Everyone flatters your idea. We put it on trial.
Dozens of different AI models examine your idea from every angle: they research real evidence and competitors on the web, prosecute, defend and vote. And you watch it, live.
Write your idea and take it to trial
Inadmissible idea? Your credit is refunded.
Why it exists
Nobody tells you the truth about your idea.
Friends are too polite. Co-founders are optimistic. ChatGPT was built to encourage. You're left with an idea in your head and no honest feedback. That's what the Court is for: a prosecutor tries to convict it, a defender stands for it, and a jury of different AI models disagrees right in front of you. Authority — without the flattery.
The proceedings
A full trial, from charge to verdict.
Each step lights up in front of you, live. Then it's saved to replay.
See it in action
Three real ideas. Three fates.
Complete, unscripted trials: one idea condemned, one saved with concerns, one acquitted. Click a card to watch the full replay.
A social network exclusively for left-handed people to post photos of their daily routine. It targets the approximately 10% of the population that is left-handed and aims to monetize through advertisements.
This idea is found GUILTY of market delusion: it proposes building a standalone social network for left-handers with zero demand signal, no viable path to critical mass, and fatal competition from entrenched platforms that already serve this community.
A Mac menubar app that automatically tidies the Desktop and Downloads folders using customizable rules. It targets any Mac user overwhelmed by numerous files and offers a one-time purchase model without the need for accounts or cloud services.
A technically sound Mac utility addressing real desktop clutter pain, but entering a mature market without a defensible moat beyond pricing and simplicity claims that remain unvalidated.
A payment and credit infrastructure that connects manufacturers, distributors, and retailers in Brazil, facilitating order, payment, and credit processes. It leverages a two-sided network effect and proprietary data to sustain growth and profitability in the wholesale distribution market.
This idea is found INNOCENT: a profitable, high-traction infrastructure play with proven network effects and ERP lock-in, though vulnerable to commoditization if it fails to deepen its credit moat and defend against public rails.
Each card's polygon is the shape of the verdict: the 9 criteria scored by the jury.
The scale
Over 40 AI requests per trial.
Most AI evaluations are one model's opinion. Here, every seat is a different model, drawn from a bench of over 30 models across 20 AI companies.
The 20 AI companies in the cast
AI vs. AI
Not one AI's opinion. It's AI versus AI.
One model accuses. Another reads what it wrote and rebuts it point by point. Then twelve jurors judge the clash — and re-review each other blind, not knowing whose score is whose. That's what turns the score into the result of a contest, not the mood of a chatbot.
The verdict
Calculated by a formula. Not decided by an LLM.
Nine criteria, all weighted equally. The average of the jurors' scores becomes a percentage, and the percentage falls into a fixed band. No model picks the verdict: it comes from a calculation you can audit. An idea that's still just an idea isn't punished for traction or execution only a running business would have.
The nine criteria, equal weight
The method
Not a gimmick. A method.
Frontier research on AI evaluation says two things: replace the single judge with a jury of diverse models, and don't let the AI set the final score. Most tools ignore both. The Tribunal was built this way from day one.
Based on multi-model jury research (LLM-as-a-Jury) for AI evaluation.
The bar
Scores here are earned.
Most evaluation tools approve almost everything. Here the verdict is calculated, convictions happen, and the distribution is public.
Real evidence
Anchored in real pain, not guesswork.
Before the debate, we search the web for pain from people who have the problem and competitors that already exist — with a source link. Every argument is marked: real source or AI reasoning. And if the search finds nothing concrete, we tell you — instead of making it up.
What you take home
The show ends. The value stays.
Reliability
If a juror falls, another steps in.
Dozens of models, with fault tolerance in every seat. If a juror doesn't respond, another model takes over its seat in its place. And if failures compromise the trial, your credit comes back. Live, in a few minutes, and you can replay it whenever you want.
Pricing
Start at $4.90.
1 credit = 1 trial, one appeal included. Credits never expire.
Before anything is spent, the tribunal checks whether your petition is judgeable. If it is inadmissible, the credit is refunded.
The verdict is not the end. Your first appeal is included in the credit: the court cross-examines you on the sentence's weak points, you answer with facts, and the same jury re-votes the 9 criteria (or you just refine the text). The next ones cost 1 credit, each judged against the previous version.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Does this evaluate AI models, like "LLM as a judge"?
We use the same technique, a jury of many models, but aimed at your business idea, not at another AI's output.
Is the score decided by an AI?
No. The models assess criterion by criterion; the final verdict is a formula you can audit.
Is it infallible?
We don't promise perfection. The method reduces bias and is transparent: we mark what's real evidence and what's AI reasoning.
Is my idea public?
No. Private by default; you decide whether to turn on the link to share.
Why pay when ChatGPT gives feedback for free?
A single AI was trained to please you. What you pay for here is a process: over 40 requests to dozens of different models, web research with cited evidence, a real prosecution and defense, and a verdict that comes out of a formula. And if you disagree, you defend yourself: the court cross-examines you and the jury re-votes. It is a different product.
What if I disagree with the score?
You can appeal for free, once per judgment. The court raises the sentence's weak points and cross-examines you; you answer with facts and the same jury re-votes the 9 criteria. New substance moves the verdict; rhetoric doesn't.
Is there a referral program?
Yes, Refer and earn: every user has a unique link (account menu). When someone you referred makes their first purchase, you both earn 1 trial credit. Full rules live on the Refer and earn page.
Put your idea in the dock.
Write it in one sentence. The court handles the rest — live.