LESSWRONGTags
LW

Robot

•
Applied to SYSTEMA ROBOTICA by Ali Ahmed ago
•
Applied to Epistemic Legibility by Elizabeth ago

This wiki page and tag gives a list and characterization of debate tools. Debate tools were previously discussed on the bloghere.

Literature

Note: Perhaps discussion should goThere exists an academic literature on argument mapping and other tools (computer aided or not) for assisting debate. The most recent survey seems to be "Computer-supported argumentation: A review of the discussionstate of the art" written in June 2009, which lists 50 tools (starting on page 94).

Online Deliberation, or is a related discipline that asks what are the comments threadeffects of the original post.online discussions, when are they effective, and how to design better systems. 

  • first mentioned:
  • pros:
    • collaboratively edit argument maps
  • cons:
    • it doesn't do anything with probabilities.
    • Do not zoom out too much!

Literature

Consider.it

There exists an academic literature on argument mappingGraphically represents people's agreement with a statement and other tools (computer aided or not) for assisting debate.which arguments were most used. The most recent survey seems to be "Computer-supported argumentation: A reviewarguments themselves are not subjects of the statefurther investigation though. Check out this use-case of the art" writtenpublic decisions in June 2009, which lists 50 tools (starting on page 94).Seattle.

Blog posts

Ruby20

Talk:Debate tools

Suggestions for improvement: "pros/cons/first mentioned" format is artificial, and notes there are of little use (either remove them all, or integrate in the summary, except for "first mentioned"). The word "Summary" doesn't need to be used. --Vladimir Nesov 07:57, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Suggestion: Would pol.is count as a debate tool? It's more like a consultation / consensus-building tool... https://blog.pol.is/pol-is-in-taiwan-da7570d372b5?gi=d4362adab60d

Reply
•
Created by PeerInfinity at

Summary: Web platform for collaborativeTree-based mapping of beliefs, arguments, and evidence.

  • first mentioned:
  • pros:
    • Collaborative creation, editing, and evaluation of debate/argument maps.
    • Open source. (under the MIT license)
    • Developed using modern web technologies. (react-js, redux, firebase)mobx, firestore)
    • Built-in Ability to enter both formal arguments (premises and conclusion), or less structured "single-premise arguments".
    • Rating system for the truth/probability and of claims, as well as the relevance/validity rating, and calculation of argument strength from these ratings.arguments.
    • Tree-based structure which can extend very deep without loss of clarity or usability.
    • Integrated term/definition system. Terms can be defined once, then used anywhere, with hover-based definition display.
  • cons:
    • Has a learning curve for casual users, as content must conform to the argument<-premise structure at each level.
    • Performance is currently less than idealNot yet made usable on mobile devices.

DebateArt

Summary: Debating platform with rich one-on-one debates functionality and advanced discussions forum.

  • pros:
    • Clean and convenient design.
    • Advanced and flexible one-on-one debating system.
    • Separate forum for casual discussions.
    • Private messaging system.
    • Great performance.
    • Friendly community.
    • Active and thorough moderation.
  • cons:
    • Has a learning curve for casual users.
    • No dedicated mobile version.

Debate Map

Summary: Web platform for collaborative mapping of beliefs, arguments, and evidence.

  • first mentioned:
  • pros:
    • Collaborative creation, editing, and evaluation of debate/argument maps.
    • Open source. (under the MIT license)
    • Developed using modern web technologies. (react-js, redux, firebase)
    • Built-in probability and validity rating, and calculation of argument strength from these ratings.
    • Tree-based structure which can extend very deep without loss of clarity or usability.
    • Integrated term/definition system. Terms can be defined once, then used anywhere, with hover-based definition display.
  • cons:
    • Has a learning curve for casual users, as content must conform to the argument<-premise structure at each level.
    • Performance is currently less than ideal on mobile devices.