+1: I like the layout and usability and hope it does well. -1: I worry it fundamentally misunderstands why we're inundated with bad stories in some aggregators

+1: I like the layout and usability and hope it does well. -1: I worry it fundamentally misunderstands why we're inundated with bad stories in some aggregators (especially political news). But I'm glad someone took a shot, and I don't think there's an quick and easy solution. If the problem was just clickbait and spam, then I think this site would work well. The trouble isn't with marketers and sites though, it's with us. Consider cognitive biases like the hostile media effect: https://www.pressrise.org/comments/trump-cites-story-of-general-who-dipped-bullets-in-pigs-blood-to-deter-muslims https://www.pressrise.org/comments/trump-cites-story-of-gene... Even if you have a carefully calibrated stream of neutral/moderate sources, most people will still perceive that stream as biased. If you give them tools to do so, they will fight to correct that imagined bias. The system is in an unstable equilibrium. So as soon as one side gets the edge, bias will rush that direction as the opponents flee, and the remaining more extreme positions pull the stream ever further one direction. If that's the case, then an implementation to correct for this needs constant education about avoiding cognitive biases. Reminders like so: http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/gw/politics_is_the_mindkiller/ (Note: knowing some of the controversies with the LW crowd, I'm not convinced "thinking about cognitive bias" is really sufficient.) Maybe I'm wrong though and this site will rise beyond these challenges. I hope someone does. Good luck!