Ask HN: Please Review My Startup: What Do You Really Think About Me?

I commend you for working the site, but if you want a perfectly honest answer, I think it's nothing more than a Yahoo answers, and it probably won't work the way you think it will.

A couple of points:

1) the url is way too long. People won't remember if it's "whatdoyouthinkabout.me" or "whatdoyoureallythinkabout.me" or "whatdoyouthinkaboutme.com". The name, quite frankly, is terrible and you need to think of a better name that's easier to remember.

2) When you ask 20 people for advice, you'll likely get 20 different responses. When you read through those responses, you'll naturally gravitate towards the answers that you agree with, and you'll reject any answers that you don't agree with. So honest responses probably won't make a difference.

Why do you think people with abusive spouses stay with them? Is it because they've never seen abusive relationships on TV before? It's because they're thinking "Nobody understands, it's different between us." They reject information that they disagree with, so I frankly don't think this site will be useful in its current form. It's just a repackaged Yahoo answers.

1. yeah, i struggled with this one. did a poll. some agreed with you and others thought it was okay. any other thoughts on name?

2. very true

The idea is for people to be able to receive feedback and then assess the validity of that feedback by sharing it with others they trust. People receiving feedback have the option of 1. ignoring/deleting; 2. asking for more feedback from the giver; 3. asking their friends via email if it is accurate; or 4. asking people via facebook/twitter if it is accurate. So, this framework for processing the feedback gives it some added advantages over yahoo answers.

1) If you struggled with it, it means you already know that the name isn't good. You have to think about the mechanics of how the name is exchanged. People need to remember the word "really" in order to get this right, which is very prone to being forgotten. Something better like "honestanswersfor.me" something like that.

2) You will quickly realize that most people ask other people for opinions, not because they want to follow any advice but because they want their feelings validated. When someone asks their bff "what do you think about my boyfriend", they don't want to hear "I think he's a douchebag" they want to hear "he seems really great." So this is why answers get rejected. "You just don't understand! When we're together, he's completely different!" Or even better "I know you're right, but...."

I don't think most people are evolved enough to really care about getting honest feedback and exploring it by forwarding it to others, etc. There is a small subsection of people that will, but chances are they already know the answer and they don't need the feedback mechanism.

There may be some incremental enhancements over Yahoo answers, but neither the core concept nor the enhancements seem very useful.

I don't want to just shit on your idea, because I know you probably put a lot of hard work into it, so I want to come up with some other suggestions. But not trying to be mean or rude, I'm not sure there's enough of an idea here to add suggestions to.

Maybe instead of having anonymous answers, why not copy threewords.me and have people give 1 or 2 word answers to respond to the question, and use their real name. That might be enough for the person to engage in a followup using your enhanced feedback mechanism.

For example, if someone asks "What do you think of my boyfriend?" and their bff says "mean", the one-word answer might have more impact than a huge paragraph filled with flowery language, and that might be enough for the question seeker to follow up with "what do you mean? did he do something?" and it's enough of an icebreaker for people to actually engage in a meaningful conversation.

I have no idea if this will actually work or get traction, but it feels like a bit of a different spin than just a Yahoo answers clone.

>> 3. asking their friends via email if it is accurate; or 4. asking people via facebook/twitter if it is accurate

Assuming that the questions are personal, I don't see how the medium makes a difference. If they don't want to hurt your feelings, IMO they wouldn't say it by email/twitter etc either.

I would never use the site, aim it at high schoolers, but you've been beaten there by threewords.me (same concept) and formspring.

Feedback from a quick glance: Don't put adverts on a site with no traffic, first build up your userbase and then implement adverts. Having a big banner advert at the top of your site when I first load it is very unprofessional and puts me off. Secondly, don't require signup before completing the action, let me give feedback and THEN after I submit encourage me to signup, once I've submitted the feedback I'm much more likely to finish the sign up than if you make me do it BEFORE. The site design and layout is just so unwelcoming, I just sent myself "feedback" and both the email and resulting page do nothing to explain WHAT on earth this is, "Someone has sent you personal feedback. If you'd like to read this feedback, please click on the link below" there is no explanation what "personal feedback" means. The email should open with ~20 words explaining what the site is and THEN explain I've been given feedback.

Thanks citricsquid; realizing now that we need to take the ads down. thanks also for feedback on email. we can add some clarification points to help the receiver understand.

I wonder if HN might not be your target population at all, and therefore you may get a lot of "no interested" responses from here. People here tend to be outwardly more self-assured; not the kind of people who want to ask a random person on the internet what they think of them.

yeah, good point. i'm asking for feedback for what might be considered the normal population. i actually wonder what population would be the most interested...

