1. What You Are Reading
This is a civic design essay. It’s not a pitch, white paper, or research submission. It’s an exploration—part concept proposal, part system sketch, part cultural provocation.
The core idea is technical: a lightweight, modular tool to highlight flawed reasoning in digital conversation. But the surrounding context is human. Tone, trust, and interpretation matter as much as model performance. So this paper moves between domains—language models, argument theory, pedagogy, and UX—and switches tone often. Some sections are nerdy. Others are more playful, skeptical, or intentionally jarring.
If that feels uneven, it’s on purpose. Structural humility isn’t just a design constraint—it’s a writing constraint, too.
This is for builders, educators, interface designers, and critics. You don’t have to agree. But if it makes you pause, test, or reframe, then it’s doing its job.