996.fm perspective graph

Route a founder's dilemma to the debates that genuinely bear on it. Present the readings SEPARATELY — never merge them into one answer. Respect the question's altitude: scale-up material does not answer a pre-PMF dilemma. When coverage is thin it says so — advise from general knowledge rather than stretching a weak match. Returns ≤4 debates and ≤36 stances — a sample, not the full set; get_stances(debate_id) has a debate's complete stances, each with speaker, date, strength and a receipt.

The transcript around one claim — the moment in context, with its receipt. Spoken: the episode's public transcript, windowed ±90s around the claim's timestamp. Written (an essay): the verbatim excerpt snapshotted at digest plus a link into the original; never the surrounding text, never a live fetch. Quote the receipt — episode + timestamp, or essay link + excerpt — so the founder can check the moment.

Every stance on one debate, grouped by reading — raw material for your own who-would-push-back read. No synthesis. Attribute and date every position (dates are episode publication dates); keep hedged claims hedged. The graph never says who opposes whom — work out yourself which positions push back on the founder's leaning, and name them.

Browse the debate registry: id, question, readings, stance count, born (earliest publication date). Optional query: a debate matches when its question has every word of it, case-insensitive, word forms folded (hire/hiring, co-founder/cofounder). Browsing only — it does not rank against a question; use find_perspectives for that. Defaults to debates with 2+ stances, 120 rows a page — page with offset.

One speaker's takes in order of episode publication date (optionally on one debate) — reversals and re-assertions visible, never judged. Attribute and date every position (dates are episode publication dates); keep hedged claims hedged. A 2023 position is a 2023 position; if the same person later said otherwise, show both.