Serious question.

Most people carry things they never tell anyone.

Not illegal things. Just thoughts that would damage relationships or reputations if they were said out loud.

Regret about past decisions. Things people hide from partners. Thoughts about friends or family they would never admit publicly.

Therapists exist for a reason, but most people never go to one.

So I was wondering something.

Would it actually be healthier if people had a place to post these thoughts completely anonymously?

No identity. No profile. Just the confession.

I’m building a small experiment called Backroom around this idea where people can post one-line anonymous secrets.

But I’m honestly curious if people would actually use something like that or if most secrets are better left unsaid.

  • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Good question.

    The idea is basically to remove identity completely. No accounts required to read. Posting is session based and nothing links back to a person. Even chats auto-delete after 24h.

    The goal is that the secret is the only thing that exists. Not the person behind it.

    Funding later would probably come from hosts running rooms people pay a small amount to enter. But right now it’s just an experiment to see if people actually want a place like this.

      • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        18 hours ago

        Simplex is interesting.

        The difference here would be that it’s not private messaging. The idea is short public confessions that appear in rooms and disappear again after a few days.

        More like anonymous graffiti than a chat group.

        • redsand@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          16 hours ago

          If it’s public it doesn’t disappear. People will make copies.

          You could have a home site or group and multiple sub groups though.

          • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            11 hours ago

            True. Anything public can be copied.

            The idea isn’t perfect secrecy. It’s more about removing identity and permanence so people feel safer saying something once and letting it fade.

      • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        1 day ago

        Fair concern.

        4chan is anonymous but completely unstructured.

        Backroom is built around hosts running rooms with their own rules. If a room becomes toxic, people simply stop entering it.

        So moderation happens at the room level, not through identity.

        • RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          1 day ago

          If a room becomes toxic, people simply stop entering it.

          How would this have stopped 4chan? People still go to those toxic message boards.

          • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            True. Some people will always seek those spaces.

            The idea isn’t to eliminate that behavior.

            It’s more about creating rooms where the default incentive is sharing something personal rather than provoking reactions.

            • RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 day ago

              There are so many ways for this to become incredibly toxic and unhelpful, my first thought is it could become a support group for all types criminals/abusers to share tips and tricks anonymously.

              At least the Catholics and therapists have someone there trying to steer things in a helpful direction. Like maybe you could tweak this idea to anonymous therapy rather than anonymous confession, and then people could view people going through therapy online and maybe find helpful tips for their own lives.

              • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 day ago

                That’s a fair concern.

                The intention isn’t to create a space for advice or coordination. Posts are limited to very short one-line confessions and rooms can set strict rules about what’s allowed.

                More like people admitting something they’ve never said out loud than discussing how to do things.

                • RoidingOldMan@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 day ago

                  There is a conflict still. First, you want unfiltered confession meaning no moderation. But then you don’t want it to become a safe space for criminals, which would require moderating. If you don’t moderate the content, it’ll quickly take on a life of its own and that won’t be the helpful thing you’re imagining.

                  • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 day ago

                    That’s true to some extent.

                    The idea isn’t zero moderation, it’s shifting it away from identity. Rooms can set rules and remove posts, but the system itself doesn’t track who people are.

                    So the control happens at the room level rather than through accounts or personal identity.

        • Venator@lemmy.nz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          19 hours ago

          Moderation kinda depends on identity, as the trolls who want every room to be toxic will enter every room and make sure it’s toxic if there’s no rudimentary identification.

          • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            19 hours ago

            That’s a fair point.

            The idea isn’t that anonymity magically solves trolling. It’s more that rooms create friction. If a host bans someone or locks access, that person doesn’t automatically get the same reach everywhere else.

            In big anonymous feeds the trolls and normal users share the exact same space. Rooms try to break that dynamic a bit.

            It probably won’t eliminate toxicity, but the hope is it localizes it.

            • Apathy Tree@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              15 hours ago

              If it’s using an expiring session-based anonymous “account” for interactions, how would you ban someone? Or allow rooms to be restricted, for that matter?

              Like I like the idea, I just don’t understand how both things can be true.

              • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                11 hours ago

                Good question.

                The sessions are temporary but not instantly disposable. A host can still block a session from a room, and rooms can require approval to enter.

                So the anonymity is mostly between users. Hosts still have basic control over who can participate in their space.

                  • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    4 hours ago

                    Hosts usually don’t decide based on identity.

                    Most rooms are just open and moderated through behavior. If someone posts things that break the rules the host can block that session from the room.

                    Restricted rooms are more like small spaces where the host simply decides who gets the link or approval to enter. The idea is control over the room not control over who someone is.

      • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        23 hours ago

        IP addresses are only handled at the infrastructure level for basic abuse protection.

        They are not connected to posts or identities and nothing is stored that could link a confession back to a person.

        The whole design tries to separate the secret from the individual as much as possible.

    • mimavox@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      Not to shit on your idea, but why would anyone want to read such things in the first place? I get the need to get something off your chest, but I don’t get why someone would be interested in hearing it?

      • Alex@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 day ago

        That’s actually the most interesting part.

        People are curious about what others really think but never say out loud. Confessions, secrets, uncomfortable truths.

        It’s the same reason anonymous confession pages and posts tend to spread so easily.