Using dialogical argument as an interface to complex debates

Over the last two decades, many online argumentation systems have been developed that support humans in arguing with one another on specific topics. Many of these have been studies in the academic laboratory, though a few of the larger-scale projects have been used in the wild. More recently, spurred perhaps by high-visibility arguments with strong, explicit argumentative structure such as the Iraq Study Group Report, there has been spontaneous interest in argument coming from the online community. Two high profile systems are Convinceme.net and Debatepedia.com. Convinceme. net uses paired message boards to collect the arguments for and against an issue. These arguments are then voted upon with the most popular becoming king of the hill. Debatepedia.com uses a Wikipedia-style interface to enable users to build logic trees in which a thesis is broken down into a series of subquestions with the aim of collating a body of evidence regarding an issue and to help users to rapidly understand a complex debate.