ADR-0006: Thread schema — inline counter, required Response, steel-manned only

Status: Accepted Date: 2026-05-19

Context

Threads are the wrestling vessel. Schema must enforce honest engagement with counter-arguments, not theater.

Counter-argument is a required inline section of the thread (not a separate note type). A thread without ## Counter-argument is invalid.
Counter must steel-man the opposition and cite a real critic with source. If valid but no source can be located, include with disclaimer: “Note: source not located — provisional.” Outlandish or strawman counters: deleted, not written.
Prefer one strong counter per thread. Multiple counters allowed only if each is independently strong. AI should suggest consolidation when proposing multiples.
## Response section is required. May say “Still wrestling — [specific unresolved point]” — that is a valid response. Empty Response = bug.
Body cap: 1500 words. Beyond that, split into multiple threads.

Counter as separate note type: rejected — user preferred tight pairing (claim and its specific opposition together, read as one flow).
Optional Response section: rejected — empty Response is ambiguous (forgot? conceded?). Explicit “still wrestling” is more honest and more useful.
Multiple counters as default: rejected — five weak counters reads as bad-faith framing. One strong counter is what makes wrestling honest.
No body cap: rejected — sprawling threads become hard-to-read essays; capping forces decomposition into linked atomic units.

(+) Every thread visibly engages opposition
(+) Readers on the published site see “still wrestling” notes and understand the project is honest inquiry, not closed apologetics
(+) Forcing split at 1500 words drives more linking, denser graph
(−) Finding real critics with sources is effort (mitigated by the disclaimer escape valve)