ryanmnly

I believe in the product. And although I have been involved in startups previously, I've either worked for one or haven't been in a position to found one as serious as this. My personal risk is greater and I naturally question it more.

And you are right, I can still move to SF :).

How about you? Have you already founded a startup? With or without YC or anyone else for that matter? And why?

I don't think most people mind advertising. It's the ads that force videos and sound and blatent distractions that they don't like. But for the most part, it is a reality of how these sites make money and if it keeps things free, it is an inarguable benefit to all.

So you are asking if there is a correlation between mental health and worries about bugs in your code? Given the fact that coding leads to watching the sun rise from your desk chair, the hope that this particular algorithm saves the world, and a disturbing reliance on Totino's pizza rolls as sustenance, I would say yes, the connection between mental health and code is not a coincidence.

I would assume that if a VC got the reputation of taking ideas and pushing them to other groups instead of the originators, it would kill their credibility. And without credibility, no one is going to go to them for funding.

That reminds me of a book called "Disney: The Mouse Betrayed." It made very interesting points about the shadowy doings of Disney behind closed doors. Unfortunately, it was written with such a bias that I could not take it with more than a grain of salt. Had the authors had more respect for the readers, they would have realized we could come up with our own opinions.

I've never had a negative impression of him. He is confident and forces you to think in a different direction. I also know the "4 hour" week is an exaggeration. Pay close attention and he does a lot of work related stuff (including writing a book) that consumes time. Nonetheless, he is providing a road map for things most of us have thought were unobtainable.

First, we definitely need critiques, and as many as possible.

Aside from ad revenue, the plan for monetization is to charge for the data we collect. On a subscription basis, we want government officials, interest groups and lobbyists to pay for the data we collect. We give anonymous and accurate data that identifies earmarks, demographic trends, hot button items, etc. The catch is that the people receiving the data need to agree to a minimum amount of interaction with the users on the site (social networking). We also charge them monthly.

I have no doubt that if just a couple reps/groups find this useful, everyone will jump on board so they aren't left behind. Not to mention, most are spending other people's money, not their own. :)

As for exit plan, this is not completely established. We expect that the application continues to evolve and automate on the back end, leaving us free to hand off to new management without a significant learning curve. Right now, we envision our target buyers to be large news sources, especially if they are political and intend to take advantage of social networking. CNN maybe? FOX? MSNBC? Washington Post? Since newspapers are going by the wayside, there are plenty of companies out there who need a new niche fast.

Thoughts?

You are both right, thanks for the feedback. These are the types of things we need to iron out immediately. We've been working with a few different layouts, but without users actually engaging, it is difficult to assess what works best. We will change it tonight, and through some trial error, hopefully we can express what the site actually does. The concept is sound but what good is it if nobody can figure out how to use it?

I'd like to let everyone know that we have launched our Fourth Branch, http://www.fourthbranch.us, for use and testing. It took us longer than planned to move to production, but our initial version is considerably better than what we previously intended.

In a nutshell, Fourth Branch will act exactly as that: The fourth branch of government. The emphasis on publicizing legislation and providing government transparency has lead us to develop this. Unlike anything to date, we are going to utilize proven social networking practices and focus it on legislation and issues that require public input.

We are looking for any and all comments, criticism and feedback to help us develop quickly. Thanks!

I think it is worth noting that although this is a good step in the right direction, Recovery.org is not going to make it easy to find unpopular information. It would be unreasonable to expect President Obama to highlight things that he believes in, but knows will not be received well by the public. There are other sources besides Recovery.org that may serve as a better data mining resource.

Even published on the recovery.gov site, it is still difficult to hone in on specific information. The bill is just entirely to big to be easily "accessible." Some type of smart search engine for it would be handy.