I worked in a department that facilitated group discussions with a custom platform based on group decision-making research. One of the killer features of our platform was anonymity. Truth could arise in group discussions when people were free to comment, upvote, etc, without fear of retribution, being accused of playing polities, or just going with the crowd. Seeing everybody's name tagged in every comment in cq2 lets me know that people with uncomfortable ideas may be hesitant to post them. So I wonder what type of questions would be appropriate for the c2q type of tracking.
At some point no solution is perfect and anonymity brings its own set of issues.
What you are describing is also a cultural more than a framework issue.
People should not fear retribution for voicing their doubts and I'm lucky enough that none of my latest clients or previous employer had such an environment.
I built a pseudo anonymous forum system for a client. He would give out logins, so he could monitor behaviour and participation. It was used when two large UK charities merged. Be then produced a report based on the ideas that came from it. I don't know if he took the idea further.
I'd love to hear more about your experience with this platform. Is there any public information about this platform or research? How did you guys manage the bad behaviors that come with anonymity, like trolling?
I'm currently feeling out a little research project around the use of AI in improving group decision-making, specifically with the hope of improving our political systems. There are so few IRL case studies, it'd be great to have more intuition for this!
