acjacobson
The next most critical thing I think is speed and in my tests it's just a little bit slower than other solutions. That matters a lot when it comes to these tools.
The third thing, more of a nice to have is controlling formatting. By this I mean - say a few sentences, then "new line" and the model interprets "new line" as formatting, not as literal text.
This is a compromise of allowing some of your wishes to be fulfilled after your death while preventing long term 'dead hand' control over property and resources. You can set up a foundation dedicated to "thing" but can't control what that foundation does until the end of time.
We probably don't want to live in a world that is controlled by the wishes of someone gone for 500 years who had a view of the world completely at odds with the present. It centralizes power and ties the hands of those living in the present.
One candidate was absolutely stumped and could not answer why and when they became interested in technology. They couldn't say anything about themselves personally. It was baffling.
I'd be open to testing and providing feedback if you're interested.
As others have mentioned your biggest challenge is the two-sided marketplace, it is unfortunately just about the hardest thing to pick for a startup. You won't get creators until there is a large enough volume of supporters for it to be worth it to them (why set up a campaign if no one responds). You won't get supporters until you have enough creators to match services they might want.
Many marketplaces like this start with at least one of two things - they either already control one side of the market via relationships (they have access to a large amount of supply, for example), or they have a lot of capital they can use to fund the concept until it gains traction (by funding creators for example). Ideally you have both.
My advice, given the time you have already invested, is to figure out how you can niche down very narrowly to start. Pick one geographic area, and perhaps one service type, and then grind it out manually to match supply to demand. Maybe you're matching creators who tutor on the side, to students in Seattle (or whatever). You want to be narrow because it's too hard to build supply and demand if you're broad, especially by yourself without funding. You'll have to try lots of hacks to see what works to get initial users - it will be manual, you will have to talk to a lot of people, it won't "scale" but that is ok to start. If it works you can grow into other markets later (example: Facebook started only for Harvard, Uber was only black limos in SF).
Also consider looking for a charitable benefactor who will fund creators (even if they don't use the services) to get a bit of energy into the marketplace. If you can find someone, or a company that wants to do this for a bit of good will and press you'll have some capital to fund the initial creators.
Good luck!
Worth it how? For your own curiosity or in some meaningfully productive way for your future self?
> Maybe in the future I will want to know exactly what the thought process that made me choose one font over another was
Maybe, but if it's trivial it's trivial so you don't need to remember it. If it was something you spent a lot of time deciding you probably are going to remember it anyway - if it was important. This kind of historical decision documentation becomes more useful when you have teams and want to onboard new people (and even then it has a limit)
> Do you have any suggestions? How do you stop yourself from overthinking and over-engineering task/project management?
For single-person projects you can go very simple. Most people are worried they're going to forget important tasks, but important tasks have a way of coming up again and again. I think storing list of items in a simple todo app or on paper is about all you need - this list can be as long as you want, but the longer it is the more diminishing the returns. Choose some small set of priorities you will do today - maybe 4-6 items. Do those then move down the list. Feel free to re-prioritize frequently.
> How do you determine what is worth specifying/documenting/archiving, and what should be ephemeral and only exist for the sake of facilitating taking the next step?
Specs are most useful in making you write, and thus helping you think. If you can't write it down you probably don't understand it. Small tasks don't need a lot of writing because you understand what you need and why. Specs are worth writing for the big items if you need to force yourself to think deeply. They're not important for historical purposes - once the feature, project, whatever is done, the spec is no longer needed. And in fact it's not very useful to review again as it's always better to review the thing you actually built instead of the spec (which in most cases will differ). Documentation (how to use the thing) can be useful if you want your future self to remember or others to use it - so document APIs, Libraries, things like that. Don't spend time documenting self-explanatory functionality.
https://thehotpepper.com/threads/cholula-copycat-recipe-reco...
This last one is especially useful because if they never looked for a solution its a signal this isn't a real problem. There are millions of problems in the world and most of them are not worth solving because they don't actually matter that much. That's an important angle to think about.