I’ve been working on this concept for 16 years, and just launched a playable MVP it’s called JuryNow, and I’d love your take on it.
The idea:
You ask any personal dilemma or life choice (serious or silly) and get a snap verdict from 12 real people from around the world, anonymously, within 3 minutes.
But here's the game loop:
💡 To get your verdict, you "pay" with ** Jury Duty** answering other people’s questions for a 3 minutes. The questions can be on any topic from a fashion dilemma to a workplace problem, to a big life decision or a mini political poll.It’s fast, instinctive, and weirdly addictive.
There is no commentary, discussion or debate...it's just a binary choice powered by human collective intelligence. It gives you a global perspective on a decision if you are stuck, and if you aren't!
JuryNow plays like a global social deduction/party game, where objectivity, empathy, and instinct matter more than logic or debate.
You can ask questions like:
"Is Atlas more of a girl name or a boy name?"
"Celery vs. broccoli/ which is more hated by kids?"
"Someone keeps ripping down my LGBTQ activism stickers off of lightposts. Should I super glue them or give up?"
It’s kind of like Wavelength, Cards Against Humanity, or The Resistance, but... micro-sized and real-time.
🎮 Play it here: https://www.jurynow.app/
Would love your honest feedback as board game fans ...what works, what doesn’t, how you’d explain it to others, or whether this could ever make sense as an app or even a table top version one day?
Thank you! 🙏
Just to clarify up front: JuryNow® is trademarked and not open source and not designed for self-hosting. It’s a live, centralized platform I’ve built over many years, and I’m sharing it here and would love feedback from board ganers! (not to release the code or architecture.)
Your question about the bill of rights illustrated a huge problem with the game too that I think is relevant to your point #1. In the question, you had something along the lines of animals are executed for consumption, "**which seems to be necessary...**" which I wouldn't agree with at all, making the rest of the question + potential answers irrelevant. The way the question is posed and what possible answers are provided can make it feel really narrow/shallow. OP should add an option C "fill your own" or a skip button or something.
I agree that it isn't actually necessary. I put that in because, at the current moment, government will to regulate simply isn't there, because most governments are fully under the control of special interest groups and corps. As such, the necessity is there unless and until such a bill of rights is enacted. I personally think we should be getting our proteins from lentils.