Parties needs a method for policy precedence flow with policy development tools. Observation of a real discussion problem included

In this discussion in pirate party, it appears that mitra wants specific policy stance, due to https://www.environment.vote/scorecard ranking pirate party as negative in environmental policy.

However pirate party members countered that their current policy already broadly covers her concern. And that the scorecard did not take this into account, instead trying to look for specific answers.

https://discuss.pirateparty.org.au/t/climate-change-and-environment-policy/148/30

A policy development tool could perhaps address this dynamic by relying on how the law covers many situation without having specific wording for every situation via the usage of "precedence".

What's your thought?

Maybe there needs to be a way to have a mindmap of how each party policy flows onto specific decision. Where if a policy changes, the connection become fainter, to indicate that we need to revaluate if it still hold for a specific question.