Thanks, Gerard. I took a look at the tool you mentioned. I'm sure that it would be very effective in encouraging multi-directional free form discussion. It looks extremely flexible.
Unfortunately, this wouldn't solve the problems that I'm trying to address. Not on its own, anyway. The consensus engine I designed is specifically targeted towards limiting people's ability to "worm away" from an argument that heads in a direction that's uncomfortable for them. They either have to counter their opponent's evidence, admit defeat, or resign the argument. I personally think that it's terribly unfortunate that I have to use the term "admit defeat" when refering to someone who has been presented with adequate information to change their mind, but that's the way the majority of arguers on the web think.
In order to do this, every person needs to be able to make one solid statement of opinion on each issue presented. These statements act as an achor and focal point for all evidence to be presented for and against the issue. As an argument matures, these arguments will change. However, and this is a big however, each author must have ownership of their opinion. It's acceptable to allow others to add suplementary opinions, but I'm banking on the idea that the highest ranked opinion for a specific viewpoint will take into account all other opinions both for and against. Whether they do or don't, these suplemental opinions will be displayed below the highest rank, also for consideration. In this way, we avoid the editing wars that make Wikipedia such unfirm ground.
I do have plans to incorporate many of the features in LiquidThreads in the "forum" section of the CE. It's important to be able to follow people's train of thought, and a lot of that helps. Much of it, in fact, has been included in various blog formats that I've seen, and even in various email clients. I also intend to include a new design for popularity ranking system (tentatively refered to as "half-life popularity ranking) for both posts in the forum and for individuals. As evidenced on Slashdot, this produces a very effective pre-sifting of content.
Again, thanks for showing me this, Gerard. I always enjoy seeing what others are doing in this direction.
-Robert Rapplean
On 4/6/06, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, This message is late in the already long line of messages on this subject. I do not know if Robert looked at LiquidThreads. http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/LiquidThreads It may seem like an old article, it is around since 2004, but the likelihood of it being developed is better than 90% at this time. If you are looking for a tool for more structured debate, have a look and if you have questions of remarks please let them be known.
Thanks, GerardM _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l