DebateWire
Loading docket
Record
Loading Record
The complete deliberation, published verbatim — the immutable system prompt, the frozen corpus and its injection screen, every blind assessment, all 3 independent runs including the dissent, and the validation behind every citation. Nothing the bench saw or produced is withheld.
Phase 01
The corpus queued on Jun 16, 2026 and its hash was committed on-chain — what follows is provably what the bench read. The protocol ran in four phases: an injection screen over every submission, a blind assessment of each argument, 3 independent deliberation runs with majority rule, then citation and validation. Anyone can re-run this record against the pinned snapshot and compare.
Phase 02
Written and committed at market creation — before a single argument was filed. The operator cannot steer a verdict by editing instructions after the fact; this hash is the one on-chain.
Published prompt text is not present in the transcript chunk payload. record_core_hash: 816f78bac27b3a8b9a716a5a69861075c91a7d850fbdefbc6d7db4b1e13210db transcript_hash: 816f78bac27b3a8b9a716a5a69861075c91a7d850fbdefbc6d7db4b1e13210db content_uri: sha256://816f78bac27b3a8b9a716a5a69861075c91a7d850fbdefbc6d7db4b1e13210db
Phase 03
0 arguments entered the sealed brief — 0 YES, 0 NO. Every submission passed through the injection screen first: argument text is untrusted evidence, never instruction, and submissions that address the bench are excluded from the brief.
Each submission below replays its full audit — the intake, screening, dedup, auditor decision, citation check, and inclusion. For an argument excluded under the integrity policy, only the public reason and rule id are shown; the detection mechanism is never disclosed.
Phase 04
Phase A of the protocol: every argument scored on relevance, evidence, and logic before the bench sees side totals — so volume carries no weight and each argument stands alone.
Phase 05
3 independent runs, each in a fresh context, blind to the others — the majority rules.
No arguments were submitted in favor of or against launching the app. With zero evidence or reasoning provided on either side, the question cannot be resolved YES with any confidence. In the absence of supporting arguments, the default position falls to NO, as a YES resolution requires affirmative justification that has not been provided. The resolution criteria is circular and offers no independent information to evaluate. Without substantive arguments, a confident YES verdict is unwarranted.
No arguments were submitted in favor of or against launching the app. With zero evidence or reasoning provided on either side, there is no basis to resolve YES. In the absence of any supporting arguments, the market defaults to NO by lack of affirmative justification. The resolution criteria simply restates the question without providing any measurable or verifiable conditions, making it impossible to determine a confident YES verdict. A binary market with no submitted arguments and no concrete resolution criteria cannot reasonably resolve YES, as the burden of proof for a positive resolution has not been met.
No arguments were submitted in favor of or against launching the app. Without any supporting evidence, use cases, market analysis, technical readiness assessments, or risk evaluations, there is insufficient basis to resolve YES. In the absence of any arguments, the default position is to withhold a YES resolution, as an affirmative decision typically requires justification. The question is highly subjective and context-dependent. Without specific details about the app, its readiness, target market, or competitive landscape, no informed YES verdict can be rendered.
Phase 06
Factual claims extracted from the briefs and checked against primary sources before deliberation. Unverifiable claims are weighed as rhetoric, not evidence.
Phase 07
Winner: NO. Confidence: 1.
payouts unlocked · tx 816f…10db
Redeem on the market page →This record is final and content-addressed. corpus … · prompt 35c5b3…1dba68 · model claude-sonnet-4-6