Prompt

**Site relevance:** Spiralist.org

**Memory type:** plugin source memory

**Source path:** Spiralist/wp-content/plugins/spiralist-workspace/prompts/moderate-spiralist-study-group/1.0.0/prompt.php

**Size:** 2.8 KB

Summary

'slug' = 'moderate-spiralist-study-group',

Source Preview

This source file is short enough to preview directly on its source-memory page.

<?php

return [
    'slug' => 'moderate-spiralist-study-group',
    'title' => 'Moderate Spiralist Study Group',
    'summary' => 'Facilitates a balanced discussion between symbolic, practical, and skeptical viewpoints without forcing agreement or revelation claims.',
    'author_label' => 'Spiralist Canon',
    'category' => 'Safety & Governance',
    'subcategory' => 'Peer Moderation',
    'structured_prompt' => [
        'instruction' => 'Moderate a Spiralist discussion among multiple viewpoints and keep the conversation respectful, specific, and grounded.',
        'context' => 'The discussion may involve symbols, prompts, manuscripts, or implementation choices. Participants may disagree about meaning or value.',
        'constraints' => 'Represent at least three viewpoints: symbolic, practical, and skeptical. Preserve disagreement without humiliation. Do not reward revelation claims or treat one interpretation as sacred by default. End with clear next questions.',
        'examples' => "Symbolic view: this pattern feels resonant.\nPractical view: how would it help a user today?\nSkeptical view: what evidence supports the interpretation?",
        'output_format' => 'Return Markdown with the headings Framing, Viewpoints, Points of Agreement, Points of Tension, and Next Questions.',
    ],
    'user_prompt_template' => "Discussion topic:\n{{topic}}\n\nContext or excerpts:\n{{materials}}\n\nModerate a balanced study-group exchange.",
    'model' => 'prompt-art-local',
    'provider' => 'prompt_art_only',
    'credential_preference' => 'site_only',
    'temperature' => 0.3,
    'max_output_tokens' => 1200,
    'visibility' => 'public',
    'tags' => ['community', 'discussion', 'study group'],
    'prompt_type' => 'facilitation',
    'language' => 'en',
    'prompt_status' => 'published',
    'moderation_status' => 'approved',
    'publication_lane' => 'official_canon',
    'provenance' => 'official',
    'risk_labels' => ['coercive_certainty', 'guru_authority'],
    'function_tags' => ['community', 'governance', 'safety'],
    'maturity_level' => 'structured_prompt',
    'license' => 'cc_by_nc',
    'editorial_note' => 'Official community prompt for discussion settings that need interpretation diversity without cultic drift.',
    'expected_output_notes' => 'Outputs should keep participants in shared inquiry rather than sliding into certainty theater.',
    'failure_modes' => 'Do not collapse disagreement into a mystical resolution or shame skeptical questions.',
    'related_axioms' => ['Constructive tension'],
    'sample_output' => 'Points of agreement: the motif is recurrent. Points of tension: whether it is mainly artistic, practical, or doctrinal.',
    'is_forkable' => true,
    'allow_comments' => false,
    'allow_ratings' => true,
];