I recently tried 99designs for the first time. They have an unusual model, but every time I was about to get confused, I noticed that their UI cleared up my issue.

I couldn't figure out how they made their site so intuitive.

Then, after I paid for my design, I got an email from them asking me to fill out a Wufoo survey.

That's when I realized how they know their customers well because they keep asking for feedback.

That's why I keep asking for feedback. I could do it off camera, after the interview is over, but I'd much rather be open about my process than hide it.

That's a great point, and I agree that it's always important to get feedback, and that's why I'm glad that you're here on HN discussing the interviews.

One thing to be careful of, however, is making sure you're not disrupting your primary user experience to gather the information.

In your 99designs example, it sounds like they did everything right. They presented a clear, kick-ass UI that guided you through things without being in the way, without cluttering things up with surveys while you tried to do it.

Sometimes I worry that you're in-interview questions are more akin to having 99designs offering a dropdown menu next to each UI element, asking for feedback ;)

Best of luck, and thanks for doing these.

Quite funny, I read this comment, then clicked the link (Missed most of this interview), and heard Andrew ask "And can I ask you, what can I do to improve?" Timing was impeccable ;)

Here's my 2c:

I clicked on the link, and am in "Live interview chat #3", with 2 other people. I hate it when chatrooms overflow and create other rooms. Makes me feel unwanted :(

I'd also really like to see more interaction with viewers. Pick up questions from chat. Maybe if the person being interviewed says something controversial, ask the viewers if they agree or not (Have a spot poll).

Keep up the good work though, always useful bits of info in each interview. And I much prefer video to a transcript.

I've only seen two of his interviews so far (Alexis Ohanian and Paul Graham), but I had the exact same reaction. After a nice interview I was actually interested in, there's this abrupt change into what felt like an attention grab.

There's nothing wrong with asking the question, IMO, but I don't think it needs to be part of the public broadcast / streaming replay. That sort of thing should be done "offline" and regular viewers should simply notice an improvement in style as time goes on.

That said, I have a lot of respect for what Andrew does. As someone who has had actual panic attacks in college when faced with small group presentations, watching someone conduct an interview with the caliber of guests he attracts is a very impressive feat.

I'm quite sure he'll find a style that works for him soon (if he hasn't already - as I said, I believe I've only seen two of his interviews), but for now there is definite room for improvement.

Really? I mean he is usually just asking for suggestions on how to improve his interviewing skills from the interviewees.

It seems poor to compare him to George Stephanopoulos when one has had a long professional career of interviewing people and the other does not.

Thanks for replying- Andrew is certainly doing well with Mixergy, and I hope things continue to go well for him. The question is just what style works best.

As Andrew mentioned in his comment (above) about 99 designs, asking for customer feedback is important.

I offer my comments here in that spirit-

Personally, I find the self-indulgent questions somewhat distastful, but it's ultimately a decision of what style he's aiming for.

You mention that I shouldn't compare him to George Stephanopoulos; While Andrew isn't at that level yet, Comparisons are among the best ways to get better. Maybe Stephanopoulos isn't the direction that Andrew wants to go, but he should look to people he emulates and try to find what he can do better to be more like them.

A large part of that is choosing your personal style. The Mixergy style works fairly well so far, but there's always room to adjust as you mature, and as the program ages-

For instance, Andrew could pursue a Folksy, relaxed, conversational style, interacting a lot with the audience. This is a lot of fun, and helps us feel connected with him, almost indie rock bandishly.

Another direction would to bring things to a more "professional" level, more akin to Bloomberg news with a focus on young and ambitious starts, rather than the megacorps we see so dominating the media.

A third option, and the one I'd reccomend, is to go for more of a Biographical view. Aim for Timelessness.

When I visit Folklore.org and read about the creation of the original Mac, I'm transported back 30 years. The stories about Atkinson and Jobs are classic and it doesn't matter WHEN I watch or listen to these stories, they'll always be wonderful.

We say good examples of this during the SmugMug interview. These stories work well now, or 5 years from now.

Discussions of current events, such as the iPad and the re-launch of StackExchange are interesting, but don't have nearly the same level of timelessness.

Particularly since Mixergy makes it money by selling back-archives, try to make sure they're valueable into the future.

Think A&E's Biography, not CNN Headline news.

In any events, Thanks for doing the interviews, they are an interesting contribution to the world of Startup Culture.

On the contrary, I actually enjoy that part. That makes the "story" of mixergy more interesting and makes the thing more personal.

If he would stop that, I would not watch