Article may be outdated

This article is 79 days old. Some details may have changed since publication.

CoinDesk·3 min read·medium

Polymarket says No for May, Yes for June after Strategy's recent bitcoin sale

S
Sam Reynolds
Polymarket says No for May, Yes for June after Strategy's recent bitcoin sale
AI Summary

Polymarket resolved a dispute over a bitcoin-sale prediction market by ruling that a sale disclosed on June 1 did not count toward a May 31 deadline. UMA token holders voted to uphold the June 1 disclosure date, resulting in losses for bettors who wagered on a May sale.

Why it matters

This case highlights the complexities and potential for controversy in decentralized oracle systems and prediction markets regarding event timing.

Dive DeeperCreate a free account to unlock

Share Share this article Copy link X icon X (Twitter) LinkedIn Facebook Email Polymarket says No for May, Yes for June after Strategy s recent bitcoin sale UMA voters ruled that Strategy s June 1 disclosure counted for the June contract, even though the company said it sold bitcoin during the final week of May. By Sam Reynolds | Edited by Omkar Godbole Jun 4, 2026, 7:50 a.m. 2 min read Make preferred on What to know : Polymarket resolved its disputed bitcoin-sale prediction markets by ruling the May 31 contract No and the June 30 contract Yes, following a vote by UMA token holders. The dispute centered on whether Strategy’s sale of 32 bitcoin between May 26 and May 31 should count toward the May deadline, with UMA voters deciding that only the June 1 public disclosure date mattered. A small group of large UMA holders, including wallets linked to Risk Labs and prominent ecosystem participants, overwhelmingly swung the vote toward No, causing May bettors to lose despite the sale occurring in late May. Strategy’s recent bitcoin sale, the first in more than three years, sparked a major dispute on Polymarket, with the dispute settlement body led by UMA token holders ultimately ruling against bettors who wagered the sale would occur by May 31.

Continue reading on Headlinne

Create a free account to read the full article.

Read full article →
cryptobusiness
Political Bias
Center
LeftLean LCenterLean RRight
Confidence: 80%

The article reports on a specific dispute resolution process within a crypto platform, maintaining a neutral tone regarding the outcome.

Get smarter about the news

Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.

Create free account

Already have an account? Sign in