More on nlite
Timeline

Investigating a controversial topic on the platform is governed by two deadlines: the Argument Submission Deadline and the Argument Evaluation Deadline. The Argument Submission Deadline is the cutoff point for users to submit their arguments. However, users can continue to evaluate existing arguments until the Argument Evaluation Deadline. Once the Argument Evaluation Deadline passes, the topic will be closed, and the final list of top selected arguments will be displayed.

The first deadline, the Argument Submission Deadline, helps ensure that all strong arguments are put forward for evaluation. The second deadline, the Argument Evaluation Deadline, occurs after some time has passed since the Argument Submission Deadline. The time gap between the two deadlines is crucial as it allows for evaluating all submitted arguments—which is one of the key features of the platform.

The same deadlines described here also apply to the submission and evaluation of counters.

Note. The individual who creates a topic will be able to change either deadline at any time based on the level of activity on the page.

Timeline for Investigating a Controversial Topic
Ranking Methodology

A common method for ranking content on online platforms is through up-vote and down-vote buttons. However, this approach has a significant drawback: it can create a bias toward early submissions, as they tend to gain more visibility and, consequently, more votes. To avoid this issue, nlite adopts a completely different approach based on pairwise comparisons of randomly selected arguments. The randomized nature of the selection process ensures that all submitted arguments, including late ones, have an opportunity to be evaluated. (Learn more)

Speed

Mathematical results show that the applied ranking algorithm is efficient at identifying the top arguments. With a little patience, you'll be surprised by the quality of the results that emerge at the top!

Note. For those with a technical background, the algorithm runs in \( n\log(n) \) time rather than \( n^2 \), where \( n \) is the number of arguments.

speed
Distinctness of Arguments

A strong argument may be expressed in various ways by different individuals. If the ranking algorithm functions properly, all of these variants will rise to the top of the list, resulting in redundancy among the top items. To avoid this shortcoming, the platform includes a mechanism to identify and eliminate repeated arguments.

When users click Evaluate Arguments under a viewpoint, the platform may occasionally ask the following question while presenting two arguments: Are the following arguments (essentially) making the same point? Responses to these questions are used to identify and eliminate duplicate arguments. (Learn More)

tv_options_edit_channels

When users click Evaluate Arguments under a viewpoint, the platform may occasionally ask a different question while presenting two arguments: Are the following arguments (essentially) making the same point? The platform uses responses to these questions to identify and eliminate duplicate arguments. (Learn More)

Common Roles

When visiting a topic page, users should evaluate which of the following situations applies more closely to them:

  • They are strongly opinionated about the topic. In this case, they should form sound and easy-to-understand arguments for the viewpoint they endorse and submit them.

  • They are NOT strongly opinionated but interested in the topic. In this case, they can still significantly contribute to the topic by helping rank existing arguments.

Note that the two scenarios mentioned above are only presented to discuss two common ways of contributing to the platform. In reality, everyone is free to both submit and evaluate arguments.

Example Scenario

The figure below illustrates the two roles mentioned in the previous section in an example scenario where the audience is a friend group consisting of 100 individuals. There are two viewpoints on the topic, each with approximately 10 staunch supporters (10% of the population). These staunch supporters will typically be the ones who submit arguments. The remaining individuals are interested in the topic but not strongly opinionated. This subgroup, which constitutes the majority of the population, will be primarily responsible for evaluating submitted arguments.

A sample group and the role of each member in investigating a controversial topic
Next Steps

To get the most of the platform, we highly recommend reviewing its Practical Tips. We also encourage you to check the User Guide to learn about other interesting features of the platform, such as:

Overview