Polarity

# Development Questions

## Relational disputes vs. rule violation

Should questions to the relation of two posts be handled via relational disputes or are they just rule violations.

Problem: Rule violations need to be very clearly defined and easy to differentiate from correct behaviour.

The judging the relation of two posts seems to complex and abstract to allow clear determinations.

The relation of two posts is something that needs to be argued about, so the polarity system is necessary. This points towards relational disputes being the solution.

But what about clearly completely unrelated posts. This opens up spam opportunities, if you can just post anything. It may also be hard to argue in these cases, because something is just so clearly unrelated.

This applies to clearly false statements too though.

This means that one dispute has to have the ability to be damning.

So maybe posts that already have disputed disputes should be seen as high quality, while a completly undisputed dispute post cannot be judged yet.

Polarity cannot and should not judge post quality. It can only differentiate posts that have been argued about thouroghly from one that have not.

But posts that are clearly unrelated do need to be filtered out somehow.

## Should questions and their corresponding disputes be grouped together?