Continuing in my theme of pleading for better support for question creators:

I know some of the meta around question creation and management is still stuck in the mindset from past iterations of the site. For example, we used to have creators 'assuming' that they would 'profit' (directly) from creating questions in the form of Manifold handouts for attracting bettors. Some of that has died out, but some of it still remains.

I think the site still has not fully internalized the degree of change we went through when we fell away from "keep subsidizing the AMM every time someone new trades" to "functionally all markets are fully subsidized by only the creator".

If I am subsidizing the market completely on my own, I should have immense power over the application of the liquidity in the market. The site should directly give me the tools I need to get the most out of my capital in managing questions. When Manifold supplied the majority of liquidity in most markets, this did not make as much sense, but I feel like creators are not given enough power to manage their markets right now.

Some summary points that could each be elaborated on request if they are not clear to others:

• Creating a question should not 'feel' like 'spending' the full amount of liquidity chosen. The default assumption should be that you will only 'pay' the amount that your current/initial guess differs from the current consensus.

• Creators should be directly encouraged to set up a market with their best guess of the probability to be as efficient as possible with liquidity.

• 'Paying' directly for a notification that news has happened is fine, but creators who specifically know that news is on the horizon should be able to opt out of paying for news updates by withdrawing liquidity before the expected news (and re-applying it afterward if appropriate).

• Creators should probably be able to fine-tune their liquidity application without affecting their 'profit' on a market. If I know a market should be at 71%, I should be encouraged to set it up at 71%, but the site currently wants me to set it up at 50% then trade/profit by moving it to 71%, which wastes capital and generates questionable 'profit'.

• I should be able to schedule the withdrawal (and possibly addition) of liquidity in advance.

• "The market is open for trading but there is very little liquidity" is much better than "I am closing the market before an expected crux moment because the platform does not let me withdraw liquidity"

• Reopening a market for trading after the above point is a miserable experience and feels close to fraud even if you warn traders in advance. Anything to help with this situation would be appreciated.

• In more complex market types like multiple choice, I should have direct control over how much is in the pool on each option. Sometimes one option is very important while another is not important at all.