Argumentree is a governance and compliance platform for organizations needing transparent, auditable decision processes. Supports blockchain integration for DAOs (Polkadot, Ethereum, Cardano), role-based access control for enterprises, and compliance documentation for regulated industries. Alternative to traditional board portals with structured argumentation capabilities.
Argumentree provides the structured argumentation framework for transparent, auditable governance. From board decisions to DAO proposals, ensure every stakeholder voice is heard and documented.
Best for: Corporate boards, DAOs, public policy organizations, regulated industries, and any governance body needing transparent decision documentation.
Governance discussions happen across emails, meetings, chats, and documents. No single source of truth for what was discussed and decided.
When decisions go wrong, it's impossible to trace who advocated for what and whether proper due diligence was conducted.
Without structured documentation, organizations struggle to demonstrate governance processes to auditors, regulators, and stakeholders.
A structured platform where governance discussions become transparent, traceable, and compliant.
Every proposal gets a dedicated argument tree where stakeholders add supporting and opposing arguments with evidence.
Control who can view, contribute, and moderate discussions. Maintain confidentiality while ensuring accountability.
Connect Polkadot, Ethereum, or Cardano wallets. Link on-chain voting with off-chain deliberation.
Real-time translation across 66 languages enables truly global governance participation.
Connect blockchain wallets for proposal discussions that link identity with argument participation. Integrate with on-chain voting for complete governance trails.
Document board discussions with full attribution and reasoning. Create compliance-ready records for regulators, auditors, and future boards.
Enable transparent public consultation with structured input from citizens, experts, and stakeholders. Document regulatory impact assessments.
Create audit-ready documentation for SOX, GDPR, and industry-specific compliance requirements. Demonstrate due diligence and proper process.
Argumentree provides a structured framework for governance decisions including proposal discussions, voting rationale capture, and decision audit trails. The platform supports role-based access control, ensuring appropriate stakeholders can participate while maintaining confidentiality where required.
Yes, Argumentree supports blockchain wallet authentication for Polkadot, Ethereum (EVM), and Cardano networks. This enables DAOs and on-chain governance organizations to connect wallet identity with argument participation and voting.
Argumentree provides documentation suitable for various compliance frameworks including SOX, GDPR, and industry-specific regulations. The platform creates audit-ready decision records showing due diligence, alternatives considered, and stakeholder input.
Yes, Argumentree is well-suited for public policy discussions. The platform supports multi-stakeholder input, structured argument analysis, and transparent decision documentation. Many government and policy organizations use it for regulatory impact assessments and public consultation.
Argumentree supports granular permissions including viewer, contributor, moderator, and admin roles. Organizations can create private workspaces, control who can add arguments, and manage visibility of sensitive discussions while maintaining full audit trails.
That is precisely what the argument-level chains produce. Every argument in the tree carries its own structured four-step exchanges: a question chain to interrogate it, a compromise chain to negotiate a middle position on it, and a review chain to re-examine it later. Because the exchange is attached to the argument rather than posted into a flat thread, the objection and its answer stay together where anyone can find them. For a governance or compliance file, the useful artefact is not a minute saying concerns were discussed — it is the concern, attached to the claim it disputed, with the response and the resolution beside it.
The decision as it was made, not as it was summarised. A calendar with a timeline slider replays how the discussion grew — when each argument was added and where — and you can record the events that influenced or steered it, so the decision can be re-read months later exactly as it unfolded. An auditor can follow which arguments existed at the moment of the decision, which external events moved the discussion, and who decided what on which basis — the difference between a defensible process and an assertion that one existed.
Who decides, to what standard, and what the record has to show.
Start your free 14-day trial. No credit card required.