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

Concept & Perceived Purpose

• Many commenters find the idea fun and immediately compelling, likening it to a gamified /r/AITA or online opinion poll.
• Others argue it’s more entertainment than “objective” decision-making, and that framing it as a serious, diverse, global jury is overstated.
• Some struggle to see the point of binary, explanation‑free verdicts, saying it feels like oversimplified “Tinder for dilemmas.”

Binary Choices, Question Quality & Need for Nuance

• Strong consensus that two forced options often don’t capture reality; many questions are seen as loaded, false dichotomies, or too vague.
• Multiple requests for:
  • “Skip,” “I don’t know,” or “None of the above / reject the premise” options.
  • “Needs more info/context” or “low quality question” flags.
• Some propose yes/no only, with better question wording, or adding a third option that questions the framing.
• Many want optional commentary so jurors can explain reasoning, especially for moral or political questions.

Moderation, Safety & Filters

• Users report overzealous content filters blocking benign or hypothetical questions (e.g., about toddlers driving, “furry,” classic gross dilemmas).
• Others see problematic content slipping through (e.g., pictures of children to choose between, inflammatory political/war questions).
• Concern that question askers can push biased narratives via loaded options, similar to push polls.

UX, Performance & Bugs

• Widespread reports of:
  • Being shown the same question repeatedly and able to vote multiple times.
  • Buttons not working or the UI hanging on result retrieval.
  • Poor mobile layout (scrolling, huge boxes, hard-to-tap/report, no undo on report).
  • “Please moderate your question” errors that are unclear and hard to bypass.
• Several users leave due to slowness or bugs.

AI Usage & “Real Jury” Claims

• Mixed reactions to AI stand‑in for jurors: some see it as a clever bootstrap, others dislike any AI verdicts and want them removed.
• Worries that users themselves could automate jury duty with LLMs.
• Skepticism that the app can actually ensure a diverse, non‑peer‑group jury, since demographics aren’t collected or verifiable.

Feature Suggestions & Use Cases

• Frequently requested features:
  • See final results for questions you answered or asked.
  • History of your past questions and juror decisions.
  • Better guidance for writing good, contextual questions.
• Some imagine extensions for community moderation or more complex “roles” (judge/lawyer), but others say even basic jury logic isn’t yet solid.

Trust & Authenticity

• A few commenters question the 16‑year backstory and stability of the MVP, but others push back, noting it may mean long incubation of the idea, not coding time.