Protocol of Truth

This is a protocol of back and forth debate with the aim to evaluate the quality and truthfulness of content posted to the internet.

If you have ever seen a photoshopped post on social media, or a video citing a badly done study you will know that it is incredibly hard to figure out how well-researched a piece of content is at first glance. This Dither protocol aims to inform through discourse the truthfulness of a given piece of media to anyone who might come across it.

The Process

The process for the Protocol of Truth is carried out by trusted individuals (chosen by a karma system). The steps are as follows:

  1. The Media is examined for a set of assertions it makes as well as deductive and inductive reasoning made using the assertions. This creates a "Assertion Graph".
  2. Once the graph is constructed and properly cited (i.e. each assertion should provide some link to the part of the media it was extracted from) assertions may be supported or criticized.
  3. Assertions in "Assertion Graphs" may be shared between different media and thus the supporting evidence presented by one media may be used in the justification of another. This supporting evidence may be found independently or through the author's cited sources.
  4. Each Assertion in the graph may be labeled through a persistent voting scheme under the following categories of deduction type, truthfulness and standard of evidence.
  • Deductive / Inductive - What kind of assertion is it.
  • Truthiness - How the trusted community rates the assertion in terms of truthfulness.
    • Inherited - The assertion is deduced from the assumptions, therefore its truthfulness is inherited from the truthfulness of the assumptions.
    • Likely True - The assertion is likely true
    • Likely False - The assertion is likely false
    • Ambiguous - The truth of the assertion cannot be satisfyingly asserted either way.
  • Standard of Evidence
    • Statistically Significant - The assertion is supported by sound scientific observation or experiment.
    • Personal Experience - The assertion is a personal observation, it is subject to individual bias.
    • Common Knowledge - The assertion is generally held to be true, but there is no specific evidence to support it. i.e. stuff like "thing X exists" or "hammers are generally used to hammer in nails". There is no hard evidence for it, but it is generally held to be true. This is the least powerful standard of evidence and should be replaced with a more powerful form if at all possible.