this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
8 points (65.4% liked)
Games
38734 readers
1791 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here and here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I was really intrigued by the idea of short “jury duty” sessions with 12 random strangers in which you have to debate and try to come to a consensus on an issue. Disappointed to see it’s just a one-click opinion poll instead.
Hello Slippy, Thanks so much for playing! It's super exciting to see feedback and I'm really grateful you took time to come back to Lemmy & let me know what you think! I think Lemmy & sites like Reddit are amazing and revolutionary for that debate, discussion open conversation type of situation they create. So if it's a peer group conversation you want whether it's office attire, family row, political debate...that is where you would go. JuryNow is more about a very diverse group of 12 people from Guatemala, Germany, Gambia, Georgia who are made up of all ages, cultures, professions, giving you a verdict that is pure unadulterated wisdom! The more diverse the jury, the better the verdict! And so while the JuryDuty can feel la bit like a chore, the part where you get your verdict from 12 real people is exciting if it's your own quesiton, and you know that 12 people have just considered it! Well this is what I hope and when lots of people are playing online simultatneously and all the juries are live, it works! But I'm learning that the negative feedback is a load more valuable in some ways! REally appreciate it!
Yup. That's what got me to click on it too. Really let down by what this actually is.
Hello Stamets, Thanks so much for playing and sorry you are let down! If you don't mind, would love to tailor my description of JuryNow so it's more accurate and doesn't lead to disappointment! That's the last thing I want!! Now you have played, and assuming it was a live jury of 12 judging your question - whether it's what shirt to wear, or whether to take a 6 month job in Antarctica (my nephew took a 2.5yr one!!) would you be less let down? Thank you again!
I don't even understand what you're trying to ask here
Sorry! Not very clear!! What I mean is that if you had asked an actual question - and had received a live Jury verdict - would you feel less let down?
I think that the thing that let them down was that they didn't actually get to participate in any discussion or consensus-building. I think that the ideal scenario to solve this issue is a quick chatroom amongst simultaneous players, in which topics for discussion are briefly discussed for a few minutes, then voted on, like a real jury. It could include deliberation, but the question writer would only see the verdict. I will tell you that I would personally play this if it followed this method:
Make it fewer players per question (like 5 or 7), so that it doesn't take an hour. Each submits a question. Make it so that, while your question is being considered, you are in another jury room deliberating on another question. Make deliberations timed (say, 3-5 minutes per question), so that no one is in a lobby waiting to serve on a jury for too long. Then, after serving on a number of juries equal to the number of jurors (5-7), they can view their verdict. This would allow for the deliberation these people are suggesting.
This was what I understood stamets to mean as well. I thought it was pretty obvious. I had the same thought opening it. Still cool though.