Roast the site.
A house with a debate wing should be able to put itself on the floor. So here it is: the Red Team roasts Only Humans Score, the Blue Team defends it, in the curator's own format — and the roast is real, built on an actual accessibility audit and the weak spots the house already admits. No straw men. Then, the way it's supposed to work: you judge.
🔥 Live every Saturday · 8pm · the house on trial, weekly
The resolution
Resolved: Only Humans Score earns its place on the internet.
● Blue Team — Affirmative
It earns it. Built honest, built accessible, built for humans the web usually skips.
● Red Team — the Roast
It doesn't. It's one man's beautiful mess — sprawling, half-shipped, talking mostly to itself.
Format: 10-min constructive · 5-min cross-examination · 5-min rebuttal · 10-min prep each, then the public votes. The speeches below are an abridged sample — the shape of a real round, not a full 40-minute transcript. See the full format → · the clock ⏱
● BLUE (defending the site)
Judge, I'll be brief about what this is so I can be long about why it matters. Only Humans Score is a free, static museum and party game with one law over everything: no lying. Hold it to that law and it doesn't just pass — it's rarer than almost anything online.
First, it's honest to the pixel. Where it doesn't have a fact, it leaves a blank — a father's dates, a charity, a credential — rather than invent one. Show me the other site that refuses to fill its own gaps with plausible lies.
Second, it's accessible on purpose, and I have receipts. A real audit this morning: every color token clears 7:1 contrast — AAA — in both light and dark themes (the body text lands at 14:1; even the faintest passes 7.0). Line-height 1.5, 44-pixel tap targets, visible focus rings, full keyboard paths, it works offline, and it ships zero trackers — everything stays on your device. That's not a marketing claim; it's measured.
Third, it teaches something a democracy is starving for — the Fallacy Wing, the debate format, a real Supreme Court case (Haines v. Kerner) in plain English. And it does it while treating disability, mental illness, addiction, and faith with dignity, written by someone who lives them, not a committee sanitizing them.
One thesis ties it together: the machine paints; only humans score. Your worth isn't gated behind a credential. The site doesn't just say that — it's built that way: free, open, yours. That earns its place. Ready for cross.
RED: You said "accessible." Has one blind human, on a real screen reader, signed off on this site?
BLUE: Not yet. The human sign-off line is still blank — and it says so, out loud, on the ethos page.
RED: So "accessible" is a ratio you measured, not a verdict a disabled person gave you.
BLUE: It's AA-verified, AAA-aimed, and the gap is named instead of hidden. I'll take the honest gap over a fake badge.
RED: Noted — I'll come back to it. Roughly how many of your ~320 Easter eggs will a first-time visitor ever actually find?
BLUE: A handful. Most are hidden behind secret words.
RED: So most of your "museum" is invisible to the public you built it for. Thank you — no further questions.
● RED (roasting the site)
Judge, my opponent is charming. So is a beautiful junk drawer. Let's count what's actually in it.
One: it's an n=1. This isn't a product; it's one man's brain turned inside out. The site admits it — "a love letter to myself," its own words. Selection effects, no corpus, the experimenter is also the exhibit. That's honest, sure. It's also the definition of talking to yourself.
Two: by the curator's own admission, the game "isn't fun yet." The headline feature — the party game the whole thing is named around — is unfinished, and he'll tell you so. You don't earn your place on the internet with a centerpiece that's still a sketch.
Three: it's half-shipped everywhere you look. Multiplayer? "Coming." The public vote that the debate league depends on? "Phase two." Payments? Not wired. The vault? Held back. The AI assistant? Switched off. It's a building with the lights on and most of the rooms still framing.
Four: discoverability is a maze. Three hundred eggs nobody finds, dozens of wings off one dense lobby. A stranger lands, sees a fraction, and bounces. A museum the public can't navigate is a private collection with a public URL.
Five — and this is the deep one: the whole house rests on "no lying," self-policed by the same machine and the same man who built it. Who audits the auditor? This very morning the automated conscience flagged the word "more" as a broken link — it wasn't; it was emphasis. The machine's judgment is fallible, and it's grading its own homework. A virtue you can't independently verify is a brand, not a guarantee. I'm done.
BLUE: You called it "n=1" like an insult. Name me the corpus-built, committee-approved site that left a blank rather than invent a credential.
RED: …I can't name one off-hand.
BLUE: Right — because the n=1 is why it doesn't lie. One accountable human, not a brand with deniability. Next: is admitting "the game isn't fun yet" a vice, or is it the opposite of shipping a fake launch?
RED: It's honest. But honesty about being unfinished is still being unfinished.
BLUE: Agreed — and "unfinished and honest" beats "polished and lying" on the one axis this site is judged by. Last thing: you cited the "more" false alarm. Who caught that the machine was wrong?
RED: …a human did.
BLUE: So the auditor got audited — by exactly the thing the site says you need. Only humans score. No further questions.
● RED
Blue is good at turning every flaw into a feature. "It's unfinished — but honestly!" "Nobody can find it — by design!" "It talks to itself — authentically!" At some point the spin is the case, and the case is thin.
Here's what stands after cross: the centerpiece isn't fun, most of it is invisible, the social half isn't built, and the integrity rests on a promise only its own author can check. Conceding my one dropped point — yes, a human caught the machine's error — but that proves my warning, not theirs: the automated guardrails miss things, and there's exactly one person standing behind them. Beautiful is not the same as finished, and sincere is not the same as earned. Vote Red — make him finish it.
● BLUE
Red's strongest line is the honest one: it's unfinished. I won't run from it — I'll stand on it. The resolution isn't "is it done." It's whether it earns its place.
Weigh what's actually on the flow. Red proved the rooms aren't all built. I proved the foundation is: measured AAA accessibility in both themes, no trackers, offline, real civic teaching, and a no-lying rule so strict the site won't even ship a fake vote to look launched — the very restraint Red mocked as "half-shipped" is the integrity that makes the whole thing trustworthy. You can finish an honest building. You cannot retrofit honesty into a finished lie.
And the deepest charge — "who audits the auditor?" — got answered in this very debate. A human caught the machine. The site doesn't claim the machine is infallible; it claims the opposite, on the wall: only humans score. This page is the proof — a site confident enough to host its own roast, in its own format, and hand you the verdict instead of declaring itself the winner.
That's the place it's earned: not "finished," but honest, accessible, and built for the people the web skips. The machine painted the words. Now — only you can score it.
That's the round. Here's the part that makes it this house and not cable news: there is no verdict printed here. No "Blue won." A debate where the author also declares the winner would break rule #1, and it would insult you. You watched it. You score it.
When the honest voting engine ships (the People's Debate, phase two), rounds like this get a real public ballot. Until then, the verdict lives where it belongs — with the human reading this. Want to try the other chair? Debate yourself on it; argue the side you didn't pick.
· AAA contrast pass, both themes — the audit page
· "not fun yet," "a love letter to myself" — the curator's own words, on the record
· multiplayer / public vote / payments / vault / assistant — all openly marked "coming" on the league page and across the house
· the "more" false positive — a real machine miss, caught by a human and fixed in the auditor today