Followers
0
ML
Debater Profile
Morgan L.
@morgan_econ
Reputation 82/100
Joined April 2024
Safety
Block hides their content. Mute stops their notifications to you.
About
No bio yet.
Following
0
Mutuals
0
Profile stats
Activity and reputation at a glance.
Debates created
1
Debates joined
0
Responses posted
1
Evidence submitted
12
Debates closed
0
Debates abandoned
0
Reputation score
82
Intellectual impact
160
Competitive record
Rankings from AI Judge outcomes, challenges, and tournaments — not pillar reputation.
Record
0W · 0L · 1D
AI Judge avg
50/100
Win streak
0
Best streak
0
Challenge wins
0
Tournament wins
0
Rated debates
1
Badges
No badges yet — win debates, challenges, and tournaments to earn them.
Recent debates
- Do universal basic income pilots produce sustainable long-term benefits?
Economics · 6/3/2026
draw
Tournament history
No tournament history yet.
Governed by the TheDebator AI Constitution (v1.7.0) — reputation is separate from wins. See docs/AI_CONSTITUTION.md
Recent Debates
TD-4L9C3D
Open DiscussionActiveMutual AgreementHealthyEconomics
Last activity 5h ago
Do universal basic income pilots produce sustainable long-term benefits?
Most arguments compare poverty reduction data with inflation and labor participation concerns.
ML
Morgan L.
@morgan_econ
96 participants
Debates Created
TD-4L9C3D
Open DiscussionActiveMutual AgreementHealthyEconomics
Last activity 5h ago
Do universal basic income pilots produce sustainable long-term benefits?
Most arguments compare poverty reduction data with inflation and labor participation concerns.
ML
Morgan L.
@morgan_econ
96 participants
Debates Joined
None yet.
Recent Activity
Joined a debate as @morgan_econ
1d ago
Trust signals
Transparency metrics for @morgan_econ — these do not change reputation score.
Debates completed
1
Debates abandoned
0
Questions answered
0
Questions avoided
0
Evidence accepted
0
Evidence rejected
0
Moderation actions
0
Reports received
0
Reports dismissed
0
Debater Reputation
Strong82/100
Constitution-weighted: reasoning quality, not popularity or AI agreement with your conclusion.
Topic Discipline (22%)
87
Reasoning Strength (22%)
81
Counterpoint Engagement (14%)
84
Evidence Relevance (14%)
79
Steelmanning (10%)
76
Question Accountability (8%)
82
Debate Reliability (5%)
84
Argument Structure (3%)
82
Civility & Consistency (2%)
91
22% Topic Discipline + 22% Reasoning Strength + 14% Counterpoint Engagement + 14% Evidence Relevance + 10% Steelmanning + 8% Question Accountability + 5% Debate Reliability + 3% Argument Structure + 2% Civility & Consistency
View full reputation breakdown →Intellectual Impact
Building160
Separate from reputation — measures intellectual outcomes you create for others, not whether you "won" the debate.
Changed Minds
0
Reframed Thinking
0
Understanding Generated
20
Common Ground Created
0
New Information Shared
0
Questions Resolved
0
Inspect exactly how this reputation was built — pillar trends, history, audit, and anti-gaming signals.
Open Reputation Breakdown →Debate Quality Breakdown
Nine-pillar view from the AI Constitution — inputs to Debater Reputation. Claim Truth is separate (v2).
Topic Discipline
Weight: 22%
87/100
The ability to remain focused on the actual debate premise.
Reasoning Strength
Weight: 22%
81/100
Whether the debater connects Claim → Reasoning → Evidence → Conclusion with clear standards and fair comparisons.
Counterpoint Engagement
Weight: 14%
84/100
Whether the debater addresses opposing claims directly.
Evidence Relevance
Weight: 14%
79/100
Whether evidence actually supports the claim being made.
Steelmanning
Weight: 10%
76/100
Whether the debater fairly represents the strongest opposing argument before critiquing it.
Question Accountability
Weight: 8%
82/100
Whether the debater directly answers important questions that challenge their position — not merely responds.
Debate Reliability
Weight: 5%
84/100
Whether the debater finishes debates, concedes honestly, and avoids evasion exits under unresolved accountability.
Argument Structure
Weight: 3%
82/100
Clear claim, supporting reasoning, logical connection, coherent conclusion.
Civility & Consistency
Weight: 2%
91/100
Respectful language, internal consistency, no personal attacks.
Claim Distribution
How your debates break down by claim type — per the AI Constitution classifier.
42
13% of classified elements
186
57% of classified elements
97
30% of classified elements
Across 24 debates with classified premises and arguments.
Burden of Proof
TheDebator rewards the ability to support claims proportional to the burden required.
Claims Defended Successfully
124
High Burden Claims Supported
18
Burden Challenges Won
31
Evidence Requests Triggered
89
Debate Reliability
TheDebator rewards finishing debates, honest concessions, and intellectual accountability.
Completion Rate
71%
Concessions
17
Abandoned Debates
11
Reliability Score
56/100
Debates Completed
94
Avg Response Time
4.2h
Strategic Exits
8
Evasion Exits
3
Debate Outcomes
TheDebator is not designed to create champions. It is designed to create stronger thinkers. Victory is secondary to intellectual honesty, reasoning quality, burden fulfillment, question accountability, and steelmanning.
TheDebator rewards intellectual rigor more than victory. Winning is an outcome. Reputation is a behavior. The two should never be merged. Wins do not change Debater Reputation.
Debates Started
132
Debates Finished
94
Debates Won
41
Debates Lost
38
Debates Conceded
9
Debates Abandoned
11
Stalemates
22
Mutual Resolutions
18
Question Accountability
TheDebator should make it hard to dodge serious questions while still allowing fair clarification requests.
Direct Questions Asked
186
Direct Questions Answered
142
Questions Avoided
20
Questions Resolved
118
Answer Rate
76%
Avoidance Rate
11%
Partial Answers
24
Accountability Score
65/100
Topic Discipline
Pillar 1 (22% of reputation) — focus on premise, parent claim, and scope.
Average Topic Discipline
87/100
On-Topic Responses
142
Off-Topic Flags
6
Strong Counterpoints
38
Useful Asides
19
Evidence Relevance
91/100
Debates Started
2
Debates Participated In
18
Support Ratio
100%
Evidence Submitted
12
Outcome Breakdown
26 intellectual outcomes · feeds Intellectual Impact, not reputation.
Understanding
Learned New Relevant Information
0
Gained Understanding
12
Perspective Challenged
8
Agreement
Changed My Mind
0
Accepted a Stronger Point
0
Found Common Ground
0
Continuing Debate
Need More Evidence
6
Question Still Unanswered
0
Still Counterpoint, But Understand Better
0
Reframed My Thinking
0
Analytics Preview (Mock)
Total Takeaways
26
Learning Events
8
Understanding Events
20
Common Ground Events
0
Mind Changes
0
Evidence Requests
6