[tcodina]

Sounds fair. I don't like judging people by their physique and identity indeed, and I think most people would agree with me on this. Taking this into account, your point makes sense - why focus on showing different people based on their identities entirely?

There's a couple reasons as to why I believe that it makes sense in the platform. To begin with, the concept that started off this project 6 months ago was simply to make women more present in people's following lists. This was an entirely identity based project from that point, attempting to increase & amplify the voices of a particular group. Needless to say, with a concept set up & validated, I kept going in the same direction.

Secondly, while some of the filters of the platform are identity-based (ethnicity, gender, LGBTQ...) I also implemented multiple based on their background (low-income, migrants, language...) as well as based on their interests. I plan on expanding this group further, as I find it extremely valuable to better diversify our feeds. There is much more other than whether someone is a man or a woman, a person of colour, or a person with disabilities.

There is a third reason, one which I might not be too fond of, but thing is, in order to achieve diversity, people tend to prefer going about it through people, faces, and real identities. As a rather "private" and ambiguous person online, I've noticed how hard it has been for me to have recognition or validity, since all in all people can just judge me by my work and ideas. Had I gone this path with the platform, it would have likely failed, and I could have not contributed to solving this issue.

All in all, your idea is good in an ethical perspective, but when it comes to its implementation, it's absolutely useless, unless you change people's mindsets (very hard, specially because you also have to change some people's mindsets in terms of diversity already...). Then again I will see if I can implement something like this in the future, I think I might be able to figure something out. Thanks for your insight!

[matte_black]

Your platform is not changing minds. It's reinforcing beliefs. Beliefs that say who you follow is more important than what you follow.

If a racist reads some amazing tweets they find interesting and later discovers they were written by members of races they don't like, that could change a mind.

If a diversity fanatic reads some great tweets and later discovers they were all from straight white males while the boring ones were from a very diverse group of individuals, that could change a mind.

But if all you do is provide a way for diversity sensitive people to pad their following lists with socially approved diverse individuals, you're not changing anything. You're giving people a way to pat themselves on the back and feel like they are doing their part. You're building new cliques and organizing new armies for future social media wars.

[tcodina]

Okay, that last paragraph really got me, is that really what you think diversity-concerned people think about diversity? Filling a quota, being politically correct... I beg to differ. While it's true there's always the kind of people who are part of a "hivemind" (there's those everywhere, blame the media, trends and multiple other sources), most people are aware of the true issue behind the topic - it's a matter of putting yourself in the shoes of the minorities. The problem is simple, say you are a trans woman of colour, from a low-income background & a migrant. Do you think their opinions are taken seriously, they are socially accepted in general, people don't hold any prejudices against them, and most importantly, they have a voice? Don't you think that oftentimes, people who are not the "norm", come from backgrounds different to yours or are simply of the other sex don't get as much value or visibility as say, a white american man? Sure enough recent diversity efforts have turned that around a bit, but I still think that for several groups, almost nothing has changed. I strive to make lives better for everyone, and I think that this issue in particular, were it solved, would help a lot the underprivileged. What about their ideologies, their thoughts, what if they are terrible people? This happens, but I still support allowing them to have a "basic dignity" to work upon. Overall, I just seek equality, that is all.

[matte_black]

I think the diversity-conscious will look at a statistic such as "80% white men, 20% everyone else" and see that as a problem to be corrected rather than as the natural outcome of a complex series of events compounded throughout many generations. Absolutely.

Straight white american males are so boring, so standard, so unremarkable in their appearances and their backgrounds that people can't help but focus on what they are saying instead of who is saying it.

These diversity play's that highlight people's status as minorities inevitably fail because they can't divorce who a person is from what they want to say. By making us pay attention to who a person is and making us self-conscious about who we follow and don't follow we ultimately distract ourselves from what matters: content.

It would be incredibly grating if I had to be reminded someone was part of an underrepresented group every time I interacted with them, to the point that I would just stop interacting with them because of it.

Real diversity is not a conscious effort. I've seen it. A bunch of people of different backgrounds come together, work on something, and go home, and no one even realizes or comments how diverse the group is. Nor do they even care. That would be weird. As weird as being in a conference room of white men and blurting out "Hey guys! We're all straight white males!"

I'm curious what the impact on your site would be if you removed all language of diversity and simply presented the people there as interesting people to follow, not even giving the user a chance to realize you are over representing minorities and playing into their guilt of following mostly straight white males. Would your site still receive such acclaim, or would it fold like a house of cards? We'll never know. You'll never know.