Exactly — say what something did to you, and read what a stranger wrote about the same thing

Reading the sentence you wrote, turning it into a set of numbers that place it near other sentences with a similar shape, and showing you the closest one somebody else left. It is not choosing a person for you and it does not know anything about either of you. It only knows that two sentences ended up near each other.

No. Every reaction shown here was typed by a person, except the ones we wrote ourselves to keep the room from being empty at the start — and those are labelled as ours on the page, every time. Nothing here generates a feeling on somebody else’s behalf. The machine only puts two human sentences next to each other.

No, and not by accident. There are no profiles, no names, no handles and no way to send anything to anyone. A reaction carrying a way to get in touch is refused before it is stored. If it turns out people repeatedly find each other here, that is the thing that would justify building a way through — and only mutually, and only then.

The sentence, yes — it is the material this is made of, and the next person who brings the same song is going to read it. What is not kept is you: a reaction has no author attached to it, and there is nothing stored that could connect a sentence back to a person, including for us. Nothing you write here can be traced to you later, which is also why it cannot be deleted by you later.

Every reaction is screened before it is stored, and every reaction you are shown carries a button that takes it down. Two people objecting is enough to hide one. It is a small, soft system rather than a large, hard one, and it errs toward hiding a good sentence rather than showing a bad one.

No. Nobody is being matched to anybody, there is no profile to fill in and nothing to browse. The question is much smaller than that: can two strangers who separately felt the same thing about the same song recognise each other in one sentence.

It cannot tell whether you actually felt something. It can only count how often somebody pressed a button. That is a much weaker signal than the thing it stands for, and the whole experiment is an attempt to find out whether the weaker signal tracks the stronger one at all.

It cannot find you the right person. Two sentences being close is a coincidence, not a compatibility. Anything more than that would be a different product, built on a claim this one has not earned.

It will be empty sometimes. Early on, most things will have nobody else on them, and the page says so rather than inventing company. A stranger who is not there is a worse outcome than an empty room, because you would have believed it.