(If I had two karma points, I’d start its own thread on the topic, but I’m a lurker and I don’t.)
I’m working (on the side) on a website that enables 1-on-1 conversations on a controversial topic, with someone of the opposing view. You are shown a list of topics, and asked what your opinion is on them (“I don’t know” is an option). Then you are matched to another party that answered differently. You then start a text-based chat with them. Everything is anonymous (your name and avatar are auto-generated).
I am hoping that this could be a tool to reduce polarization and promote active open mindedness. Here’s what I wrote:
“You may not be convinced by their arguments, but hopefully your conversation will lead to a better understanding on both sides. We hope that an interaction with someone with a different viewpoint will lead to reduced animosity toward their whole out-group.”
However, as we get closer to launch, I’m trying to think of how to attract the right kind of users. Here’s a list of who might be attracted to such a site:
Those that hold a strong point of view and want to convince others.
Those that are actively open minded and want to learn about various view points.
Those that just want to debate for debate’s sake.
All of those seem pretty rare. I’m having a hard time trying to figure out how to spin the project so that it’s attractive to a broader audience, and not just people that are normally into rationalism, self-doubt, CMV/etc. My friend suggested that I ask the rationalist community for their ideas, and here we are. Any thoughts here?
I’ll add a datapoint to that and say an anonymous site like that is would tempt me enough to actively go and troll even though I’m not usually inclined towards trolling.
Although I picture it getting so immediately overwhelmed by trolls that the fun would disappear; “pissing in an ocean of piss” as 4chan calls it.
Doubtful. Troll efforts scale better than thoughtful discussion efforts. One troll can easily open multiple windows and surf for the easiest targets, and can get a lot of attention from a low-effort interaction.
As Dagon said, this is troll heaven. From straight shock trolling to concern trolling. If you launch and 4chan hears about it, it would have a field day with it :-/
When creating a new website like this the goal should be to release a minimal viable product. The assumption that those three categories of people are rare doesn’t mean that you can’t find them for your minimum viable product.
The YC advice is to focus on creating a great product for a small audience instead of creating an okay product for a large audience.
(If I had two karma points, I’d start its own thread on the topic, but I’m a lurker and I don’t.)
I’m working (on the side) on a website that enables 1-on-1 conversations on a controversial topic, with someone of the opposing view. You are shown a list of topics, and asked what your opinion is on them (“I don’t know” is an option). Then you are matched to another party that answered differently. You then start a text-based chat with them. Everything is anonymous (your name and avatar are auto-generated).
I am hoping that this could be a tool to reduce polarization and promote active open mindedness. Here’s what I wrote:
“You may not be convinced by their arguments, but hopefully your conversation will lead to a better understanding on both sides. We hope that an interaction with someone with a different viewpoint will lead to reduced animosity toward their whole out-group.”
However, as we get closer to launch, I’m trying to think of how to attract the right kind of users. Here’s a list of who might be attracted to such a site:
Those that hold a strong point of view and want to convince others.
Those that are actively open minded and want to learn about various view points.
Those that just want to debate for debate’s sake.
All of those seem pretty rare. I’m having a hard time trying to figure out how to spin the project so that it’s attractive to a broader audience, and not just people that are normally into rationalism, self-doubt, CMV/etc. My friend suggested that I ask the rationalist community for their ideas, and here we are. Any thoughts here?
I think you missed out
Trolls. Those who want to torment or infuriate people who take a topic seriously.
I’ll add a datapoint to that and say an anonymous site like that is would tempt me enough to actively go and troll even though I’m not usually inclined towards trolling.
Although I picture it getting so immediately overwhelmed by trolls that the fun would disappear; “pissing in an ocean of piss” as 4chan calls it.
I was hoping that the 1-on-1 nature of the service would deter trolls. Their efforts won’t scale very well. Valid?
Have you done research into other 1-on-1 chats services for anonymous participants and see whether those services have a problem with trolls?
Doubtful. Troll efforts scale better than thoughtful discussion efforts. One troll can easily open multiple windows and surf for the easiest targets, and can get a lot of attention from a low-effort interaction.
As Dagon said, this is troll heaven. From straight shock trolling to concern trolling. If you launch and 4chan hears about it, it would have a field day with it :-/
When creating a new website like this the goal should be to release a minimal viable product. The assumption that those three categories of people are rare doesn’t mean that you can’t find them for your minimum viable product.
The YC advice is to focus on creating a great product for a small audience instead of creating an okay product for a large audience.