Day 72: “We Cannot Lose Our Humanness.” Are You Kidding, Nextdoor?
I saw Nirav Tolia is back on the podcast circuit, this time with Scott D. Clary on Success Story.
The title certainly got my attention:
“The Man Who Connected 100 Million Neighbors Says AI Is About to Make Us All Lonelier.”
Podcast:
https://lnkd.in/d6ncXhpj
Video:
https://lnkd.in/dY9AazUx
One of the first statements from Nirav highlighted in the LinkedIn post was:
“We cannot lose our humanness.”
I read that and thought:
He's kidding, right?
Not because I disagree with the statement.
Actually, I completely agree with it.
My issue is the disconnect between the rhetoric and what I've been observing and experiencing with Nextdoor.
What Does “Humanness” Actually Require?
Being human isn't simply having conversations about the dangers of AI.
To me, humanness includes:
Listening.
Empathy.
Accountability.
Acknowledging someone even when the conversation is uncomfortable.
And that's where Nirav's statement becomes fascinating when compared with what's happening at the company he leads.
It's Day 72 since I requested the detailed Home Insurance Insights research.
Enough said about that.
But this isn't only about me.
What About Nextdoor's Small Businesses?
I've been watching the reaction to Nextdoor's new pay-to-play approach, where businesses may have to pay to comment as businesses when a neighbor posts looking for a service.
And I've seen small-business owners who are not happy.
These aren't giant corporations with unlimited marketing budgets.
They're plumbers.
Landscapers.
Contractors.
Cleaners.
Handymen.
Local service providers.
Many operate on razor-thin margins.
They're also part of the small-business economy that helps keep communities—and the United States—running.
So while Nirav is discussing preserving our humanness in an AI-driven world, I'd like to know:
Who's listening to them?
Was someone sitting with Nirav when this monetization strategy was discussed asking:
“What does this mean for the small businesses that helped build engagement on our platform?”
Was there a focus group?
A beta?
Did anyone calculate the impact beyond Nextdoor's potential revenue?
Was there an effort to create buy-in?
Did anyone practice the very human behavior of listening before acting?
Maybe there was.
If so, please tell us about it.
Another Chapter in the White Paper on Rhetoric
That's increasingly what I find fascinating about studying Nextdoor.
The external messaging sounds terrific.
Community.
Connection.
Neighbors.
Humanness.
Then I compare those words with what I'm observing.
A shareholder waiting 72 days for detailed research he's repeatedly requested.
Small businesses questioning a new monetization model.
Corporate LinkedIn posts where comments are frequently unavailable.
Communication that, from my perspective, too often feels one-directional.
That's not an AI problem.
That's a human communication problem.
Nirav is right about one thing:
We cannot lose our humanness.
But perhaps the first place to demonstrate that philosophy isn't another podcast.
Maybe it's inside Nextdoor.
Listen.
Respond.
Show empathy.
Explain difficult decisions.
Engage with people who disagree.
Be accountable.
Otherwise, this becomes another fascinating chapter in my growing white paper on the difference between corporate rhetoric and corporate behavior.
And AI didn't create that problem.
Humans did.
Day 72.
Follow the continuing Nextdoor study at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Please subscribe at NielFlamm.com so you don't miss a post if the platform where you're reading this decides not to show you the next one.
A Correction—and an Apology to Sarah Leary
I've spent more than 70 days publicly questioning Nextdoor, its leadership, and what I see as failures in communication and accountability.
So accountability has to work both ways.
Sarah Leary, I owe you an apology.
On August 14, 2026, I publicly questioned what happened to an X post on Sarah's account after I could no longer find it.
I noticed it was missing the day before.
It was the Beacon Street snow post where I had left numerous comments documenting my ongoing experience with Nextdoor—the company Sarah co-founded with Nirav Tolia.
At the time, I couldn't find the post.
I questioned whether Sarah had deleted it and whether my numerous Nextdoor comments had anything to do with its disappearance.
Well...
As of August 24, 2026, the post is there.
I can see it.
And yes, I've commented on it again on Nextdoor.
So what happened?
I don't know.
Maybe it was an X glitch.
Maybe its visibility temporarily changed.
Maybe it disappeared and returned.
Or maybe I didn't see it when I searched for it.
And that's the important part:
I don't know.
I’ve raised concerns about Nextdoor's communication, transparency, and accountability.
I can't demand those standards from a company and then exempt myself when I may have made a mistake.
My observation at the time was straightforward:
I couldn't find the post.
But suggesting Sarah personally removed it went beyond what I could actually establish.
There's a difference between:
“The post appears to be gone.”
and
“Sarah deleted the post.”
I should have maintained that distinction.
So, Sarah:
I apologize for stating or implying that you deleted the post when I didn't have evidence to support that.
That's on me.
This correction doesn't change my broader questions about Nextdoor. I'm still waiting for the detailed research I've requested. I still have questions about communication, moderation, verification, monetization, and leadership.
And I'll continue documenting those issues.
But this particular issue deserves a correction without a bunch of qualifications attached to the apology:
The Beacon Street post is there.
I don't know why I couldn't see it before.
I shouldn't have attributed its disappearance to Sarah without knowing what happened.
Accountability doesn't mean much if it only travels in the convenient direction.
If I expect Nextdoor and its executives to acknowledge mistakes, I have to be willing to do the same.
So, Sarah, sincerely:
My apologies.
And yes...I've already returned to the Beacon Street post to continue commenting about that company you and Nirav co-founded.
I said I was apologizing.
I didn't say I was retiring. 😏
Follow the continuing Nextdoor story at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Nextdoor says it connects neighbors. This comedian just exposed why that's complicated.
John Crist's bit on neighborhood apps is genuinely funny.
It's also a little too accurate.
He describes maintaining two Nextdoor accounts — one progressive, one conservative — and arguing with himself as he watches strangers pile on. He backs out and lets the chaos run.
The crowd laughs. But sit with it for a second.
Nextdoor's founder, Nirav Tolia, has pointed to TransUnion’s address verification as the platform's backbone of trust. Real neighbors. Real accountability.
And yet — a comedian openly jokes about running burner accounts to manufacture conflict on the platform. Not as a hypothetical. As a bit rooted in something he actually does.
That raises real questions:
How robust is the verification in actually keeping bad actors out?
If one person can run two accounts and stoke division for sport, what does that do to Weekly Active User numbers the platform reports to investors?
And if the algorithm rewards conflict — which it clearly does — are we measuring engagement, or just outrage?
Comedy works because it tells the truth sideways.
John Crist didn't set out to write a platform audit. But he did.
If you work in community building, social platforms, or neighborhood tech, this 60-second clip is worth your attention.
🎭 Watch the short: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/9Kx4QSkbqX0
What's your experience with Nextdoor? Does it bring your neighborhood together — or surface the fault lines?
Subscribe to NielFlamm.com