Thank you! I try, but it upsets me people feel this way. I made the platform to help users open their minds more, and it seems the people who should be using it are just hating on it.
As someone who has to deal with groups on the internet often (I'm a moderator here), I know how upsetting that can feel. May I offer a tip? Try to remember that the vast majority of the community isn't reacting this way. It's just that most people don't comment.
When you post to HN or elsewhere on the internet, you're broadcasting to a large crowd. Somebody somewhere is probably going to get triggered—that's just statistics. But when it's a public forum, those are the ones who show up to vent their spleen. So comment sections are weighted towards these sorts of reactions, not because they represent the community, but because it's a self-selecting, biased sample.
This leads to the community seeming a lot more negative than it is, which sucks. The only solution I know of is to give more attention to the other data you have: e.g. the upvotes, and any traffic to your site. That's a challenge, because we're hard-wired to take personal communication more seriously, and comments feel like personal communication (though really aren't).
Thank you, I shall try to think more like this. Indeed I am focusing on a minority here - I had great success either way with >700 users, >4K views and $420 from supporters in just 1 day. I should be more grateful of that, instead of focusing my energy on closed-minded people.
I’ve always found that the people who pursue a diversity of skin tones and genders and the like are the most ideologically isolated (“safe spaces” and deplatforming and all that), so perhaps your platform does the opposite. Besides, “diversity” as you define it is mainstream—the people you’re trying to reach are almost certainly inundated with the thoughts and opinions you would try to expose them to.
I initially had a negative reaction but after thinking about it I changed my mind. There is a major need to cut through the algorithmically generated suggestions that provably fuel misinformation, group think, and general hate. Twitter is a great medium to hack at this problem, and the first iteration of a product will always have some (positive or negative) biases in an effort to find itself and move forward on key features and mission.
Personally I think the conversation on this thread needs to stop thinking this product criminalizes content choice. If my interest is engineering blogs and most engineering blogs are written by men its ok for me to predominantly follow engineering blogs. What this product (to me) is there for is when I want to branch out I have an option for doing that in a powerful new way.
Finally (offtopic) I think we do need to have more civil conversations about virtue signaling. I don't think this product or announcement is virtue signaling. But virtue signaling IS a big problem in Silicon Valley, people shouting from the rooftops how they want to do good before quietly slinking back into a board room to do bad.
Good job OP, I'm not a hardcore twitter user but will definitely follow this projects development and wish it the best.
Appreciate your comment, I think it sums up well what I intended to go for with the platform. Taking aside what people might think about diversity, we've seen that ideologies radicalize when we are only surrounded by like-minded people, usually from similar backgrounds. Having the chance to find people based on a variety of filters allows you to discover pretty much any kind of person, and it can contribute to avoiding this issue in particular. Do I think that everyone must equally follow the same people from those different groups? No, not at all. But even having someone outside your bubble can help you broaden your view in a multitude of topics, for sure. Thanks!
First of all, props for shipping this! It says you're only 18 so great work!
I think that people are taking issue with this though:
> Taking aside what people might think about diversity, we've seen that ideologies radicalize when we are only surrounded by like-minded people, usually from similar backgrounds
You've classified people based on gender and sexual orientation but that doesn't actually mean they have different backgrounds. 99% of my upper middle class friends have nearly identical opinions (very liberal for the record). It doesn't matter if they're men, women, lgbqt+... I suspect you'd get more actual diversity by looking for people (regardless of gender or sexual preference) who don't live on the coasts or in major cities.
Fair. I think I might've mentioned this in another comment, but although I've put emphasis on identities, I also take into account background through filters such as language (different cultures), low-income (so not upper class), migrants... I will expand upon these now that I've got a decent userbase.
Cool! Great job taking the sometimes rough feedback too. The more you ship the more haters you're going to get. Take it in stride and do listen to see if people have a point (they won't always). Seems like you're doing just that though, so keep up the great work.