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 15, 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: d090ad3a410f2f16b86861ae845d5e6e4639f78d8f3e258e704186b79ba50366 transcript_hash: d090ad3a410f2f16b86861ae845d5e6e4639f78d8f3e258e704186b79ba50366 content_uri: sha256://d090ad3a410f2f16b86861ae845d5e6e4639f78d8f3e258e704186b79ba50366
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.
A hotdog is commonly understood as its own distinct food category in everyday usage, separate from sandwiches. While it shares a structural similarity (filling inside bread), common parlance, menus, and food culture consistently treat hotdogs as a separate item. Food taxonomy and culinary tradition distinguish hotdogs by their unique bun type (a hinged, split roll rather than two separate bread pieces), their specific preparation context, and their cultural identity as a standalone category. The ordinary definition of a sandwich typically implies two separate pieces of bread or a roll split entirely, encasing a filling. A hotdog bun is typically a hinged, partially-connected roll, placing it in a contested structural category more akin to a sub or hoagie — yet even those are debated edge cases. Common usage is the strongest signal: virtually no one orders a hotdog by asking for a 'sausage sandwich' at a hotdog stand, and food industry classifications (e.g., USDA, restaurant menus, grocery store aisles) treat hotdogs separately from sandwiches. While there is a legitimate philosophical and structural argument that a hotdog IS a sandwich (the 'Cube Rule' or 'if it fits the structure, it qualifies' argument), the resolution criteria explicitly weight common usage and normal description, which favor NO.
Common usage: In everyday language, the word 'sandwich' is rarely used to describe a hotdog. People order 'a hotdog,' not 'a hotdog sandwich,' indicating a distinct culinary identity in ordinary speech. Food taxonomy: While some broad technical definitions of 'sandwich' (e.g., the Merriam-Webster definition of 'two or more slices of bread or a split roll having a filling in between') could technically include a hotdog, food taxonomy in practice — including restaurant menus, grocery store categories, and culinary traditions — consistently treats hotdogs as a separate category (frankfurters/sausages) rather than a subcategory of sandwiches. Structure: A hotdog bun is a split, hinged roll, not two separate slices of bread. This structural distinction — the bun remains partially connected at the base — differentiates it from the canonical sandwich form. Many food scholars and culinary conventions draw the line at the hinge. Normal description: Hotdogs have their own distinct cultural identity, preparation methods, toppings (mustard, relish, sauerkraut), and serving contexts that set them apart from sandwiches. The National Hot Dog and Sausage Council itself has stated that a hotdog is NOT a sandwich. Resolution criteria alignment: Given that the resolution criteria asks to evaluate 'common usage,' 'food taxonomy,' 'structure,' and 'how the item is normally described,' all four factors point toward NO — a hotdog is its own separate food category.
Common usage: In everyday language, people do not call a hotdog a sandwich. The term 'hotdog' refers to a distinct food item with its own cultural identity, separate from the broader sandwich category. Food taxonomy: While some technical or legal definitions (e.g., the USDA's broad sandwich definition) could technically include a hotdog, most food taxonomies and culinary traditions treat the hotdog as its own category alongside burgers, tacos, and other handheld foods. Structure: A hotdog bun is typically connected at the base (a hinged or top-split roll), which structurally distinguishes it from the two-separate-piece bread construction most associated with a classic sandwich. This connected-bun design is more analogous to a sub or hoagie roll, yet even those are debated. Ordinary description: The resolution criteria specifically call for 'ordinary food definition' and 'how the item is normally described.' In normal, everyday speech, no one orders a 'hotdog sandwich,' and menus, restaurants, and grocery stores categorize hotdogs separately from sandwiches. Cultural identity: The hotdog has a well-established, independent food identity (ballpark staple, July 4th cookout icon, etc.) that reinforces its classification as a separate food category rather than a subcategory of sandwich.
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 d090…0366
Redeem on the market page →This record is final and content-addressed. corpus … · prompt 35c5b3…1dba68 · model claude-sonnet-4-6