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: 94df44874fe44e90dd366416b9881c920fecd45ac2a3c7820452802ec87ef65f transcript_hash: 94df44874fe44e90dd366416b9881c920fecd45ac2a3c7820452802ec87ef65f content_uri: sha256://94df44874fe44e90dd366416b9881c920fecd45ac2a3c7820452802ec87ef65f
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 for either side of this debate. The question of whether cats are better pets than dogs is inherently subjective and depends on individual lifestyle, preferences, and needs. Without any supporting arguments for YES, the market defaults to NO by the absence of affirmative evidence. However, confidence is at the minimum meaningful level (0.5) because this is a purely opinion-based question with no objective resolution criteria and no submitted arguments to weigh.
support either position, the market cannot resolve YES. In the absence of any supporting arguments, the default lean is NO.", "This question lacks objective resolution criteria, making a definitive verdict impossible beyond a coin-flip confidence level."], "decisive_argument_ids": []}
No arguments were submitted for either side of the debate. The question of whether cats are better pets than dogs is inherently subjective and depends on individual preferences, lifestyles, and needs. With no evidence or arguments provided to support the YES position, the question cannot resolve YES by default. In the absence of any submitted reasoning, the arbiter defaults to NO with minimal confidence, reflecting maximum uncertainty on a subjective matter.
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 94df…f65f
Redeem on the market page →This record is final and content-addressed. corpus … · prompt 35c5b3…1dba68 · model claude-sonnet-4-6