|
|
Measures:
|
|
The my way or the highway approach may be successful with adolescent or in a dictatorship, but it 's not a successful formula for a democracy. The cable news networks have channeled argument into a binary formula of the right way and the wrong way. When an argument favors our point of view, we tend to be blinded to alternatives or consequences. As the butt of an argument, the vision of compromise is clear. Right/left or liberal/conservative models of measurement provide a incoherent method of understanding differences in point of view. Instead of attempting to label individuals as conservative or liberal, the Do Good Gauge provides a formula which lets categorization and statistics derive ideology. |
|
|
The Do Good Gauge will utilize gauges in two ways. One type displays the overall argument score. The second type measures the relevancy of one argument to another. Scores of an argument are determined by direct reader voting, a factor of the scores of all related arguments, their relevancy, revision, and time. The idea is much more than a popularity concept. It is to keep the discussion flowing, to break down polarizing points of views, and provide a respectful and competitive network for encouraging argument refinement. |
|
The do good relevancy gauge utilizes crowdsourcing as a measure to connect arguments. Categorization, author suggestion, and software heuristics will initiate connectivity. Connectivity is ongoing as new arguments are created. The public measures relevancy through a gauge where zero is the center, one extreme measures highly relative and supporting views, and the other extreme will measure highly relative but counter-supporting views. |
 |
