Independent Judgement (I-Judg)

TL:DR

Users type in their responses. I-Judg ensures that length, 1 opinion, unbiased,

Length: Feedback indicates if the opinion is the right length, too short, or too long.
Sentiment: Feedback ensures the opinion isn't too extreme in positivity or negativity.
Specificity: Feedback checks if the opinion is specific enough.
Objectivity: Feedback suggests whether the opinion includes objective information.
Single Point Focus: Feedback verifies that the opinion focuses on a single point or argument.

Aug 26 further thoughts

Harmonica is a good option for this as Jonas has mentioned. We will pursue that angle.

Actually... I think we could use Harmonica really well to get a set of reasonably thought through independent judgment statements from participants, I'm going to try that.
**August 22, 2024 4:09 AM (EDT)August 22, 2024 4:09 AM (EDT)August 22, 2024 4:09 AM (EDT)

I.e. We can instruct harmonica to guide the user through the process of finding some statements about an issue: It presents the problem, the user replies with one or two answers, harmonica checks and clarifies and makes sure the answer only contains 1 single focus, i.e. helps the user to split it out into separate statements, etc, and also can help the user with some brainstorming & refining of more ideas.

Another path to independent judgement is to forget about asking ppl to offer short snippets of their opinion.

Imagine this:

We ask an open ended question.

Users answer how they like, written, voice message, loom etc. This allows them to tap into their stream of consciousness. not restricted.

I-judg determines exact quote snippets from the User’s answers that have Single Point Focus

Return list of snippets to user to edit and drag drop prioritize. On edit, ensure single point of focus.

lazy consensus applies