There are too few debates being held about important issues. This is an attempt to fix that, by reinventing how commenting is done on divisive issues.
Don't know what the fuss is about? Understand the key terms and concepts before you join the discussion.
No time to read all the comments to see where the disagreements are? Get a balanced summary of a long discussion instantly with charts, data, and a one-paragraph summary of the key disagreements and consensus areas.
Hate reading long lists of threaded comments? Comments are now sorted and structured in a way that makes sense for the reader and for that discusion - not just by chronology or votes.
Don't trust the moderators, but still wish there was a way to beat trolls? The community now owns the quality of the discussion: Leave a comment, and the next few random visitors will decide whether it is respectful and relevant enough to be added.
Still think Big Brother is watching and don't want to leave your details? Registered users have the option of commenting completely anonymously if they want to.
Download the founder's technology study and negotiation analysis research papers at Harvard that catalysed this project. Learn more about how the dialectic works, our vision, and the technology [coming soon].
We received 4 arguments and 54 votes, in these categories: Customer, Taxi or Uber Driver, and Observer, Analyst, or Regulator.
Key DisagreementsThe most hotly debated area was the category/perspective of Customer.
Key Consensus AreasThe least debated area was the category/perspective of Taxi or Uber Driver, which might indicate some consensus there.
We received 2 arguments and 26 votes, in these categories: public transport user, taxpayer, and observer / analyst.
Key DisagreementsThe most hotly debated area was the category/perspective of public transport user.
Key Consensus AreasThe least debated area was the category/perspective of observer / analyst, which might indicate some consensus there. Commenters generally agreed that the public transportation system was inexpensive compared to other countries, but could be improved further.
We received 6 arguments and 132 votes, in these categories: commenter, visitor, and website owner / blogger.
Key DisagreementsThe most hotly debated area was the category/perspective of website owner / blogger.
Key Consensus AreasThe least debated area was the category/perspective of visitor, which might indicate some consensus there. Commenters agreed that the quality of engagement on most commenting websites and forums was poor.
We received 3 arguments and 36 votes, in these categories: #1: Improve Dispute Resolution, #2: Create a Family Justice Court, and Broader Perspective.
Key DisagreementsThe most hotly debated area was the category/perspective of #1: Improve Dispute Resolution.
Key Consensus AreasThe least debated area was the category/perspective of Broader Perspective, which might indicate some consensus there.
Before you discuss a topic, you must understand what the topic means. The key terms, concepts, and context for the discussion must be clear. A specific and unambiguous topic allows people to focus their analysis and avoid going off on tangents. The topic affects different groups of people differently; each group has its own motivations and interests that need to be understood and respected.
An argument with clear structure is easier to understand. A thesis (or claim) introduces a reader to your general point. The reasoning (or logic) explains the cause-and-effect theoretical relationship that underlies your view. Arguments need to be substantiated with evidence in the form of examples or statistics. [Learn more]
A good argument is most effective when communicated with a persuasive writing style. Clear and simple language is better than fancy phrases and jargon. Use metaphors, similes, quotes, and other rhetorical devices to make your message more memorable and impactful. A persuasive communicator is likeable, earnest, humble, polite, funny, and confident. [Learn more]
Read carefully what the other person has said, and try to empathise with their perspective before you respond. Find and analyse the flaws in their understanding of the topic, their thesis or claim, their cause-and-effect logic, or their examples. Explain those flaws clearly and concisely, and provide an alternative explanation. Do not be disrespectful or aggressive, as that is not persuasive. [Learn more]