Show HN: I Built the Anti-Social Network (and Social Media Billionaires Hate It)
eintercon.comIt seems that the connection should persist as long as the conversation is alive. Start chatting and keep all active conversations with some kind of 2 way back and forth within the last week. If the conversation dies out, then let the connection expire.
It creates urgency to actually engage (no "I'll reply later" that becomes never) It's long enough for meaningful exchange across time zones It filters out low-effort connections before they clutter your inbox
The alternative would be what you described—keeping conversations alive as long as there's activity. But in practice, we found people don't want 47 half-dead conversations lingering. The explicit "extend or end" decision forces both people to actively choose whether this connection matters. Sharing external contact info? Some users do exchange WhatsApp/Instagram if they really click, but that's not the goal. The goal is to keep quality high by requiring mutual intent to continue. Does that make more sense? Happy to clarify further!
Users in major timezone offsets (12+ hours) tend to extend more often Async messaging actually works better than expected. People write longer, more thoughtful messages instead of rapid-fire texts The 48-hour timer creates a bit of urgency even across timezones ("I should reply before bed so they wake up to it")
We're also experimenting with:
Giving users a "timezone buffer" notification if their match is 8+ hours offset Allowing one free extension per connection (currently testing this)
You've hit on something real though. Do you think a dynamic timer based on timezone offset would feel more fair? Like 72 hours for 12+ hour gaps? Curious about your take.
2 more comments available on Hacker News