A prediction market for ideas, where arguments are scored, not just shouted.
The Idea Stock Exchange is a long-term project to build systematic reasoning infrastructure for public discourse. It treats arguments like financial instruments: each claim has both an intrinsic value derived from logic and evidence (ReasonRank) and a market value determined by crowd conviction (Market Price). When the two diverge, an arbitrage opportunity exists. The goal is replacing the chronological chaos of social media with structured, evidence-scored debate that accumulates progress instead of relitigating the same questions forever.
We do not need more civic engagement. We need better organization of the engagement that already exists.
Every claim is scored on three independent dimensions:
- Truth — is the claim accurate and logically coherent?
- Relevance — does the supporting argument actually bear on the conclusion?
- Importance — how much does the argument move the parent claim if true?
An argument's contribution to its parent equals Truth × Relevance × Importance. Scoring is recursive: a claim's score is computed from the scores of its sub-arguments, the way Google's PageRank computed page authority from inbound links.
Independent of the logic score, users invest virtual currency (IdeaCredits) in claims via a constant-product market maker. Buying YES shares pushes the price up; buying NO pushes it down. Prices reflect the crowd's collective probability estimate, separately from whether the claim is logically sound.
When ReasonRank and Market Price diverge, rational actors profit:
| Scenario | ReasonRank | Market Price | Action | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Undervalued | High | Low | Buy YES | Logically supported claim the crowd hasn't caught up to yet. |
| Overvalued | Low | High | Buy NO | Popular claim that doesn't survive scrutiny. |
| Fairly valued | Aligned | Aligned | Hold | No edge. |
Both gaps are visible. No other platform shows you both numbers and lets you bet on the gap closing.
The methodology is documented in detail across an open wiki. Start with the foundations:
- Home page on PBworks — the wiki's entry point
- FAQ and common criticisms — eighteen questions answered, including "who decides what's true," "isn't this vulnerable to brigading," and "won't one political tribe dominate"
- Truth Score — the composite metric and what feeds into it
- Linkage Scores (Relevance) — how the system catches the True-But-Irrelevant pattern
- Importance Score — why an argument can be true and relevant but trivial
- Logical Validity Score — six logic battlegrounds: fallacies, contradictions, evidence trees, metaphor analysis, prediction tracking, validity inheritance
- ReasonRank algorithm — how the scores compose
The methodology is being applied to real debates on Kialo:
- Should Kialo let users post media that supports or weakens each belief? — proposal for a media-list feature with affiliate-revenue sustainability
- Should arguments be debated in separate pro/con sections for Truth, Relevance, and Importance? — adoption of the three-dimension scoring on Kialo
- Should politicians publicly rank the top ten pros and cons for each vote? — show-your-work transparency for elected officials
This repository is a Next.js application:
- TypeScript frontend with React 19 (App Router)
- Prisma 7 with SQLite via
@prisma/adapter-better-sqlite3 - Constant-product market maker for the Market Price layer
- ReasonRank engine for the logic layer
- Tailwind CSS v4
MIT licensed; contributors welcome.
npm install
npm run db:generate
npm run db:push
npm run db:seed
npm run devOpen http://localhost:3000 and head to /beliefs/[slug] to see the canonical belief page — the heart of the product.
- Forward Party Colorado — Process Party platform: parties competing on decision-making methodology, not ideology
- How to Fix Search — applying the methodology to search engines and information ranking
- How to Fix Twitter — applying the methodology to social media and public conversation
Three ways to help:
- Developers: clone the repo, pick an issue labeled
good first issueorhelp wanted. Priority areas include the belief scoring pipeline, the Belief Equivalency Engine, and frontend belief display components. - Researchers and writers: use the Belief Template to add or improve a belief page. Score arguments using Truth, Relevance, and Importance. Classify evidence as T1 (peer-reviewed), T2 (expert/institutional), T3 (journalism/survey), or T4 (opinion/anecdote).
- Everyone: star the repo. Share a belief page on social media. Submit a new belief as a GitHub issue using the belief taxonomy template. Join the discussion in GitHub Discussions.
MIT. Maintained by Mike Laub. Methodology documented on the PBworks wiki; code on GitHub; applied examples on Kialo.