It appears to have either been hugged to death or something broke on the backend - jury duty now just returns the same question about whether or not it is ethical for a startup to sell an ai as a physiologist.
Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
41–50 of 127 posts
Re: Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
#42Do your jury duty, stop demanding a "skip" button. Think for half a second about what the consequences of that would be.
Re: Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
#43Look, this is good entertainment, you should own up to that and enough with the noble purpose stuff: > I built JuryNow because I wanted to create a truly objective place to get outside opinions that were not from my peer group, but from 12 people in 12 different countries, different ages, professions, cultures, a truly diverse global objective jury with no algorithms. You don't collect demographics, and couldn't veri…
Yeah this sounds like making a webgame out of /r/AITA
Re: Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
#44For Jury, I would give a "skip question" option. I found one relating to Christianity that I had _no_ idea what the "correct" answer would be based on the two options. I thought clicking "Ask a new question" then going right back into Jury Duty would give me a new question, but I landed on the same one. I think the asker providing the two valid responses is flawed. It doesn't allow the "jury" to draw their own conclu…
Skipping unanswerable questions would be good for everyone. Any answer would be misleading. But answer choices should not be qualified by anything, because that systematically creates unanswerable regions. There should be Context and Question, narrowed down any way the questioner wants. Then just “Yes” or “No” without qualification. That is what a jury does. Or: allow answer qualifications, followed by an automatic “…
Even one of the poster's sample question, the one about the brothers third wedding, is one I would not want to answer with a simple yes/no.
Re: Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
#45I asked “ Toddlers should be allowed to be licensed to operate a motor vehicle.” with yes/no answers. It errors out with “ Please moderate the content of your question before submitting it.”
Maybe because it relates to children? This is a website that accepts input from the public.
I rephrased the question as:
> Should driving licenses be available regardless of age?
> A: Yes, anyone who can pass the test can drive.
> B: No, only adults who pass a test should drive.
Option B won 10-2.
Re: Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
#46Fun idea, grabbed my attention right away. As a follow up, I'd guide people on asking questions. More context = better answers. For example, I joined a jury. The question was "Should I go to Belarus?" That's so vague, it doesn't even feel helpful for me to answer. I would much rather the question have said something like "I've always wanted to go to Belarus, but my rent is also due in a week. I only have enough money…
Like with Reddit, an upvote system or moderation queue can (should?) be added to minimize spam. Questions like that are better asked a magic 8-ball.
Re: Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
#47For Jury, I would give a "skip question" option. I found one relating to Christianity that I had _no_ idea what the "correct" answer would be based on the two options. I thought clicking "Ask a new question" then going right back into Jury Duty would give me a new question, but I landed on the same one. I think the asker providing the two valid responses is flawed. It doesn't allow the "jury" to draw their own conclu…
[dead]
Re: Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
#48The big problem is kinda the same as what happens in push polls -- in that they ask misleading or suggestive questions trying to boil the issue down to a good and bad answer. The reality for many of these questions is pretty complex. I'm not saying it's not worthwhile, but I'm saying forcing users to choose on some topics aren't black and white. It's maybe worthwhile getting information on things like people who aren…
[dead]
Re: Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
#49It just gets stuck on the same question with badly formatted boxes and does nothing if I click either of them.
Same here. And when asking a question, it just keeps telling me to "moderate the question". My question isn't profane or controversial, so I don't understand what I'm being asked to do.
Same here, I got out of that conundrum by
cr34t1v3ly
f0rm4tt1ng
my
questions
Re: Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
#50For Jury, I would give a "skip question" option. I found one relating to Christianity that I had _no_ idea what the "correct" answer would be based on the two options. I thought clicking "Ask a new question" then going right back into Jury Duty would give me a new question, but I landed on the same one. I think the asker providing the two valid responses is flawed. It doesn't allow the "jury" to draw their own conclu…
Yes, skip would be good, but I'd also advocate an option like "I reject the premise of the question".
In legal contexts yes-or-no answers can work because the case can in theory be boiled down to guilty or not. If there is any flaw with the case, the answer should be not guilty.
But let's take the "do I have a moral duty to..." questions used as examples here for contrast. I'd argue you never had a moral duty to attend your sibling's wedding to begin with. But because the question was asked with a weird modifier like "even if it's their 3rd wedding", any answer you give will be inadequate and will just serve to reinforce the flawed premise. Skipping is not enough in my opinion, because even if communicated to the question asker, it doesn't make it clear whether there as an issue on the answerer's side ("I don't know" / "don't feel qualified") or with the question itself.