Why can't we have a website where everyone asks "why can't we just..." and the discussions get aggregated and shared so people don't have to wonder alone?
Asked 2h ago · Updated 1h ago
Assessment
This is a novel and viable idea with unique positioning in the Q&A space. While platforms like Stack Exchange, Quora, and Reddit exist, none are specifically designed around "why can't we just..." questions. The technical infrastructure exists (Apache Answer and other open-source Q&A platforms are available), and research shows community Q&A can be highly effective through wisdom of crowds. The concept has natural engagement advantages since these questions are inherently curiosity-driven and shareable. The main challenge would be achieving critical mass and proper community culture, but the built-in shareability of these questions provides a potential solution to the cold start problem. Sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_and_answer_system, https://answer.apache.org/, https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s42001-021-00125-9
Arguments
✅ Why it could work
- Aggregation and categorization could solve searchability problems
- Could fill a gap for exploratory/speculative questions that don't fit traditional Q&A sites
- Natural engagement advantages - the format celebrates curiosity rather than punishing naive questions, these questions are inherently engaging and shareable, and they come from genuine curiosity and frustration, creating natural motivation for participation
- Research shows community Q&A often surpasses expert answers through wisdom of crowds, and people prefer social Q&A for first-hand information and different perspectives
- Modern Q&A features like tagging, rating, and crowd-powered quality control are well-established
- The concept fills a unique niche - existing Q&A platforms are either hyper-specialized or completely general, but 'why can't we just...' questions have their own character focused on systems and societal solutions
- Technical infrastructure already exists - scalable, open-source Q&A platforms like Apache Answer are available, making this technically feasible
- Could foster intellectual rigor around typically dismissed ideas
- Good timing - traditional Q&A sites lose traffic to AI, creating space for human-focused discussion. Studies show people spend 29% of their week searching for information, indicating significant time savings potential
❌ Why it can't work
- AI chatbots provide instant answers without social friction
- Free-riding and lack of rewards reduce contribution motivation
- Quality control challenges - maintaining standards at scale is difficult (Stack Overflow has 17% duplicate questions), creating inherent tension between accessibility and quality compared to expert-moderated services
- Critical mass challenges - need both quality contributors and active users (90/9/1 rule means most will lurk), network effects require both askers and answerers, and losing either kills the platform
- Competition with established platforms - existing Q&A platforms already serve this need to some degree and handle some of these questions
- Research shows experts tend to be selective and may leave platforms, while poor contributors get demotivated
- Risk of becoming too broad or unfocused without clear community guidelines
- Moderation challenges around potentially controversial systemic/political topics