"You decide," "I'm fine with anything," "Whatever you guys want" - these are definitely the three phrases you'll hear before any weekend gathering among young people today. While they sound polite and easygoing, putting the choice in others' hands, let me translate what they really mean - you handle checking the map, booking restaurants, and planning the itinerary.

So people aren't being casual; they're avoiding the hassle of planning because it's genuinely challenging. Think about it: some live in the east of the city, others in the west, some in the suburbs. Some don't eat Sichuan cuisine, others can't live without spice, some want to sing karaoke in a villa, others prefer board games first. As the organizer, you need to plot everyone's needs and locations on a map like a mathematical function to find the optimal solution.

Many gatherings end up cancelled or falling through - not because people don't want to meet, but because figuring out "where to go" as the first step is already too difficult.

Recently, I came across a mini-program that seems to solve this problem. The name gets straight to the point: "Where Shall We Meet," and it's officially developed by TENCENT. The function is simple - it helps those of us scattered across different corners of the city on weekends find a suitable place to gather.

What you need to do is: enter the mini-program, grant location permissions, initiate a meetup, forward it to group chat, and have friends share their locations too. Of course, for those too lazy to fill it out, you can manually input their positions.

Once everyone's locations are collected, the mini-program recommends an optimal meeting point. For example, with our editorial team members living in Yuhang, Binjiang, and Xiaoshan, it recommended Xicheng Plaza in the city center.

Below the map, it thoughtfully calculates each person's route and travel time - how long by car, taxi, or public transport, all clearly displayed.

Some might ask: isn't this not exactly the center? Good question. I believe its logic tries to average out everyone's travel time. If it found an absolute center, we'd probably have to leave Hangzhou entirely.

After recommending locations, the mini-program also directly suggests nearby restaurants, including ratings, average cost per person, cuisine types, operating hours, specific addresses, and phone numbers. You can also preset price ranges and exclude cuisine types you don't like.

Besides restaurants, there are options for KTV, cafes, and board game venues - covering most daily activities. When you find a good restaurant, you can share it for everyone to vote. Voting results are visible in real-time on the page and can be sent to group chat with one click.

Additionally, the mini-program has some thoughtful design details. When sharing to group chat, you can select participants. If someone cancels last minute, you can remove them from the list, and the mini-program will recalculate the meeting point.

Seeing this, you might think this tool is excellent, precisely addressing everyone's pain points. But the problem is, after writing this, I discovered that TENCENT seems to have stopped maintaining it.

First, its data is extremely outdated. The Xicheng Plaza recommended earlier closed down years ago. The restaurant rating data, apparently sourced from Dianping, hasn't been updated even though many stores' ratings have changed.

Second, it contains very limited data. For restaurants, you only get 7-8 options before hitting the bottom. Some establishments are recommended from 20 kilometers away due to insufficient data - what's the point of recommending that?

There are also experiential bugs. During testing, I found that if your first share target is a private chat rather than group chat, many participant features become unusable.

Our editorial team actually thinks this mini-program concept is genuinely good. At minimum, it provides some reference points, which is better than having no clues at all.

As for why TENCENT stopped maintaining it, I privately asked colleagues working at TENCENT. First, they hadn't even heard of this mini-program. Second, they believe the reason is likely poor post-launch data performance, or they pivoted to similar products and abandoned maintenance.

My perspective is that tools don't need to generate profits to be considered valuable. So if you really think this mini-program addresses a daily need, shouldn't we ask TENCENT to revive it?