Polymarket has finalized its assessment of a prediction market related to Strategy's sale of Bitcoin, maintaining a "no" result. Although Strategy subsequently disclosed that it sold 32 Bitcoins before the May 31 deadline, 98.6% of the voting power in the UMA final review supported the current conclusion.

The controversy revolves around whether the goods had been sold by the deadline.

The issue with this contract is whether Strategy will sell any Bitcoin before May 31st. According to the market's website, the contract underwent final review on Wednesday. Previously, the market had twice ruled "no," followed by challenges from traders.

The core of the controversy lies in the regulatory filing Strategy submitted on June 1st, which showed that the company sold 32 BTC between May 26th and May 31st, for approximately $2.5 million. Traders supporting the "yes" result argue that the sale itself occurred before the deadline and therefore should be settled as "yes".

The platform explains the shift to public confirmation time.

Other traders argued that although the trade occurred before the deadline, it wasn't publicly confirmed until after the deadline, and therefore shouldn't be counted in the contract results. Just days before the final review concluded, Polymarket added a note to its market page stating that "events confirmed outside the market timeframe are ineligible."

This supplementary explanation has become the focus of the controversy. Traders who oppose the current outcome argue that the original question only asked whether Bitcoin would be sold before May 31st, without explicitly requiring public disclosure before that date. They question whether the platform used an explanation that was not stated in advance, after real funds had already entered the market.

Trader losses and the debate over rules are widening.

One trader stated on social media that they established a large "yes" position on June 1st, ultimately incurring a loss of $500,000, and claimed that the market continued to trade even after sell signals had appeared. There is also an argument that UMA voters can only make decisions based on the rules ultimately written to the Polymarket page, and cannot change the outcome based on their personal interpretations.

Galaxy Research believes the crux of the controversy lies not merely in the wins and losses of individual markets, but in whether prediction markets should settle accounts based on "whether an event occurred" or "when an event was publicly confirmed." The firm argues that if platforms adjust their interpretation methods after a transaction has occurred, it weakens the pricing power of prediction markets for real-world events.

Based on disclosed information, Strategy still held 843,706 BTC as of May 31 after selling 32 Bitcoins. The documents also indicate that the proceeds from the sale are expected to be used to support preferred stock allocations. This controversy has once again drawn attention to the standards for listing prediction markets, settlement methods, and the transparency of oracle governance.