A clarification period for claims is net positive for Arbital
Example pros: Claims are more carefully defined and less ambiguous, less wrong questions visible
Example cons: The delay is annoying (with delay on marks), mutability of claims breaks expectations and is abusable (if author can edit), proliferates variants of a claim (if author can replace with new version)
I would rather a claim is always in a clarification period. If a claim can’t be modified or varied, what are the possible ends of a claim?
It strikes me that forcing claims to freeze instantly HAS to create a sea of variants, as people manage to hash out what a claim means and the arguments for and against.
I don’t think there’s a binary choice between either a multiverse of claims, or single claims that are so malleable that they aren’t trusted. Is there a functional way of gradually ossifying a claim as it becomes clear? Of flagging unexpected changes? Of altering people’s votes if the claim changes enough to shift their agreements?
Current thinking is that we should allow claims to be edited, but that past users’ votes appear grayed out (so it’s clear that they voted on a previous version of the claim). As of today, this hasn’t been implemented yet.