Looking for Technical Feedback on an AI-Moderated Multi-User Discussion System

Community
1

Title: Looking for Technical Feedback on an AI-Moderated Multi-User Discussion System

*(If this post belongs to another category, please feel free to move it. This is not a feature request to OpenAI, but a request for technical and design feedback from developers.)

Hello everyone,

I would like to ask for technical feedback and discussion regarding a concept for an AI-assisted multi-participant discussion system.
This is not a request for OpenAI to build something, and I am not submitting an idea to the company.
I am simply looking for insights from developers and researchers who may be interested in the technical challenges involved.

:memo: Concept Summary

I am exploring the feasibility of a system where AI acts as a moderator in a multi-user BBS-style discussion.
The goal is to help make online conversations more constructive and organized.

The AI would:

  • summarize threads into pro / con / alternative structures

  • perform soft fact-checking with references

  • provide simplified explanations for users who struggle with complex threads

  • identify common ground or suggest next steps

  • visualize discussion flow (who contributed what, how ideas evolve)

  • maintain fairness across multiple simultaneous participants

I am not a developer myself.
This is purely a conceptual exploration, shared in the hope that someone might find it interesting or useful.

:wrench: Technical Question

The main challenge seems to be:
How can an AI system fairly manage and respond to multiple participants at once?

In other words:

  • What are good architectures for 1-to-many AI interactions?

  • Would a message routing / turn-taking layer be needed?

  • Could OpenAI Assistants API or Realtime API be adapted for this?

  • Are there known patterns for “AI as facilitator” in multi-user environments?

If anyone has insights, experiences, or references on multi-party dialogue systems, I would greatly appreciate your perspective.

:pushpin: Intent / Context

  • I am not trying to promote a product.

  • I am not requesting OpenAI to implement anything.

  • I do not want money or credit.

  • I simply hope to hear technical opinions from people who build things with AI every day.

If this topic has been discussed before, please feel free to link me to relevant threads.

Thank you very much for reading, and I appreciate any feedback you can offer.

— Anonymous (“Suteneko”)

2

Towards implementing automated moderators and facilitators, it might be useful to consider: how can AI systems best ask and answer concrete, procedural questions about man-machine multimodal conversational transcripts?

Metadata about topics, goals, and rules could enable or simplify such systems asking better questions about conversational transcripts.

Internet forums, their areas and subareas, and their discussion threads could allow users (in certain roles) to be able to create, affix, and edit metadata, e.g., about topics, goals, and rules. Note that, during some longer structured conversations, subtasks having subgoals might open and close.

Abstractly, is a conversation: on its topics, moving towards its goals and objectives, in accordance with its guidelines and rules? If not, what sorts of useful messages and feedback could AI moderators or facilitators provide?

Without metadata, human and AI moderators or facilitators would have to, I think, otherwise be able to access, obtain, or infer topics, goals, and rules to be able to ask and answer concrete, procedural questions while simultaneously being able to provide participants with aggregated helpful messages or feedback.

As interesting to you:

  • An emerging standard for conversational transcripts: vCon.
  • Some datasets for Q&A about or grounded in transcripts: MeeQA and MISeD.
  • Omnipedia automates article review using specified manuals of style.

Some of the concepts shared in the Concept Summary section appear to involve functionalities beyond those directly based upon Q&A about conversational transcripts. So, while Q&A about conversational transcripts will hopefully be useful, there appears to be more topics and features to consider as well.

1 Like
3

Hi AdamSobieski, thank you very much for your thoughtful comment.

Regarding topics, goals, and rules for conversations,
I understand your point that having users with certain permissions create, copy, or edit such metadata — and exposing it to both AI systems and general users — could be very useful.
Indeed, asking AI to automatically infer all of this metadata may be quite challenging.

In my initial concept, I only imagined rather simple interventions such as:
“If the discussion drifts too far, the AI gently reminds participants of the original topic.”
Since this system could also be used for brainstorming with AI involved, I thought some degree of topic drift might even be acceptable or desirable.

Thank you very much for providing the references and resources.
I will take a closer look at them.

1 Like