One of the best showcases of what can be done with Kialo in the public sphere is probably the gun legislation debate, with >2.4k unique claims and thousands of participants, mapping out the reasoning for all perspectives. Was created by user paulmoore about 9 months ago.

https://www.kialo.com/should-the-us-adopt-stricter-gun-contr...

It’s hard to follow cons side when support for red cons are green pros. The pro side always has green pros. https://banter.wiki/ keeps the same color for a position.

Do you allow multi linking, intermap linking, branch copying to other Kialos of claims or do people always have to rewrite them from scratch (and all their children?)? Because if you did, you would know that claims have to change their color based on what is exactly above them.

Also, when you are on level 10 of a debate, the claims might very well be a subdiscussion that attack the veracity or relevance of their parents, not of the thesis. Our debates often have >1k claims, that's the only way to handle it. A pro or a con relates directly to the parent above.

(Linking your site once, instead of thrice, would have been polite, like the others did. :) )

Did you flag my comments? It’s even not my site. I compared Kialo and other debate sites in the past. Linking is how we refer to things on the Internet. Don’t be so defensive. When people like your ideas, they’ll link you.

It was our first time on HN and I don't think the person using the account did (or had enough karma even if they wanted to). As you can see here and beneath (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17486633) we prefer to engage. Arguman is also still in there. Also, I am unsure how flagging works on HN, but I think it requires multiple people clicking "flag" to mark a post as flagged.

If anyone wants to try out teams (private portal for team discussions etc), please drop us a mail to support@ and we'll enable your account, reference HN.

It's been used in organizational contexts for decision-making, -preparation, -logging, ideation and funnily enough job interviews, where you let people reason a business decision in a given time and then compare their reasoning to others'.

We are right now building dedicated sites for edu (free) and teams, which won't be cluttered up with the public debates.

Yes, SAAS is how we will want to make money at some point in the future. :)

A little feedback.. I couldn't figure out how to get back to the topology view of the discussion after entering it.

Thanks for feedback. We only show it on first load, might well change that. You can open it by going to the menu (on the left) and selecting discussion info or clicking the (i) on the thesis.

Is it possible to link to a duplicate claim?

If I start to enter a pro or con to a claim, and it shows me a duplicate claim with a different parent, what is the correct action for me to take?

If it shows you linking, then link it. (that means you should have permissions to do so)

In discussions where you do not have editor rights, click "view in new tab" copy the url and suggest a claim with text "suggest linking this(link) as a pro (or con)"

We are building suggest linking in a couple of weeks for discussions that you haven't been invited to yet.

Are there ways to provide a "counter claim" that refutes a positive claim?

Sure, just click on it and then click on the red + and add your con.

Have you considered implementing a sentiment API for topics on this site? I imagine the data of what people are liking, viewing, and interacting with will be a goldmine.

We don't do anything with the data. We'll probably provide the public discussion corpus anonymized to researchers. It's all too sensitive and some users cannot be dissuaded from using real names. :(

Even aggregated data from a source like this is extremely valuable way of understanding the interaction surrounding specific ideas and topics.

Good news everyone...we found a way to monetize :) (Agreed, though you'd probably want demographic data with that, which we deliberately don't have. The best we do have are our follower audience analytics on T / FB. We are happy about every user who signs up with an anonymous email address.)

Have you considered adding Stack Exchange or Quora integration and then using reputation from those sources? Might help in avoiding bots/trolls

I don't think they offer an API for reputation exporting, do they?

Also, our reputation system, the thanks count, is based more around HOW you interact with others, so if you are polite, open to have your claim changed, etc. It's a general measure of how nice it is to work with you and how good your contributions are.

Contrary to SO and Q, we are not a place where you, solipsistically add an atomic answer, but because you are working with others in a collaborative reasoning system, will have to edit your claims, comment on others etc.