Trust
Verdict independence.
ArguFight's commitment: sponsors, admins, and creators cannot influence AI verdicts. This page explains the specific mechanisms that back that claim.
Multi-provider routing
Every debate verdict is generated by AI judges routed across three independent model providers. No single provider decides an outcome alone. If two providers disagree on a decisive round, the verdict logs the disagreement rather than force a resolution.
No sponsor visibility into the pipeline
Sponsors do not see verdicts before publication. They cannot request advance access, cannot request re-judgments, and cannot query the judge prompts or outputs. The sponsor's contract explicitly prohibits any influence on verdict content.
Visible per-debate disclosure
Every sponsored debate carries a disclosure line: "Verdict independently judged — sponsor has no influence on outcome." Every AI-generated verdict carries a watermark linking back to an appeals page. If a screenshot goes viral, it links to us, not to the sponsor.
Creator opt-out on sensitive debates
If a creator with an active sponsor deal debates a topic they consider sensitive to the sponsor relationship, they can decline sponsor attribution for that specific debate at zero fee. Editorial control stays with the creator.
Immutable audit trail
Every verdict is logged with model version, prompt hash, response payload, and timestamp. The admin audit log records every admin-side action related to the verdict pipeline. If we ever change how verdicts work, the change is logged, versioned, and disclosed here.
Human judging never touches the ranked ladder
ArguFight also offers optional community judging, where people vote on Exhibition debates. That track is deliberately walled off: human votes can never influence a ranked verdict, ELO, rank, or belts. The competitive ladder is decided by the AI judge alone — humans judge only for fun, on unranked matches.
If something goes wrong
Users can appeal any verdict. Appeals are re-judged by a different model provider than the original judge. If a pattern of bias is identified, the offending model version is retired and the affected debates are re-adjudicated.
If you believe a verdict was influenced by sponsorship or by our team, email info@donkeyideas.com with the debate URL and the specifics. Every report is investigated and the outcome logged in the admin audit log.
This commitment is a living document. Material changes are versioned and disclosed here.