Welcome to the development site for debatepoint

Current source release:

• (comment) 100% · Moved ISP

  by anonymous on 2010-02-24 20:04:54

  Redwoodvirtual has announced it will be dead by next March, so I have moved debatepoint to Webfaction. Hopefully everything was migrated successfully in the process.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 80% · Column View Top Level Arguments Only

  by yqbd on 2007-12-18 05:30:20

  Can you make column view only show the top level supporting opposing arguments? The replies to the top level arguments could be threaded. This wouldn't be bad for people with wide screens.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• • oppose 100% · Re: Column View Top Level Arguments Only

    by yqbd on 2007-12-18 05:35:51

    Sorry, I thought it saw replies in column views. Nevermind this.

    [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · Reuse points, arguments, and comments.

  by yqbd on 2007-12-17 05:49:04

  Does Debatepoint have a way of linking other points, arguments, and comments to other relevant points, arguments, and comments?

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• • (comment) 100% · Re: Reuse points, arguments, and comments.

    by metric on 2007-12-17 06:15:44

    Internally there is a "stanceLink" in the argument's SQL table. My thoughts were to have it be able to link the outcome of a debate to an argument in some other debate. Whenever the outcome of the linked-to debate changes, the score of the argument would then change. I never implemented the frontend to it, however.
    
    I havn't worked on debatepoint in a long while. I was planning on migrating from php to python/django once I get Argon Project working.

    [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · Reuse points, arguments, and comments.

  by yqbd on 2007-12-17 05:48:45

  Does Debatepoint have a way of linking other points, arguments, and comments to other relevant points, arguments, and comments?

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · SPAM

  by metric on 2007-06-17 18:47:20

  Need to implement a feature that hides arguments beneath the user's current threshold. Make a link that says e.g., "There are 1034 replies beneath your current threshold", which is clickable to reveal the shaded arguments.
  
  I tried doing this on the server side, but failed. I think it needs to use the current li_hide and li_invisible classes and pass javascript a parent argumentId and it will turn all the child li_invisibles into li_shaded.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · latest bug

  by metric on 2007-02-02 00:05:14

  There is a bug that has alluded me for a while now. For some reason, child arguments that hold a "comment" stance have a negative effect on their parent arguments. I clearly take account of this in the code, but for some reason it isn't working. Child comments should have _no_ effect on their parent argument's score... though child arguments of comments should affect the parent comment's score. :(

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · update

  by anonymous on 2006-12-28 00:29:34

  It has been a while, but I still intend on revamping debatepoint. I've just been pre-occupied with school/work/projects in the mean time. One more semester until I graduate around may 2007.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · gravatar

  by metric on 2006-05-18 10:16:25

  Globally Recognized Avatars

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · TODO list / ROADMAP

  by metric on 2006-04-06 02:56:46

  While not a roadmap, I'll try to list a few things I've been planning for near of far-term development into debatepoint. In NO prioritized order:
  
  * arguments of "irrelevant" to go with "support", "oppose", and "comment". Irrelevant-marked child arguments would have the same effect as moderating an argument as irrelevant.
  
  * direct stance moderation. ie. popular consensus moderation. The score wouldn't be derived from the arguments, but instant feedback from the user moderation. Maybe add a second triangle to represent this statistic.
  
  * history tracking. cron job that frequently runs a script that keeps track of every modified stance over time. generate graphs to see how the debate has progressed over time.
  
  * tag-based RSS feeds of points
  
  * javascript routines to render tag-based RSS feeds dynamically on front page. This would be like start.com or google.com/ig, and would allow the user to customize which topics show up on the front page. Rico has a nice drag-n-drop library.
  
  * CSS cleanup, site revamp. use subtle gradients. possibly make a non-annoying logo.
  
  * user pages needs extensive work. add tabs for different areas like "arguments made", "user preferences", "points submitted", and maybe a "talk" like page like wikipedia has.. sort of a cross between a blog and a forum. Also, argument lists need to truncate redundant threads.
  
  * javascript routines to create new arguments without reloading the page. Once you click "support", the thread should make room for the space to create a new reply argument. "preview", and "submit" shouldn't reload the page either.
  
  * support for different RPC methods. json, xml-rpc, etc. see API for de.licio.us
  
  reply on this thread any other things that I'm sure I most definately missed.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• • (comment) 100% · Re: TODO list / ROADMAP

    by metric on 2006-04-06 03:17:47

    FYI, I'm actively working on the first two points. The rest are free for anyone to tackle. Just post here to let us know if you decide to work on something.
    
    the RSS feeds would probably be the next thing I would be working on after these are "finished".

