> One thing I wonder is how this can best be extended to argumentative discourses where much of the discussion is a dispute of facts. This is what I always thi

> One thing I wonder is how this can best be extended to argumentative discourses where much of the discussion is a dispute of facts. This is what I always think about when the topic of structured argument/discussion comes up, but everyone wants to focus on aspects of the threading. We are still totally missing a n obvious layer or organization, such as splitting sub comments into categories like disputes-parent and supports-parent and asks-clarification and elaborates-parent. We’re missing flags for ad-hom and logical fallacies and all the nuance of discussion has degenerated into up/down votes . And we are missing the ability to collapse or zip up any finished meandering paths once there is consensus/clarity on the subtopic. Since all we do is debate bullshit on the internet it’s surprising that we’re still so disorganized and ineffective at it! There’s definitely a sweet spot somewhere between this baby talk that we’re all engaged in and the rigors of things like lawyery jargon / math / Loglan. But we’re not even close yet.