Standpedia, a new site by the makers of Standpoint, lets you contribute to what the makers call, a social encyclopedia of belief. Similar to Standpoint, Standpedia lets you submit a question or belief, add some related information, and then allow others to agree or disagree. But Standpedia takes it a step further by allowing users to make a map of supporting reasons and links for any side of the question. Although Standpedia is fairly new, I can already tell the site is great for not only supporting your beliefs but for learning as well.
The way it works is simple. As a viewer, pick a question on the main page or search about a specific topic and select a question. You will then be directed to a page with the question and reasons/links that other users have added supporting their stand on the question. On the left is an overview of answers as well as latest comments and on the right is a map that allows you to easily view all reasons/links, each connecting to it’s parent reason. Any user can add a supporting reason to an existing reason, linking them together, or add a new reason to the question. Users can also login and add their own question, preferably a controversial one to get users to contribute.
I’ve always liked Standpoint because you can simply signup and share your beliefs in a matter of clicks, although for a more informative and detailed site, Standpedia is the way to go. What makes it so great is that users can add options to a question and users can support them with unlimited reasons. For example, one question asked, “Should we leave Iraq?” Many users added the options (yes, no, etc.), and others added supporting reasons to each option. It’s like an ongoing discussion for each option to the question and makes for a very interesting and informative read. The service is neat, although one problem is getting users to cooperate with relevant information. It’s like a wiki for opinionated questions and there are some questions that have users adding pointless reasons that just clutter the system, although this was to be expected.