    [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · Rico

  by metric on 2006-03-21 06:04:31

  check out Rico
  
  It's a javascript library for doing client-side applications. We can use it to do the drag-and-drop for the RSS feeds on the frontpage. It also does ajax I think.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · GWB wife cheating bastard

  by metric on 2006-03-12 03:25:32

  One solution would be arguments classified as either [ support | oppose | irrelevant ]. this would make for a nice symmetry with the moderation system. I like symmetry.. I'm thinking about taking out the 'relevant' moderation option as well because moderating support or oppose is implicitly supporting relevancy.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · comments

  by metric on 2006-03-09 02:43:01

  yay.. comments are now able to be moderated, though they don't effect their parent score. Go ahead, moderate me! I dare ya.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · release

  by laptop on 2006-03-08 17:17:54

  Source is back with new license... the Affero license. There's a few bug fixes plus a fix to the debatepoint.sql file. thank Matt Dinmore for pointing that out.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 0% · source

  by metric on 2006-03-04 18:29:32

  The source has been temporarily taken offline. I'm switching the source over to the Affero General Public License. pligg.com also uses this license. See other threads on discussion of this new license. I'll get the source tarballs back as soon as possible along with some new additions.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 80% · Affero

  by laptop on 2006-03-04 00:55:11

  So I was just contacted by Brett Smith from the FSF about licensing issues for server-side software:
  
  ---------
  Yes: the Affero General Public License. This is a modified version of the GPL, with our blessing, that simply adds a requirement exactly like you describe. We encourage you to use it: the current draft of GPLv3 will be compatible with the AGPL, so once GPLv3 is released people will be able to use your code in other projects released under GPLv3.
  
  You can find the license, and more information about it, at http://www.affero.org/oagpl.htm l. The new requirement is in section 2(d). If you have questions about it, please let us know.
  -----------------
  
  I'm thinking about switching to this license.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• • oppose 100% · Re: Affero

    by metric on 2006-03-04 01:04:39

    Affero seems to be a mediator between free content providers and benefactors willing to donate cash to the content providers. I was going to sign up until I read their Terms of Service.. is this scary, or am I just being paranoid?
    
    -------- Section 10:
    You acknowledge and agree that the Site, the Services and any content used in connection with the Services (collectively "Affero Content") contain proprietary and confidential information that is protected by copyrights, trademarks, service marks, patents or other proprietary rights and laws. As between you and Affero, Affero and its licensors shall own all right, title and interest in and to the Site, the Services and the Affero Content. Except as expressly authorized by Affero, you may not modify, rent, lease, loan, sell, distribute or create derivative works based on the Site, the Services or the Affero Content, in whole or in part.
    --------------------
    
    wtf?! I did not register until I get a reply from them.

    [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
  • (comment) 0% · Re: Affero

    by metric on 2006-03-04 00:58:36

    btw, 'laptop' is a seperate account of mine, as well as yottahz and wikipedia. Multiple accounts is by one person is looked down upon, but it helps me test the moderation system. Any argumentation or moderation by myself will only be done via 'metric'.

    [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 0% · Re: dev forum

  by music_man on 2006-02-27 03:51:51

  I think that debatepoint should have an api as such, like Wordpress whereby there are a list of tags you can use. Like: <?php get_header ?> That gets all the head information.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• • oppose 100% · Re: dev forum

    by metric on 2006-02-27 20:55:27

    what doess 'get_header' do that isn't available in the PHP Predefined Variables?

    [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 0% · SSL/TLS

  by metric on 2006-02-27 02:07:17

  The passwords are stored SHA1 encrytped in the database along with a GPG encrypted version w/ email which is encrypted with a private key that I hold.
  
  The issue is the session login code is completely plain text.. It would be nice to have TLS support at login.
  
  I've delt with this crap before, and it's a pain the the butt. you have to register with some central authority or else a "do you trust.." pop-up appears on the client.
  
  any ideas?

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• • (comment) 0% · password automation

    by metric on 2006-02-27 02:22:59

    Right now I have to manually GPG decrypt a user's password if they lose it.
    
    this needs to be automated someday. Well.. if it ever becomes a problem.
    
    verifiable email addresses need to be mandatory for two reasons:
    1: to have a place to send lost passwords 2: to alleviate abuse of the moderation system

    [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• (comment) 100% · Welcome

  by anonymous on 2006-02-25 05:40:30

  This is the place to make any comments/arguments about the source code to debatepoint. Anything goes I guess.. since it's moderated, I shouldn't have to filter anything. Anyway.. time to get back to work.

  [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
• • support 0% · Re: Welcome

    by anonymous on 2007-09-01 16:53:36

    testgoodgoogle

    [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
  • (comment) 100% · Re: Welcome

    by music_man on 2006-02-27 00:04:42

    It's nice to see a forum.!

    [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]
  • • (comment) 100% · Re: Welcome

      by metric on 2006-02-27 00:19:58

      eventually moderation will be enabled for (comment)'s. I'll get around to it.

      [ support · oppose · comment · moderate: support oppose irrelevant ]