I’ve been working on a browser-based decision tool called JuryNow.

You submit a question with binary options (yes/no or A/B): it could be a moral dilemma, fashion choice (you can upload 2 images), or big life decision, a political poll, or maybe you want a global objective perspective on a family argument?

You will receive your verdict in 3 minutes

While you wait 3 minutes, you “pay” with JuryDuty, anonymously vote on other people’s questions. There is no commentary, no discussion or debate, just a binary verdict.

Then you get your own verdict: 12 strangers from around the world give you a decision. Just human input , fast and anonymous.

It’s free to try, and no sign-up is needed. You can also play a round of JuryDuty to get the idea.

would love to hear your feedbac! (gently does it, I’m a 58F and this is my first game which has taken me 16 years from idea to MVP!)

👉 https://www.jurynow.appbut/ as it’s a brand new MVP and i have just launched, if there are less than 13 people playing, your verdict will be simulated, but this is just a temporary feature which I need to demonstrate JuryNow’s functionality and it will be permanently dismantled as soon as there are regular players across different time zones!

    • JuryNow@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      0·
      7 days ago

      JuryNow is not open-source or self-hostable, and won’t be.

      This is a personal project I’ve developed over many years (16), and I’m still shaping where it goes. I shared it here because it’s lightweight, browser-based, and real-time and not because it’s federated or designed for open deployment.

      I fully respect the open/self-hosting ethos but this is NOT that, and I’d like to be upfront about it.

  • NutinButNet@hilariouschaos.comEnglish
    0·
    7 days ago

    I just spent a few minutes browsing and it was pretty fun! Love the very minimalist design and no requirements to sign up, etc. Just straight to the point for both those asking and those selecting.

    Nice job all around!

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.caEnglish
    0·
    7 days ago

    I like the idea, but it needs a privacy policy. If someone answered 100 of those questions, the insight into their behaviour would be incredibly valuable to bad actors.

    Guaranteeing anonymity would make this much better.

    • JuryNow@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      0·
      7 days ago

      I like the idea, but it needs a privacy policy. If someone answered 100 of those questions, the insight into their behaviour would be incredibly valuable to bad actors.

      Guaranteeing anonymity would make this much better. Good point and yes, that’s something I’ve thought about a lot.

      Right now, JuryNow doesn’t store any personal data or persistent user identifiers. The questions and votes are not linked to individuals in a way that would allow tracking behavior over time.

      Still, I agree that a clear privacy policy is overdue even just to explain what isn’t collected. Thanks for raising this. I’ll prioritize adding it. There is a User Agreement, Liability, Disclaimer etc…but yes, need a privacy policy!

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.caEnglish
        0·
        7 days ago

        JuryNow doesn’t store any personal data or persistent user identifiers. The questions and votes are not linked to individuals in a way that would allow tracking behavior over time.

        Great to hear!

        There is a User Agreement, Liability, Disclaimer etc…

        Are these currently in place? I don’t see links to them on the homepage, or during the sign-up screen.

    • JuryNow@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      0·
      7 days ago

      Hello there, Thanks so much for playing! Indeed, I see it as a game - my daughter insists it’s not a game because you can’t win and there is no competition! It’s definitely fun getting your veredict - some mini dopamine hits there!

  • over_clox@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    7 days ago

    Do you feel guilty when your phone battery goes below 40%?

    • Yes, oh shit, I need to charge!
    • No, fuckit, let it run dead.
  • Captain Janeway@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    0·
    7 days ago

    There should only be 12 jurors (maybe you’ve already done this). People should have to wait in a queue to join a jury of 12. Once you have 12 you all vote within 30 seconds. Everyone should see the results. If a jury is a hung jury, it ends up back in the queue. Majority wins. Users can only appeal once.

    Basically it should mimic jury duty a little more closely. Right now, it just feels like you’re doing a survey.

  • iAmTheTot@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    0·
    7 days ago

    Fun idea. Seems like a lot of people are asking questions that have nothing to do with making a binary choice. I got a fair few “have you ever…?” questions that were about my personal life.

    • JuryNow@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      0·
      7 days ago

      Thanks so much for playing!! you can really use it for a whole variety - from silly trivial questions, to a mini political poll knowing you are getting an answer in real time…and it’s great for fashion dilemmas as you can upload two images and get NOT your family/friends opnion!

  • thefartographer@lemm.eeEnglish
    0·
    7 days ago

    I just reported a question, not because of the content of the question but because the buttons were formatted strangely and clocking on them caused the question to refresh. It was about cassettes vs CDs.

    Other than that, this is pretty fucking legit. What a simple, fun, useful tool! And I mean simple as in “easy to explain,” not “easy to make.”

    Thank you for sharing!!!

    ETA: I just got served either the same question twice (with a different question between each time), or found duplicate questions. If the same question twice, I’d be concerned about individuals skewing results. If a duplicate question is being submitted, it might be helpful (albeit slower) to run word matches against strings and then check the IP address of the submitter (if you record that) on anything with over 90% match and then let that user know they’ve already submitted this question.

  • r00ty@kbin.life
    0·
    7 days ago

    Needs a skip option for questions you’re really not comfortable giving a reply to (I maybe missed it if there). I hit one I really did feel was far too subjective to give a reply to that might even potentially be taken seriously.

    Otherwise a nice idea.

      • ratatouille@feddit.orgEnglish
        0·
        7 days ago

        Allow to skip and answer an altwrnat answer. (if the questioner wish that.) otherwise allow to answer standard excuse like:

        • Please think further, this are not the only options
        • I do not understand the Question
        • You need a better help than a crowd can give you
        • JuryNow@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
          0·
          7 days ago

          Thank you Ratatouile! There is currently a REPORT button, but indeed, i really see a high priority need clearly for SKIP! Do you think it would be confusing to have it as a Joker Card that you can play once (to skip) or does it just need a SKIP button (that you can only use once)

          • ratatouille@feddit.orgEnglish
            0·
            7 days ago

            I think people should not be forced to answer. Cause answers should be well answered. I think questionairs should see how many skiped the answer until 12 answer could got, to get an idea how difficult their question was. may add a timout for around 7s for the skip button so people are confronted and could not avoid it to fast.

          • quill_pusher@lemmy.worldEnglish
            0·
            7 days ago

            Why not just allow unlimited skips, but make it so that you have to respond to 6 in total before you can see your results?

        • r00ty@kbin.life
          0·
          7 days ago

          Yeah I think allowing a write in answer is too risky. You will end up with 12 unique text answers otherwise.

          I do like the idea of the equivalent of an open verdict. Which is probably a mix of options 1 and 3 from your list. If you don’t believe either of the provided options are suitable and you don’t want to skip then this option would be a nice thing.

  • junkthief@lemmy.blahaj.zoneEnglish
    0·
    7 days ago

    Neat idea, but most question askers seem to be shoehorning their questions into the binary format instead of thoughtfully considering what the actual binary choice would boil down to. The low quality of questions makes me not want to participate in the jury duty option. I wish I had a suggestion- I’m sure you want to keep things simple and accessible

    • JuryNow@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
      0·
      7 days ago

      Thanks so much for trying it out and your honest feedback! It’s definitely dependent on the quality of questions for the “fun” element, but knowing that 12 dvierse random people who aren’t connected to you in any way are looking at your question, can be extremely eye opening…connecting to random people around teh world - it’s sort of what the internet was intended for?