- Polymarket criticized for incorrect result of “yes” in commitment to agreement of US $ 7 million between Trump and Ukraine.
- There are complaints of governance manipulation by a UMA whale.
- Polymarket moderators have said there will be no refunds.
Polymarket, the world’s leading decentralized prediction market, faces a wave of criticism after the controversial resolution of a high profile.
The market in question bet on whether US President Donald Trump would accept an agreement on rare earths with Ukraine before April.
Despite not having evidence that such an event occurred, The market closed with a “yes” on March 25, 2025 what generated outrage among users and questioned the integrity of the platform. With a volume of operations of more than 7 million dollars, the result has fed concerns about possible manipulations and vulnerabilities of governance.
Polymarket governance attack linked to the oracles of the UMA protocol
The reaction focuses on the accusations of an “attack on governance” related to the use by Polymarket of the Blockchain oracles of the UMA protocol, which verify events of the real world to liquidate bets.
The cryptographic threat researcher Vladimir S. pointed to a single “whale” of UMA who allegedly handled 5 million tokens in three accounts, which represents 25% of the total votes, to force the incorrect liquidation.
This measure, argued on March 26, allowed the tycoon to benefit at the expense of other merchants.
A GOVERNANCE ATTACK OCCURRED ON @Polymarket where a @Umaprocol Tycoon used His voting power to manipulate The Oracle, Allowing The Market to Settle False Results and Successfully Profit.
The Tycoon Cast 5 Million Tokens Through Three Accounts, Accounting for 25% of The … pic.twitter.com/fyzmmfk2fq
– Vladimir S. | Officer’s Notes (@officer_cia) March 26, 2025
Polymarket has been committed since then to prevent such incidents, but the damage to its reputation has already taken root. However, not everyone agrees with the narrative of manipulation.
The pseudonym user of Polymarket, Tenadome, offered a different opinion, suggesting that the fault was negligence instead of malice.
In an March 26 publication, Tenadome said that the decision came from the usual voters of UMA – many affiliated with the protocol team – that do not quote in Polymarket. Ignoring the clarification of the market, they opted for a quick resolution to ensure rewards and avoid sanctions, he argued.
There Was no Government Attack. This was just extreme negligence from Boch @Polymarket and @Umaprocol.
What Actually Happened was:
1. A User submitted A YES PROPOSAL FOR “UKRAINE AGREES TO TRUMP MINERAL DEAL BEFORE APIL?” (https://t.co/hehc6775k2) and This Was … https://t.co/49bgheawrz
– Tenadome (@tenad0me) March 26, 2025
This opposed perspective has only deepened the debate on accountability.
Polymarket rules out reimbursements
To increase user frustration, Polymarket moderators ruled out reimbursements. The Moderator Tanner acknowledged that the resolution challenged the expectations and the guidelines of the platform, but said it was not a “market failure” that justified compensation. This decision has left many operators feeling betrayed by a platform that is proud of their transparency.
In response, Polymarket promised to implement new monitoring systems to address what he called an “unprecedented situation”, although the details are not yet clear.
It should be noted that the controversy arises in the midst of a generalized boom of the prediction markets, promoted by the US presidential elections of 2024.
Coingcko data shows that the volume of bets on the three main platforms shot 565% in the third quarter of 2024, reaching 3.1 billion dollars, compared to 463.3 million of the previous quarter.
Polymarket, which controlled more than 99% of the market share in September, has been a key driver of this growth. However, as this incident reveals, its rapid ascent can be exposing cracks in its decentralized framework, leading to observers to wonder if more strict supervision is necessary to maintain confidence in the future of the platform.
The Post Polymarket faces the scrutiny for the manipulation of bets on Trump’s mining agreement with Ukraine. Appeared First on coinjournal.
https%3A%2F%2Fcoinjournal.net%2Fes%2Fnoticias%2Fpolymarket-se-enfrenta-al-escrutinio-por-la-manipulacion-de-apuestas-sobre-el-acuerdo-minero-de-trump-con-ucrania%2F