Day 68: Nextdoor Finally Responded—Sort Of*
Yes, that's an asterisk next to Day 68.
After more than two months of emails, posts, questions, tags, and wondering whether anyone at Nextdoor would respond, Nextdoor Communications emailed me.
Progress?
Well...sort of.
Their email said:
“We did not find it necessary to respond to your request for the following studies because they are both publicly available.”
They then sent me links to the Home Insurance Insights and Financial Advising and Investing blog posts.
There's just one problem.
Those aren't what I've been requesting.
Nextdoor's own Financial Advising and Investing post says:
“Want to explore the complete findings? This summary highlights key insights from our research, but there's much more to discover.”
It then tells readers seeking detailed data, additional audience segments, and strategic recommendations to contact Jacob Chavis.
That's precisely what I've been doing.
I responded and thanked Communications for reaching out. I'm requesting the complete findings and detailed data—not the blog summaries.
Whether Jacob sends them or Communications sends them doesn't matter to me.
I want what Nextdoor's own blog says readers can request.
Then came another interesting part of their email.
Nextdoor Communications told me this would be the only message they would send from that address and directed future support inquiries elsewhere.
Well, at least after 68 days I've confirmed something:
The Communications inbox works.
And since my research request remains unanswered, I'm not backing away from the underlying question. I'm doubling down on asking for clarity.
Meanwhile, Nurav Tooleyah Has Left the Neighborhood
Remember my experiment testing Nextdoor's verification system?
I created a duplicate account using the intentionally fake name “Nurav Tooleyah.”
Nextdoor Communications specifically mentioned the duplicate account in its email, and the account has now been indefinitely suspended.
Reason:
Duplicate account.
So, credit where it's due: Nextdoor eventually caught it.
But there's another asterisk.
It took more than 68 days.
That's the part that should concern anyone interested in platform trust and safety.
My account was an experiment intended to test the verification process. But imagine someone creating a false identity with genuinely malicious intentions.
How much damage could a bad actor potentially cause in 68 days while appearing to be a verified neighbor?
Could they build trust?
Collect information?
Contact vulnerable neighbors?
Promote a scam?
That's why I've been questioning Nextdoor's verification model.
Eventually catching a fake account is better than never catching it.
But how quickly you detect it matters.
And there's an interesting irony here.
Nextdoor found my duplicate account.
Nextdoor Communications found my email.
Nextdoor Communications found the two blog posts.
After 68 days, I haven't received the detailed research those posts explicitly invite readers to request.
So yes:
Day 68.*
The asterisk matters.
Nextdoor finally communicated.
The fake account finally disappeared.
But the original question remains remarkably simple:
Jacob, could you please share the complete findings and detailed data that Nextdoor tells readers to contact you to obtain?
Full timeline at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Nextdoor Has an AI Day. Maybe It Needs a Communication Day.
I came across an interesting HR Brew article about Nextdoor's HR team dedicating one full day every month to AI experimentation.
Full article:
https://www.hr-brew.com/stories/nextdoors-hr-team-halts-people-work-once-a-month-and-dedicates-the-day-to-ai
First, credit where it's due.
As someone with a Learning & Development background, I like this idea.
Nextdoor Head of People Tony Castellanos told HR Brew that the HR team clears its calendars one day each month—no meetings, interviews, or reports—so employees can experiment with AI and build solutions.
That's experiential learning.
That's giving employees permission to experiment, iterate, and learn.
I can get behind that.
But given everything I've been documenting about Nextdoor, another thought immediately crossed my mind:
Could we dedicate one day to communication?
I've spent more than two months trying to obtain a Nextdoor Insights study from Jacob Chavis.
I've contacted Jacob, Nirav Tolia, Sarah Leary, Investor Relations, and Communications.
Then Nextdoor published another Insights report directing readers who want detailed information to—you guessed it—Jacob Chavis.
I followed those instructions again.
Short email. Kinder, gentler reset. Two studies requested.
I'm still waiting.
That's why this article fascinates me.
Nextdoor can pause routine HR work for an entire day each month so employees can explore AI.
Great.
But technology doesn't solve every organizational problem.
Sometimes the solution isn't another AI agent.
Sometimes it's:
"Hey, somebody answer that email."
HR Brew also reports that Nextdoor's "People Brain" reviews content published to public channels to help ensure messaging and policy align with the People team's core content.
