We are building arguing software. It's somewhat analogous to JamBoard, but just for arguing. We have a MVP out and documented at docs.arguflow.gg. We are considering building a premium version.
Agreed with @dribcot, “arguing software” is a tad weird.
Would I pay for something like this, as is? Unlikely. Would I pay something similar to this? Yes, and allow me to explain:
I am looking for a software for my team. The purpose of this software is to help my remote team make decisions and then retain those decisions in a knowledge base-like format for future reference.
In this ideal software, there are not only “two sides” but probably “multiple options” with different advantages and disadvantages for us to explore. People can add advantages and disadvantages to options, and also they can introduce new options.
In the end, maybe a voting happens and people provide their rationale for their vote. Obviously, the decision is made by the accountable, but voting and rationale along with options help make this decision. When the accountable makes the decision, they also note their rationale for this.
Then this decision is archived and can be viewed any time with its timeline, but most importantly the end decision and rationale.
Does that make sense?
This kind of software would make sense for any type of organization governmental, private sector or non-profit and I assume that people would pay for this.
"Arguing software" sounds a bit odd. It just makes me think of a digital version of this Monty Python sketch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ohDB5gbtaEQ
I'm assuming that's not what you're building. :)
Maybe a name based on "debate" or "discussion" would work better?
It also reminds me of https://www.kialo.com/. Is it the same idea?
It's somewhat similar to Kialo. The idea is more to be a platform that lets your team host internal arguments to figure out things like tooling decisions, marketing angles, etc. We are very unsure if that's actually something that anyone wants.
Could be interesting ....