"Since SEAS is meant to be used by a community of analysts, it must address issues of privacy. When an analyst is in the early stages of argument development, they might not want their work to be accessible by others. During development, they might want certain individuals or groups to aid the process by reviewing or contributing to the process. Even when an argument is complete, they will want to control who it is that will be allowed to see the results. Further, when an argument is used as evidence in support of another argument, then that argument serving as evidence must be guaranteed to persist in its current state to guarantee the integrity of the argument it supports."
The guarantee to persists over time is basic for what is typically understood as "publication." In this sense, AGORA-maps are not "published," because,
they can be deleted any time by the creator
they are not stable in the sense that other people can add to them, and trolls can damage them
they are not stable in the sense that they can be moved in and out the World of Arguments, and within the WOA.
they do not have a unique location like a DOI that would allow to reference them in bibliographies and similar instruments.
What should be done about this?
It should be possible to "publish" maps in the sense of creating an indestructible, unchangeable, and unmovable entity with a unique identifier. Our map ID can be part of this identifier, but it should be embedded in something publicly available. I guess I should talk with our library experts about this. Publication in the usual sense of the word could either be achieved within the software or outside of it. The former is risky because it depends on the persistence of the software for eternity. The latter is constrained because we could probably only do it in the form of pdfs that are archived somewhere.
We need a new word, a new term for what we call by now "publish" in the UI. Something that captures the idea of "putting an argument map into the public sphere for becoming supported by further arguments, criticized by objections, and commented on by comments, questions, and friendly amendments." Maybe "we should start using "agora" as a verb; "agorizing" could mean just what I put in quotation marks above. Any better idea?
At the end another quote from the same source:
Arguments "are guaranteed to persist, that is, they will continue to exist; no such guarantee is made for unpublished arguments, templates, collections. As a consequence, only published objects can be reliably cited, much as only published works are (typically) included in bibliographies so that the reader has a real opportunity to obtain and read them. Unpublished arguments, templates, and collections are distinguished from published ones in that they are unstable i.e., likely to change in content. Published arguments, templates, and collections will not change. Finally, unpublished objects are distinguished from published ones in that their authors are given write access, while published ones restrict access by both their authors and audiences to reading."
The following made me thinking, it is from the end of http://www.ai.sri.com/~seas/concepts.html:
"Since SEAS is meant to be used by a community of analysts, it must address issues of privacy. When an analyst is in the early stages of argument development, they might not want their work to be accessible by others. During development, they might want certain individuals or groups to aid the process by reviewing or contributing to the process. Even when an argument is complete, they will want to control who it is that will be allowed to see the results. Further, when an argument is used as evidence in support of another argument, then that argument serving as evidence must be guaranteed to persist in its current state to guarantee the integrity of the argument it supports."
The guarantee to persists over time is basic for what is typically understood as "publication." In this sense, AGORA-maps are not "published," because,
What should be done about this?
At the end another quote from the same source: Arguments "are guaranteed to persist, that is, they will continue to exist; no such guarantee is made for unpublished arguments, templates, collections. As a consequence, only published objects can be reliably cited, much as only published works are (typically) included in bibliographies so that the reader has a real opportunity to obtain and read them. Unpublished arguments, templates, and collections are distinguished from published ones in that they are unstable i.e., likely to change in content. Published arguments, templates, and collections will not change. Finally, unpublished objects are distinguished from published ones in that their authors are given write access, while published ones restrict access by both their authors and audiences to reading."