Reddit Is Too Chaotic. Twitter Is Too Toxic. So I Built Dtrue.
Over the past few years, I’ve spent a lot of time exploring how people interact, express ideas, and debate online.
One thing became obvious:
The internet is full of opinions — but very few conversations lead anywhere.
Traditional social platforms weren’t built for structured thinking:
- Reddit becomes chaotic.
- Twitter (X) becomes toxic.
- Comment threads spiral endlessly.
- Arguments become personal instead of meaningful.
So I decided to build something different.
A platform where discussions are structured, time-bound, and outcome-driven.
That platform became Dtrue.
🎯 What Problem I Wanted to Solve
Most social platforms are optimized for:
- engagement
- virality
- outrage
- noise
But not for:
- clarity
- understanding
- consensus
- closure
People don’t lack opinions.
They lack a system that makes opinions useful.
I wanted to design a platform where:
- opinions are short and structured
- every argument can be voted on
- debates end with a clear result
- people walk away with perspective — not frustration
Dtrue was my attempt to rethink online discussion from the ground up.
🧩 How Dtrue Works
Instead of infinite threads, Dtrue uses a structured flow:
1️⃣ A topic is posted
2️⃣ People submit short opinions
3️⃣ Others vote Agree / Disagree
4️⃣ AI filters low-quality & spam replies
5️⃣ The debate runs on a timer
6️⃣ It ends with a clear outcome
No endless arguments.
No toxic reply chains.
No chaos.
Just clarity.
🧠 Product Philosophy — What Makes Dtrue Different
While designing Dtrue, I focused on three core principles.
1️⃣ Debates Should Be Time-Bound
On social media, conversations never end.
On Dtrue, every debate has:
- a fixed start
- a fixed end
- a defined outcome
When the timer hits zero:
the debate ends — and the results are published.
This creates healthy closure instead of emotional burnout.
2️⃣ Every Opinion Should Be Votable
Instead of liking people…
You vote on ideas:
👍 Agree
👎 Disagree
This forms something powerful:
A real-time snapshot of public sentiment — what I call World Mood.
3️⃣ AI Should Assist Good Discussion — Not Replace It
AI on Dtrue is not for generating content — it is for:
- reducing spam
- filtering low-effort posts
- highlighting thoughtful perspectives
- keeping the environment civil
The goal was simple:
Help humans debate better — not louder.
🚀 The “World Voice” Concept
One of my favorite outcomes from Dtrue’s design is this idea:
When thousands of people vote on a debate…
You don’t just see comments —
you see a global stance.
A collective voice.
Users can open the app and instantly understand:
- what people believe
- why they believe it
- which arguments resonated most
It feels less like scrolling a feed…
And more like listening to the world think.
🔧 Product & UX Design Priorities
While building Dtrue, I focused on:
No Noise
- no deep reply chains
- no popularity bias
- no spam floods
No Chaos
Everything follows structure:
- Topic
- Opinions
- Votes
- Summary
- Final Result
No Bias Toward Influencers
No boosted creators.
No algorithmic favoritism.
Ideas compete — not people.
Every voice starts equal.
💡 Who I Built Dtrue For
Dtrue is designed for people who:
- enjoy meaningful conversations
- want to understand both sides
- are tired of noisy comment sections
- value structured discussion
- want results instead of endless arguments
If conversations should lead somewhere — Dtrue makes that possible.
📱 Where Dtrue Is Today
Dtrue is still early — but growing fast.
Users use it to:
- explore trending debates
- share quick structured opinions
- vote and understand global consensus
- read clear debate summaries
- participate in civil discussions
It feels like:
a debate platform
a poll system
and a social feed
combined — but with purpose.
🧑🚀 Closing Thoughts
Building Dtrue has been one of my most meaningful product journeys.
It combines:
- product design
- psychology of discussion
- real-time systems
- AI moderation
- civic thinking
My goal isn’t just to build another social app.
I want to build a platform where:
- people think before reacting
- disagreement remains respectful
- ideas win — not egos
If we can make online discussion even slightly more meaningful…
That already feels like progress.