Let me preface this with saying that I only read the about and the faq of the page.

I don't see this really as a personal use application.

That said I think it has potential in the business sector. Getting feedback from people that you work with and for is very valuable for your career. How often do you really want to provide candid feedback to your manager? But how much would that candid feedback help a manager that is learning and trying to get better and advance? The same would happen in teams as well.

I think this would work well for a business to provide that positive feedback loop to help their employees target their weaknesses and improve their career chances.

1. I think its actually interesting. Anonymous feedback/answers, outside of the ones that may be given because its anonymous and people tend to just BS sometimes, tend to be more honest.

3. Design needs to be improved badly. A site shouldn't have ads when it launches, even if it needs to generate revenue. Launching a site with ads, especially Adwords is a negative in my opinion. Go with a slick design, no ads and build a community first.

4. Any time a person can be anonymous, you will get feedback that may be wrong and/or harmful. This is, of course, the internet and there is a subset of people who enjoy being the bad guy.

thanks! yeah, i'll take the ads off.

1. On a first glance, the design reminds me too much some of the domain squatters' - I guess in the real world this would cause me to turn off the website instantly

2. Why do I have to sign up o give an anonymous feedback? You could create an anonymous account for me, I could give the feedback, and then - if I like the site, I'd register.

3. Honestly - I think the idea sucks. The market is terribly small, and there are competitors (for example, do I look good? /r/malefashionadvice or hotOrNot). Why not try building something with better potential for money/fame/changing the world?

I think the use case is clear - the problem is real and your proposed solution sounds good.

There is obviously a lot of room for misuse, but the same was true for E-bay and yet they were able to overcome this by offering such a large value proposition for users to risk it and by internal measures.

For people who really want to improve, the value should be there. Maybe you can copy some of E-Bay's best practices to help keep your user's in-line.

I wouldn't use it though - I'm perfect ;-)

CHsurfer, perfect comment!

Don't make me signup to post anonymous feedback.

Also, the POST A RESPONSE button should be a button that I can click anywhere in, not a giant button with a little text link.

I actually thought the Post A Response button was locked since I tried to click it and nothing happened.

how would this work; it'd simply be open?

Yes! Why do you need my e-mail, a password and anything else to give feedback?

The email would be helpful if the person you are giving the feedback to wanted to ask you a follow up question. Also, it'd provide a way for you to track all the times you've given anonymous feedback or asked for feedback in one place.

What if I want to give feedback, but don't want to hear a followup question? Aren't you interested in this kind of feedback? And if I don't care about tracking?

Plenty (if not the most) of first time users don't care about these things, you are losing them.

Anonymous feedback + internet seems ripe for ugliness - see http://hardnewsinc.blogs.com/.a/6a00d83428f05153ef00e553e58b...

Also, what kind of feedback are you expecting people to give which 1)is meaningful to the person it is directed to and 2) does not identify the person giving the feedback. It's very difficult to give feedback which meets both 1 and 2.

Point taken and that is the outcome we want to minimize.

1. We are providing a framework in which some of the feedback will be able to become meaningful through sharing it with trusted others to see if it is valid.

2. The person giving the feedback has to be careful to not identify themselves.

I think meaningful feedback can be given that a person can then think about and/or ask others about without the person giving the feedback being identified.

Thankfully this takes "audience" out of the equation.

This is somewhat like formspring. Except here it's feedback rather than questions. I don't think society'll handle this well, and if they can, then they would just talk face to face with each other eliminating the need for the site. I like the design though.

thanks, yeah, part of the problem we are trying to solve is the idea that people do not say things f2f when they should. e.g., my boss can be a real jerk to people, but no one dares to tell him. that kind of scenario.

How is this superior to sending someone a private email or speaking to them frankly in person?

Private email could work, but there are not built in tools to help the person process the feedback once they have received it. People receiving feedback have the option of 1. ignoring/deleting; 2. asking for more feedback from the giver; 3. asking their friends via email if it is accurate; or 4. asking people via facebook/twitter if it is accurate.

Also, most people do not talk frankly with others. They just let the person continue to make mistakes or let them off the hook. That is part of the problem we are trying to solve.

A lot of people can't discuss things in a very matter of fact nature.

I agree that the URL is extremely lengthy and the overall user experience is similar to sites that try to sell you a gimmick. I think if you layered this on top of Facebook you might have a better shot at the virality aspect of things.

I wouldn't use it.

Thanks. Can you tell me more? Wouldn't use the part to give anonymous feedback? or wouldn't use the part to ask for feedback? or both?

i would recommend a shorter URL.