AtlasCase 06 / 07Prediction markets / UX
Concord
Concord is a prediction-market product concept designed around the full lifecycle, not just the bet. Evidence, disputes, voting, and resolution all have to feel understandable and fair.
The problem
Prediction markets compress uncertainty into a price, but credibility is tested after the market closes. If evidence is difficult to assess, dispute windows are ambiguous, or resolution feels opaque, the interface has failed at the moment trust matters most.
I designed the experience around the complete market lifecycle: creation and staking, evidence-backed discussion, timed disputes, voter selection, resolution, and claims. The goal was to keep the rules visible without turning the product into a rulebook.
The product is not only the prediction. It is the path to resolution.
How it fits together
The bet is only the beginning.
State the claim, outcome choices, stake, and timing.
See it in the workCreation and participationConnect evidence and discourse to the market itself.
See it in the workEvidence beside the claimMake selection, incentives, and the dispute window explicit.
See it in the workDispute and voting statusClose the loop with a visible result and claim state.
See it in the workOutcome and claim actionKey decisions
The choices that shaped the work.
Staking, dispute, voting, and resolution periods change what people can do and what an outcome means. Those periods are presented as explicit product states, supported by countdowns and notification logic rather than buried in policy.
Discussion and submitted evidence belong in the market experience. Keeping them attached to the disputed claim gives voters a shared context and makes the path to resolution easier to audit.
Stake, reputation, randomized voter selection, and rewards shape behavior. The interface explains those mechanics so fairness comes from understandable rules, not visual polish.
A resolved market needs a durable summary: the winning outcome, vote distribution, payout detail, contributor reward, and the action available next. Resolution is the closing experience, not an administrative afterthought.
The work
01 / 06Lifecycle model. Market creation, staking, discourse, voting, and resolution are treated as one continuous trust journey.
The work
02 / 06Creation and participation. The claim, outcome, stake, timing, and voter incentives are made visible before resolution is needed.
The work
03 / 06Dispute and resolution. Evidence, voting status, final outcome, payout detail, and claim action close the market loop.
The work
04 / 06Public market feed. Market state and participation signals help people understand where attention or action is needed.
The work
05 / 06Platform framing. Markets and applications are organized as a system that can support more than one prediction experience.
The work
06 / 06Community layer. Moderated discussion and transparent resolution are carried into the product’s participation strategy.
What this case shows
This case demonstrates the designed market lifecycle and interface logic. It does not claim adoption, production performance, or business impact that the available public material cannot support.
What the work delivered
Defined a complete prediction-market journey from market creation through dispute and resolution.
Integrated evidence, moderated discussion, and timed voting into the core interaction model.
Made incentive, reputation, voter-selection, notification, and payout logic visible in the experience.
Next case study
07Beacon KitBrand system / crypto infrastructureHow do you brand an EVM client without reaching for the usual crypto visual language?