Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: I built a platform where audiences fund debates between public thinkers

logosive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 42 posts

Re: Show HN: I built a platform where audiences fund debates between public thinkers

#32

Post by mcastle »

gruez wrote: post #26

There are already organizations like Open to Debate and The Munk Debates organizing and publishing debates. What are you doing differently than them, aside from allowing users to suggest topics and giving them a cut? I feel like coming up with topics is probably the easiest part of the process. All you need is a vague pulse on what's in the news cycle, or ask a LLM.

Thanks for sharing those other platforms. I think what differentiates Logosive is the funding mechanism, which could allow debaters, organizers, and promoters to earn substantial revenue from their debates. This also provides more of a market mechanism to reveal which topics are most in demand for debate.

Re: Show HN: I built a platform where audiences fund debates between public thinkers

#33

Post by mcastle »

dangus wrote: post #30
mcastle wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the feedback. I’ll update the messaging to make this more clear.

You’ve made a tech platform but you should just make content. This won’t work out for you because you’ve designed it to be as close to a valueless middleman as possible. I don’t blame you as it’s a nice business model…when it works. You sit back and do nothing while your community does all the work that a normal media company would do: coming up with content ideas, executive producing, and even doing the technical wo…

I think much of the value is the funding infrastructure and also the debate creation and discoverability, similar in some ways to the role eventbrite serves for events.

Thanks for catching the copy and messaging edits. The homepage debate is a sample debate that directs to the list of proposed debates. I’ll change that sample debate so it’s less confusing.

Also good point about “create with AI”.

Re: Show HN: I built a platform where audiences fund debates between public thinkers

#34

Post by mcastle »

gruez wrote: post #24
danudey wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention that a lot of these public 'debates' about topics unfairly give time and energy to perspectives which do not deserve them. For example, 99% of climate scientists agree that climate change is real and human-caused, but - oh! - we need to be fair and balanced so we'll give time to the other side that has tons of untested and unproven crackpot theories about maybe that's just what climates do and we just…

>The headline example on their site is 'are seed oils healthy?' Assuming an agreed-upon definition of 'healthy', this shouldn't be a debate. Are they good for you in moderation or not? Let's look at the science. Oh, they're fine? Great, debate over. The problem is that in any contentious topic where the science isn't definitive, each side will latch onto whatever ambiguous studies that favors their position. For seed…

That’s true, but I think even in those cases, debate unveils important questions that can help arrive at more definitive answers as future data comes in.

Re: Show HN: I built a platform where audiences fund debates between public thinkers

#35

Post by pixel_popping »

mcastle wrote: post #11
8organicbits wrote: post #3

Debate with AI? No thanks.

Thanks for the feedback on what could be confusing messaging. The debates happen between real people. The AI is used to create the debate launch page based on the debate organizer's prompt.

To most "advanced AI users", it will directly sound like "one more AI project" just due to the fact that the entire homepage is vibe-coded and feels awfully similar with Lovable projects and such, you can remove that feeling by being opinionated on your design.

Re: Show HN: I built a platform where audiences fund debates between public thinkers

#36

Post by mcastle »

pixel_popping wrote: post #35
mcastle wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for the feedback on what could be confusing messaging. The debates happen between real people. The AI is used to create the debate launch page based on the debate organizer's prompt.

To most "advanced AI users", it will directly sound like "one more AI project" just due to the fact that the entire homepage is vibe-coded and feels awfully similar with Lovable projects and such, you can remove that feeling by being opinionated on your design.

Good point, thanks!

Re: Show HN: I built a platform where audiences fund debates between public thinkers

#37

Post by etavgac3 »

great idea, and there are many potential pathways for where this can go so excited to see Logosive develop. The key will be seeding the platform with some interesting debates that aren't necessarily part of the mainstream conversation (either topics that aren't getting enough attention, or debate participants that otherwise aren't being matched up against one another). Feel this is the perfect moment in time for this platform.

Re: Show HN: I built a platform where audiences fund debates between public thinkers

#39

Post by mcastle »

etavgac3 wrote: post #37

great idea, and there are many potential pathways for where this can go so excited to see Logosive develop. The key will be seeding the platform with some interesting debates that aren't necessarily part of the mainstream conversation (either topics that aren't getting enough attention, or debate participants that otherwise aren't being matched up against one another). Feel this is the perfect moment in time for this…

Thank you, very much appreciated! And thanks for the insights about priming the platform with non-mainstream topics

Re: Show HN: I built a platform where audiences fund debates between public thinkers

#40

Post by loughnane »

analog31 wrote: post #5

I don't want to discourage this idea, but I have to admit that I've lost interest in debates. It seems like a debate is not a search for the truth, but a form of public entertainment to see who wins. I wouldn't change my views based on the outcome of a debate. Then again I may be biased because I'm a terrible debater. On the other hand, my mom used to show off her debate medals from high school.

Most public debates aren't a matter of truth seeking, and haven't been for a long time (two examples below). Rather, it's a platform for people to make their case to the audience.

That said, the level of respect and orderliness of the debates below is something I'd like to see more of.

* Russell v. Copleston on God https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wMsbD1L5IlQ

* Buckley v. Baldwin on if the american dream is at the expense of the american negro https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldwin%E2%80%93Buckley_debate

Post reply on HN