Now that makes me curious.
If AI is helping evaluate Nextdoor's public messaging, I'd love to know what it thinks about:
Community without conversation.
Communication posts with comments disabled.
Research advertised as available while requests go unanswered.
A shareholder spending more than two months asking for an answer.
Maybe those aren't AI problems.
Maybe they're leadership and execution problems.
I've repeatedly said I want Nextdoor and NXDR to succeed. I'm a shareholder. Financially, that's in my interest.
AI Days could genuinely improve efficiency.
But innovation shouldn't distract from the basics.
Artificial intelligence is impressive.
Answering an email doesn't require it.
Perhaps alongside AI Day, Nextdoor should try a Communication Day.
I'll volunteer my inbox for the pilot.
Full timeline at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Day 66: The Kinder, Gentler Reset Continues
It's Day 66.
Yesterday, I tried something different.
A kinder, gentler reset.
No lengthy email. No dissertation about corporate culture. No recap of the previous 65 days.
I emailed Jacob Chavis and asked for two Nextdoor Insights reports:
The Home Insurance Insights study I've been requesting, and the newly published Financial Advising and Investing study.
Short. Polite. Direct.
Now I'm wondering something beyond my own experience:
Is anyone actually able to obtain the detailed studies referenced on the Nextdoor Blog or LinkedIn?
Nextdoor's latest Insights post directs readers who want the complete report and detailed data to contact Jacob.
So I'd like to hear from someone who has done it.
Did you request one? Did you receive it? How long did it take?
That comparison matters as I examine whether I'm experiencing terrible communication or being treated differently.
Meanwhile, Back at NXDR...
The broader market slid yesterday, and NXDR followed suit.
The stock had been making gains following Nextdoor's Q2 results and was approaching its two-year highs. That enthusiasm appears, at least for now, to have been short-lived.
As a shareholder, I want NXDR to succeed. That's what makes my feedback counterintuitive: financially, I'm rooting for the company I'm criticizing.
I've also noticed E*TRADE now provides additional visibility into options activity, giving investors another interesting data point to watch.
And Then There's the Legal Question
Finding an attorney interested in evaluating a potential discrimination claim isn't as simple as announcing, "Lawyer wanted!"
There's a process.
An attorney would need to determine whether the facts support a viable claim, which law applies, what damages are available, and whether others have experienced comparable treatment.
The same applies to a potential class action. There needs to be an identifiable class with common legal and factual issues.
I'm exploring those questions.
Nextdoor also has substantial cash on hand. Using the figures I've been reviewing—approximately $377.97 million in cash against $27.70 million in debt—that's roughly $350 million net of debt.
But that's not a pot of money automatically available to plaintiffs or attorneys. Any recovery would require an actual viable claim followed by a settlement or judgment.
So I'm not counting imaginary settlement checks or contingency fees.
First comes the simpler experiment.
I sent the polite email.
I asked for the studies Nextdoor tells people they can request.
Now let's see what happens.
And I'd particularly like to hear from anyone who has successfully requested and received a Nextdoor Insights report.
Day 66. Kinder. Gentler. Still documenting.
The complete timeline is at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Day 65: A Reset—But Not of the Clock
It's Day 65 since I originally requested Nextdoor's Home Insurance Insights study.
That clock isn't resetting.
What I'm getting at with a semi-reset is my approach.
I've written plenty. I've sent detailed emails. I've asked questions about communication, leadership, moderation, accountability, and most recently, whether my experience represents differential or discriminatory treatment.
Today, I stripped all of that away.
Simple. Short. To the point.
I sent Jacob Chavis an email requesting two things:
1. The Home Insurance Insights study I've been requesting for 65 days.
2. The full “How Neighbors Approach Financial Advising and Investing” study, which Nextdoor recently published and specifically tells readers to contact Jacob for additional detailed data.
That's it.
No lengthy explanation.
No 65-day history.
No commentary about Nirav Tolia, Sarah Leary, Communications, or Investor Relations.
Just two requests.
Now let's see what happens.
Maybe Jacob responds.
Even better, maybe I simply receive both studies, and we can finally put this particular question to rest.
If I don't?
Then the question I've recently raised about discrimination or differential treatment becomes even more interesting to me.
I'm not asserting that unlawful discrimination has occurred. Whether there is a viable legal claim—and whether any broader group has experienced comparable treatment—is something an attorney would need to evaluate based on the facts and applicable law.
