Platform's Guidelines

StarkTalk is a space for serious thought and calm disagreement, bringing together professionals who believe that even in times of intense confrontation, dialogue remains not only possible, but necessary.

Every discussion on StarkTalk starts with a clearly formulated problem or dilemma. A contributor—who also acts as the moderator—frames the issue and invites two experts to present their positions. These positions may diverge sharply, but the goal is never confrontation for its own sake. The aim is to understand one another, test assumptions and explore potential outcomes.

From there, discussions unfold in several layers:

1. Expert Exchange

Contributors respond to one another’s arguments, clarify points of disagreement and challenge underlying assumptions. The moderator’s role is not to arbitrate who is “right”, but to keep the exchange focused, structured and substantive.

2. Questions and Clarifications

Members can submit questions linked to specific arguments: ambiguities are addressed, logic is tested and blind spots are exposed. Contributors respond directly, helping to refine their positions and make it more transparent for those following the exchange.

3. Sandbox and Proposals

StarkTalk is not only about debate; it is also about ideas.

Participants can submit proposals—i.e. practical recommendations, policy ideas, analytical frameworks or new initiatives. These proposals are gathered into a growing bank of ideas, where members and contributors can comment, exchange views across roles, and vote to express their support for promising concepts.

The aim is always to move from disagreement to reflection, and from reflection to potential solutions—without forcing artificial consensus.

To keep debates focused, readable and analytically rigorous, StarkTalk follows a clear discussion structure with set length guidelines:

• Topic Introduction (up to 250 words)

The moderator introduces the topic by outlining the core dilemma, strategic context and key questions at stake. The aim is to frame the problem clearly rather than argue a position.

• Contributors’ Positions (up to 800 words each)

Each contributor presents their analytical position. These positions are expected to reflect distinct or contrasting perspectives, grounded in professional experience and evidence.

• Questions to the Positions (up to 280 words)

Members may submit focused questions addressing specific arguments, assumptions or implications raised in the positions.

• Responses (up to 700 words)

Contributors respond to questions, clarify their reasoning, address criticism and refine their arguments.

These guidelines are intended to encourage depth without excess, discipline without rigidity, and clarity without oversimplification.

4. Roles on the Platform

StarkTalk has three levels of participation:

• Visitors

No registration required. Visitors can freely browse open topics, read positions, questions, answers and published proposals.

• Members

Members have access to all discussions, including restricted ones. They can ask questions, participate in the Sandbox, submit proposals, comment and vote.

• Contributors

Contributors are verified experts. They can create and moderate topics, present positions, respond to questions, and publish proposals. Each contributor moderates the discussions they initiate.

This structure helps discussions to remain focused, informed and free from noise—while still open to diverse perspectives.

5. Anonymous Participation

StarkTalk was created on the clear understanding that many highly qualified professionals cannot safely speak in public under their own names.

For some—particularly Russian experts—this is a matter of personal or professional risk. As we developed the platform, it became clear that some Western experts face similar constraints, whether political, institutional or corporate.

For this reason, StarkTalk offers anonymous participation for professionals whose expertise is valuable, but who prefer not to disclose their identity publicly.

In such cases:

• The administrator verifies the participant’s real identity privately.
• On the platform, they appear under a chosen nickname.
• Their profile displays only their field of expertise and country of association.

This solution is not perfect and we are fully aware of the issues it creates. However, in some cases, it is the only way to ensure that important contributions are included.

Anonymous members and contributors have exactly the same rights and responsibilities as other participants.

6. Applying to Join StarkTalk

StarkTalk is selective by design — not to be exclusive for its own sake, but to protect the quality of discussions and foster a professional atmosphere.

To apply, prospective members and contributors are asked to provide:

• Full name and email address
• Country of association
• Workplace and position
• Areas of expertise and a short biography
• Profile photo
• Password for login

Applicants are encouraged to share as much relevant information as possible, especially if their name is not widely known. Applications are stronger when candidates clearly explain how they see their role on StarkTalk and what they hope to contribute.

What happens next:

1. You confirm your email address.
2. The administrator reviews your application.
3. If approved, you are granted member status (and, depending on expertise and engagement, contributor status).

Visitors can continue to explore open content without registering.

7. Why This Matters

This selective process is essential to what StarkTalk is trying to achieve:

• A calm, professional environment where experts can exchange ideas without propaganda, activism or performative outrage.
• StarkTalk does not aim for visibility, scale or speed. It values thoughtfulness over immediacy, expertise over volume and dialogue over positioning. Even a small community of serious professionals, engaging honestly and respectfully, will be enough to make the project worthwhile.

A Note on Time Horizons

StarkTalk deliberately prioritises long-term thinking over reactions to the daily news cycle. Discussions are not expected to follow breaking events in real time. Instead, the focus is on underlying dynamics, strategic consequences, structural constraints and decisions that unfold over years rather than days. This distance from the news cycle is intentional, aiming to provoke reflection rather than reflex reactions.

Disagreement as a Feature

Disagreement on StarkTalk is not a problem to be managed—it is a core feature of the platform. Participants are not expected to converge on shared conclusions or “common positions”. On the contrary, StarkTalk is built on the belief that well-articulated, professionally grounded disagreement is often more illuminating than premature consensus. What matters is not agreement, but the quality of the exchange.