3 ms·
So could you describe what the discussion for, say, "P = NP" would look like? What would it score? .01 truthiness? Are entire comments upvoted, or can single s
by arh68 13y ago
So could you describe what the discussion for, say, "P = NP" would look like? What would it score? .01 truthiness?
Are entire comments upvoted, or can single statements be up/downvoted line-item-style? Can the result of one discussion automatically influence another (can I post a statement /foo that assumes /bar is true and /baz is false)?
- oxplot 13y agoI assume it would be full of attempts from both sides to provide proofs, counter examples and lot of external links to existing materials on the web (a good argument could for instance increase the rank of an external page if we cared to keep track of such metrics). You're right, ideally it would score something close to the center of true/false scale (whatever number we assign it) but things like imbalance of count of participants on each side could create a biased result. I really like the idea of upvoting a part of a argument and not the whole. I have also thought about inter linking of statements which is useful to keep each discussion within some bound.