Why agreement counts for so little
A jury of people is useful because the people on it saw different things. These did not. They read overlapping piles of the same text, so when they agree it is closer to asking one source three times than to asking three.
Nothing on this page was checked against a source. Every verdict here is a model's opinion about what is likely to be true, and they are all capable of being confidently and identically wrong.
Disagreement is the outcome worth having. It tells you the question is genuinely contested or badly framed, and both are worth knowing before you act.
How this differs from the Arena
The Arena hides the names and asks which answer you preferred. It is about you, and whether your instincts track anything.
The Jury names them and asks whether they agree. It is about the question, and whether it is settled enough to act on. Most people should do the Arena first.
