While having a lot of great qualities, prediction markets do have some drawbacks. For one, betting markets can be manipulated by anyone with enough resources if they do not mind losing some of them (in expectation). As a case in point, there is some evidence that in 2012 Romney's chances were artificially boosted, and some (rank) speculation (see e.g. here) that Bloomberg's could be similarly benefitting.
The proposition in question will be taken as:
A major prediction market such as PredictIt, Betfair, or one of comparable liquidity has had 2020 Presidential election results materially changed using bets made with funds tied directly to Bloomberg or his campaign.
That's not terribly precise, by design. It does not address the source of knowledge or fix many of the details. But this question is a bit experimental, one of a series of "self-resolving" ones. Resolution to this question will be determined as follows:
If at any time after the date of 2020-12-01 the community prediction is > 95% or < 5%, the question resolves positively or negatively, respectively.
Otherwise, on or about the close and resolve date of 2022-01-01, the question will be decided by unanimous vote of a council of three people as to whether the proposition listed above is true, resolving ambiguous in the case of disagreement. The council of three will be chosen by quantum mechanical random numbers from a list of 12 people that will be composed by the author around the time of question close, and held secretly until the time of question resolution.