Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people

After 16 years, I have just launched my game JuryNow. Imagine having a truly diverse panel of 12 real people of all ages, far removed from your peer group, around the world who will be able to give you an instant decision on your question 24/7. No commentary, just a verdict between two choices. You can ask a moral dilemma, or a fashion dilemma (you can upload 2 images), you can use JuryNow to give you an independent perspective on a family argument, or a workplace problem, or even a trivial thought. You can also ask a mini political poll and receive global verdict in real time.

It’s anonymous, fast (under 3 minutes), and...when there are more than 13 people playing simultaneously, completely AI-free.

How do you pay for this priceless fun? With JuryDuty. While you wait 3 minutes for your verdict, You answer other people’s questions. There is no commentary, just a binary choice.

You can ask things like:

“Do I have a moral duty to go to my brother’s third wedding? We have no parents?”

“Do you feel guilty when you kill mosquitoes?”

"Should I take away my mother's car keys? She is 84 and had two near misses this month."

As a 58F, 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.

Would love your feedback! It’s totally free, no sign-up needed for a first play. https://jurynow.app/

if there are fewer than 13 people playing (and it only just launched last week and that was just on Reddit!) then a popup will appear saying your verdict is simulated by AI. But this is just a TEMPORARY feature with the MVP. As soon as there are regular players, it will be permanently dismantled and we will celebrate the power of collective human intelligence!

Show HN: JuryNow – Get an anonymous instant verdict from 12 real people
jurynow.app

First congrats on launching, from personal experience that's the hard part.

Are there filters or monitoring for the more violent or maleficent types of things that people have a habit of gravitating towards? Depending on the number of people online and the balance, I could easily see groups jumping on and choosing the negative or harmful choice for lolz

Hello there! Thanks so much for trying it! Indeed, there is a filter to weed out any hate speech, self harm content, there is also a feature for jurors to report comments, and there is the User Agreement! But indeed, this was a big worry for me and put me off trying for a long time!

For 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 conclusion, or provides leading answers (one about "is it rude" to eat by themselves when they're socially exhausted in a work context -- one is "yes they would be offended", the other "no they won't be" -- well, they certainly may be but it is your right to eat alone, so the answer could have been "they may, but you need to take care of yourself").

The 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't knowledgeable, people who don't care or have no preference, or people who don't want to answer because the answers are skewed towards one side.