So I'll put this out there:
Is there an attorney experienced in discrimination, corporate practices, consumer rights, or shareholder matters who finds this situation worth exploring?
Potentially even whether there's a broader pattern affecting others?
If an attorney believes the facts support an individual or class-action case and is willing to evaluate it on a contingency-fee basis, I'm open to a conversation and, if appropriate, serving as a lead plaintiff.
Reach out.
But I'd much rather have the simpler outcome.
Two studies requested.
One short email.
Let's see if Nextdoor responds.
The reset starts today.
The 65-day clock does not.
Full timeline at NielFlamm.com/blog.
Is Nextdoor Discriminating Against Me?
After writing my other posts today, I came across something that changed the conversation.
Nextdoor published a new Insights report today:
New Nextdoor Insights Report: How Neighbors Approach Financial Advising and Investing
And at the bottom?
Nextdoor tells readers who want the full report with detailed data, additional audience segments, and strategic recommendations to contact Jacob Chavis, Customer Analytics & Insights Manager.
Yes.
This is the same Jacob Chavis I've been trying to get a study from for 64 days.
So I'm going to use a word I haven't used throughout this experience:
Discrimination.
To be clear, I'm not stating that Nextdoor has engaged in unlawful discrimination.
I'm asking whether I'm being treated differently, why, and whether that differential treatment could raise more serious questions.
For weeks, I've considered other explanations.
Maybe Jacob's responsibilities changed.
Maybe Nextdoor stopped publishing these studies.
Maybe Insights was on pause.
Maybe Jacob wasn't the appropriate contact anymore.
Today's publication makes those explanations much harder for me to reconcile.
Nextdoor is publicly saying:
Want detailed research? Contact Jacob Chavis.
Well...
I did.
Sixty-four days ago.
And again.
And again.
I've also contacted Nirav Tolia, Sarah Leary, Investor Relations, Communications, and others.
Still no substantive answer.
So I think it's fair to ask:
Am I specifically being treated differently?
And if I am:
Why?
Is it because I'm publicly critical of Nextdoor?
Because I'm a shareholder asking uncomfortable questions?
Because I've challenged its moderation model?
Because I've questioned leadership?
Has someone internally decided not to engage with me?
Or is there another explanation?
I don't know.
Different treatment doesn't automatically constitute unlawful discrimination. I'm not making that allegation.
But when Nextdoor publicly invites people to contact Jacob for detailed research, while my comparable request has remained unanswered for 64 days, I believe that asking about differential or discriminatory treatment is reasonable.
Let Me Play Devil's Advocate
Someone could look at my emails, posts, tags, comments, and follow-ups and say:
"Niel, maybe they think you're contacting them too much."
Fair question.
I'm persistent. I'm publicly documenting my experience and following up on this.
But persistence and criticism aren't automatically harassment.
I'm not threatening anyone. I'm not advocating violence. I'm not seeking anyone's private information. I'm asking questions about a publicly traded company, its leadership, policies, research, and my experience as a shareholder.
If Nextdoor believes my communications have crossed a boundary, please let me know.
"We're declining your request."
"Direct future inquiries here."
Even:
"We will not engage further."
That's still communication.
Instead, I'm left wondering whether Nextdoor has deliberately decided not to communicate with me.
And I'd ask every business, advertiser, news organization, government agency, and partner working with Nextdoor to consider something:
Today it's me. Could you eventually find yourself on the other side?
What happens when your experience doesn't match the corporate messaging?
What happens when you ask an uncomfortable question?
What happens when your company needs information Nextdoor publicly says is available—and suddenly nobody responds?
Partnerships aren't just about reach, impressions, WAU, and revenue.
They're also about the organization you choose to do business with and how it behaves when the conversation becomes uncomfortable.
So I'll ask Nextdoor directly:
Has Nextdoor decided not to respond specifically to me?
If yes, why?
If no, how does Nextdoor explain 64 days without a response while publicly directing others to Jacob Chavis for detailed research?
Earlier today, I was asking where Jacob was.
Then Nextdoor answered part of that question.
Apparently, he's exactly where I've been told to look all along.
Now I'd like Nextdoor to answer the rest.
Join the discussion at NielFlamm.com/blog. I'd genuinely like to hear your perspective.