How does only allowing yes or no answers increase nuance?

> How does only allowing yes or no answers increase nuance?

I don't know. It says they're 30-second videos- I imagine it'll consist of people prefacing their answer with "yes" or "no" followed by 30 seconds to elaborate. However, I think this will have the same problem that makes Twitter so unpopular with HN's crowd; Twitter is far too limiting in the length of a single tweet, so all that gets shouted out into the aether is an emotionally-triggering soundbite. That's a key part of what fosters such an echo chamber. It kills discussion and all you end up with are some very loud, angry tweets with no context or nuance.

I have no idea how Polemix plans on bringing more nuance to the political scene this way, but that's probably why I'm still a lowly non-founder/non-FAANG dev. I don't like to be negative or disparaging, but in my limited vision, this sounds like the love child of Twitter and Vine.

Because everyone gets to see a Yes followed than a No video. Also, besides the classical "like button", there is a Respect button that signals that you are willing to open the door to the other side. Hence, the nuancing and approaching instead of flame wars

Why does your approach presuppose that there are only two sides to any given question?

Because to propose that 30s video format (that our research has proven is easier to engage and create) we frame questions as Yes or NO. Indeed, this is not the proper format for every question.