploy peer-to-peer escrow contracts, create 2-of-3 multisigs, and route bets to custom Polymarket markets.

Per docs.bankr.bot/features/polymarket, BankrBot's Polymarket support is listed markets only — search, place bets, view positions, redeem — and it moves funds by transfer to a handle or address. It has no escrow, multisig, or market-creation rails. The spec was telling it to perform actions with no underlying capability.

The honest model

  1. Listed market first. If Polymarket already lists a market expressing the condition, route there — neutral resolution, no counterparty trust. The only trustless path that exists today.
  2. Otherwise a trust-based side bet, stated as such. Stakes go to an agreed stake-holder via a BankrBot transfer; PolyRobin adjudicates against the agreed resolution statement at the deadline; settlement is a confirmed, human-issued transfer. The trust assumption is stated up front, never buried.
  3. No holder and no market → stand down. A valid output.

Changed

  • Frontmatter description
  • "What PolyRobin is (and isn't)" social-bet bullet
  • Non-negotiables — market-data routing line
  • Social & Friend Bets: path selection (step 3), tracking/settlement (step 4), worked example, fairness rules
  • Example command (the set up a P2P escrow line)
  • Two social-bet edge cases (counterparty won't fund; resolution disputed)
  • CHANGELOG.md: entry under [Unreleased] → Changed

The only remaining escrow/multisig mentions are explicit negations of those rails.

Unchanged (the actual value)

Parsing, the resolution statement, refusal to run ambiguous/manipulable bets, the objective-source requirement, gate-5 confirmation, and the bad-faith guard — none of that depended on rails that don't exist.

Validation

./scripts/validate.sh → all checks pass.

No version bump / tag / release — versioning to be decided separately.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

BankrBot has no escrow, multisig, or custom-market rails. Per
docs.bankr.bot/features/polymarket it bets on listed Polymarket markets
only (search, bet, positions, redeem) and moves funds by transfer to a
handle or address. SKILL.md instructed it to deploy escrow contracts,
create 2-of-3 multisigs, and route to custom markets — actions it cannot
execute.

Rewrite the social-bet path to the honest model:
- Listed market first — the only trustless path that exists today.
- Otherwise a trust-based side bet: stakes go to an agreed stake-holder
  via a BankrBot transfer, PolyRobin adjudicates against the agreed
  resolution statement, settlement is a confirmed human-issued transfer,
  and the trust assumption is stated up front, never buried.
- No holder and no market -> the bet can't be run safely; stand down.

Updated: frontmatter description, the "What PolyRobin is (and isn't)"
bullet, the Social & Friend Bets section (path selection, tracking/
settlement, worked example, fairness rules), the example command, and
the two social-bet edge cases. The only remaining escrow/multisig
mentions are explicit negations of those rails.

Unchanged: parsing, resolution statement, refusal of ambiguous/
manipulable bets, objective-source requirement, gate-5 confirmation, and
the bad-faith guard — none of that value depended on rails that don't
exist.

Also adds a Changed entry under [Unreleased] in CHANGELOG.md.
Validated with scripts/validate.sh.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@PhantomCapAI
PhantomCapAI merged commit 0f86929 into main Jul 17, 2026
2 checks passed
@PhantomCapAI PhantomCapAI mentioned this pull request Jul 17, 2026
@PhantomCapAI
PhantomCapAI deleted the correct-social-bet-rails branch July 17, 2026 09:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant