Re:Chess.com but for debating(AI judge who wins)
by fantajuice on Thursday July 31, 2025 @04:08PM
(#44749590)
I don't understand can you use simpler words please
Re:Chess.com but for debating(AI judge who wins)
by alganet on Thursday July 31, 2025 @04:14PM
(#44749645)
Chess implies a game. Conversations that are games already exist. It makes your idea dumb. Dumb ideas deserve no space.
Conversations that are not games are rare. That's an idea worth pursuing.
---
I'm not afraid of games. I can play them if it is the only thing available. In fact, I can play the most terrifying role (for gamers): the role of ending the game and opening up space for reality.
Re:Chess.com but for debating(AI judge who wins)
by fantajuice on Thursday July 31, 2025 @04:16PM
(#44749665)
so you're suggesting removing the elo/ranking feature?
Re:Chess.com but for debating(AI judge who wins)
by alganet on Thursday July 31, 2025 @04:19PM
(#44749695)
I was suggesting you had chosen a bad name. But then, you gamed the conversation, and assumed that the bad name follows the bad idea.
What I did to describe it, would be the equivalent of an en passant pawn capture, in chess terms.
The novelty would be a conversation platform that overcomes the primitive urge to game everything.