Name that website: annotated multi-user arguments reaching consensus?
January 15, 2009 12:25 PM Subscribe
Name that website: annotated multi-user arguments reaching consensus?
I'm sure that I saw a website, many moons ago, that allowed collaborative "arguments", or discussions. It might have been intended as some sort of reconciliation service, allowing multiple people with differences to debate their points.
The aim was to encourage productive, rational discussion, rather than a free-for-all.
Some of the features:
# Paragraphs or sections of text were given a reference number -- like a Biblical verse, or a legal sub-paragraph reference number type of thing.
# Once the parties had agreed on a point, I think the previous cruft of the debate was hidden, leaving only the jointly agreed wording.
# Multiple users could contribute to any discussion.
# The aim of any discussion was to remove anger, aggression, and all that nonsense; and to produce a final written statement or consensus that all parties could agree with.
I might have this all slightly wrong, it's from a fuzzy memory. But I'm sure there's something similar out there. Somewhere. Trawling Google and del.icio.us has not revealed what I'm trying to find.
Much obliged.
I'm sure that I saw a website, many moons ago, that allowed collaborative "arguments", or discussions. It might have been intended as some sort of reconciliation service, allowing multiple people with differences to debate their points.
The aim was to encourage productive, rational discussion, rather than a free-for-all.
Some of the features:
# Paragraphs or sections of text were given a reference number -- like a Biblical verse, or a legal sub-paragraph reference number type of thing.
# Once the parties had agreed on a point, I think the previous cruft of the debate was hidden, leaving only the jointly agreed wording.
# Multiple users could contribute to any discussion.
# The aim of any discussion was to remove anger, aggression, and all that nonsense; and to produce a final written statement or consensus that all parties could agree with.
I might have this all slightly wrong, it's from a fuzzy memory. But I'm sure there's something similar out there. Somewhere. Trawling Google and del.icio.us has not revealed what I'm trying to find.
Much obliged.
Response by poster: Thanks TPS, but no. In fact, that's exactly the sort of site I'm *not* thinking about :-)
The one I have in mind was far more "professional", far more dispassionate. There was nothing as populist as voting. The more I think about it, the more I remember something about reconcilliation.
posted by ajp at 5:17 PM on January 15, 2009
The one I have in mind was far more "professional", far more dispassionate. There was nothing as populist as voting. The more I think about it, the more I remember something about reconcilliation.
posted by ajp at 5:17 PM on January 15, 2009
Response by poster: Oh my, I do believe that's it :-)
Nice work!
posted by ajp at 10:32 AM on January 16, 2009
Nice work!
posted by ajp at 10:32 AM on January 16, 2009
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by ThePinkSuperhero at 12:33 PM on January 15, 2009 [1 favorite]