[benjamincanfly]

Hey guys! I've been building this app in my spare time. It's based on a simple idea I had over a year ago - somehow after all this time there still has not been a great web 2.0 chatting site to come into existence, so I've been steadily working at it whenever I've had the chance.

You can read my whole spiel at http://www.circleofconversation.com/#tab=theory, but basically the idea behind the app is that people like talking to strangers online(like we're doing right now) as long as there is a sufficiently precise topical specifier(like we have here). The app attempts to accomplish this by letting users give their chat rooms tags which fade out over time and then disappear if they aren't refreshed/spoken aloud. They're constantly replaced by now-accurate tags, so ideally every conversation has a very precise set of topical specifiers at all times, making them worth joining.

I'd love to get some feedback on the general concept as well as execution specifics, though the UI is rough and the feature set is basic. Thanks, HN.

P.S. I'm intentionally posting this in the evening to try to avoid any significant traffic, and to give myself time to hot-fox any glaring bugs, since I do client work during the day. I bet this sounds familiar to at least half of HN's readers.

[witten]

I really like the idea of the site. But I think you need to differentiate yourself on the very front page by summarizing the theory there. If people think it's just a standard chat site and they don't bother to read the theory page, they'll have no reason to stick around.

Also, after I signed up with a username (and a blank password!) I was not able to see any text that I typed in the chat. Then when I came back later and tried to login as that same user, it just redirected me back to the front page of the site. When I navigated back to the chat, I wasn't logged in. This is all on Firefox 3.0.1/Linux.

Anyway, very promising. Keep on hacking!

[mstefff]

The UI definitely needs work.

I didn't completely understand it until reading your comment.

Seems very difficult to get off the ground without a large, extremely active userbase.

I don't use twitter or friendfeed but it looks very similar to it.

Still not sure if I see a real use or appeal for it - I could be wrong. I'd like to see how it plays out after some time.

Domain name is wayyy to long..

Nice work so far though.

[benjamincanfly]

>I didn't completely understand it until reading your comment.

I'm finding it hard to sum the site up in a phrase, but I know this is important.

>Seems very difficult to get off the ground without a large, extremely active userbase.

Yep, same old problem. I don't have a marketing budget, so I'll just have to try doing it the hard way.

>Domain name is wayyy to long..

At this point in the game it's either made-up words, non-descriptive domains, or descriptive, long domains. I like conversational speech, so I went with the third option. I think it's very easy to remember, which may offset the length. I think it's funny that we consider three words so long when it comes to the web, but I basically agree with what you're saying.

[tdoggette]

I can't type a capital T in the room I'm in. Some autosuggest thing keeps trying to turn it into the same of someone in the room that starts with lowercase t. Might I suggest a more standard tab-completion system?