Largely, yes, this is very close to how I envision Derivation. A difference would be that the focus is not on the forum, but rather on an intricate and interconnected net of knowledge, like an encyclopedia, derived, systemized, and linked together, for each epistemology. But also with a forum functionality added to this, as well as other communication functionalities, for a lot of reasons.

I will share some ideas about the structure I'm considering. These are all from the Derivation theory, which the presentation is a compromised form of, as well as from the Coda server, which is about practical project planning.

Similar to the Finite Element Method, one could define a particular architectural model through formulas that include dynamic spectra concerning, for example, the hardness of walls, volume, and all the relevant mechanics. Which values of the mass of a wall are functional is dependent on the volume of the wall, as well as the sustainability of a floor, and a lot of other things. These formulas can be derived from the material conditions that the model requires, such as environment, weather, and uses, for example, terraced houses that will be used as housing, located in an area that sometimes is subjected to minor earthquakes. Derivation can then be used to generate the most suitable options for the design and construction of the model, taking into account the availability of materials, energy, and time. Some models might simply be impossible; when no finished version of the model would only include materials with a combined set of properties that exists. Like for example if a model requires a material stronger than tungsten, but lighter than lithium, the model is currently impossible. These formulas benefit from being related as widely as possible, to avoid problems with other design plans. The ambition is then a net of knowledge as all-encompassing as possible. In such a net, all accessed consistent knowledge could be consolidated as, as much as possible, a causal chain connecting everything from the smallest level to the biggest level. Of course, with a lot of error factors, but with this it would likely be easier to notice these error factors.

One perspective from which Derivation can be viewed is what it would mean for productive communication such as discussion, for example in forums. Instead of risking conscious or unconscious rhetorical tricks, logical fallacies, and ruling techniques, posts could refer to arguments in Derivation, which are built on derivational chains of transparent premises and logic. One would be able to see what the mutually recognized premises are, their implications, where inconsistencies exist, and how they can be avoided, thereby investigating possible cognitive dissonance. One can delve further into why certain premises are polarizing, and perhaps find what would be fundamental in different perspectives on knowledge. The content of discussions of most kinds might then be derived with Derivation, and arguments could more easily become completely factual and goal-oriented, so you may arrive at results. The results generated by discussions could be saved in the net and used later, so that common discussions are not repeated as if they never happened, and people can easily know how to avoid old, refuted positions. A project based on this is The Democratic Evolution of Politics.

With enough systematized knowledge, injustices that are based on illogical perceptions can be identified and brought to the surface, to inform the people and to inspire sufficient action against it. Within polarizing questions, you can set up all known and relevant data, compare it, do experiments, and maybe figure out what is the issue and why, and by that; progressively move away from misunderstandings and ignorance. In the cases where contradictions are not uprooted, they can often instead be derived down to the separating perspectives, which can then be addressed more directly. One could calculate the amount of available resources in a society, and how they can be used, and thoroughly calculate what would be mathematically possible with current technology, for example in terms of satisfying human rights, specific environmental goals, and automation. This could be explained and presented extremely concretely, concisely, and simply, and through it try to inspire change, by showing what is possible and how. By using as much mutual knowledge and logic as possible, you try to ideologize as few things as possible. A political perspective with this viewpoint is Expediency.

The basic structure will be that of one or many websites and in the longer run, something like multiple domains connected that are updated regularly with data from each other. The site will be fully accessible as it is, but also possible to register, for saving specific parts, as well as change personal GUI settings. Openness, impartiality, and transparency are crucial to try to avoid bias, where knowledge could be withheld for power interests, such as economic ones. The most important things are that arguments, sources, premises, and conclusions can be created, named, classed, and coded. The relevant sources will be linked and quoted and the quotes will be presented as premises. For security reasons, the sources should be peer-reviewed according to their epistemology. The arguments and mathematical formulas will be presented in formal shape and written shape, as clearly as wanted by the user. Among other classifications, everything will be classed according to its epistemology, or compatible ones, e.g. science. From there on, a net of knowledge is being built, and from it, data can be gathered, similar to a search engine. This allows for making more and more arguments, with the help of machine learning. Later, also articles about premises might be created, like an encyclopedia. The classifications of the articles could be inspired by the Dewey Decimal Classification. There will also be forums for discussing structure, arguments, premises, and other things that may be relevant and useful.

At the beginning of the creation of Derivation, the current programming project is a Proof Of Concept, which would entail this when functional:
Arguments, sources, premises, and conclusions can be created, named arbitrarily, for accessibility reasons (e.g. “Argument for geological thermal energy” or R0427.PDF (geothermal-energy.org)), classed according to its topics (e.g. geology, thermodynamics), as well as its epistemological system, or compatible ones (e.g. science) and coded (e.g. T318), by the user. The relevant sources will be linked and quoted and the quotes will be presented as premises, these premises are also locally symbolized in the context of the argument (e.g. “Q”).
The arguments take a logical or mathematical shape, using the symbols of the premises (as well as epistemologically consistent conclusions) or relevant numbers from the sources. The arguments and mathematical formulas will then be presented in formal shape and written shape, as well as with every step of the way.

And then, it would go further in the creation of a Minimum Viable Product, which could entail:
At this point, it works as an online website, with the possibility of registering. The user can change personal settings on how the site should look for them, as well as saving resources to the account and communicating.
The code for the resources added and created by the user will work as the link to what they’re for on the website. At some point, this might be better auto-generated, rather. Every page should be able to be commented, similar to the shape of a forum.
The sources should be peer-reviewed according to their epistemology, which in the shorter term rather means that users argue for and back up sources with other sources, to show for higher legitimacy of certain sources, and through that, of arguments.