1
3 Comments

Five days without a new signup, and eight days without a commit

I build HerShape, my own product. It generates meal and workout plans around where a woman is in her cycle. Founder update, not a pitch.

The number this week: 2 signups in the last 7 days. Both arrived on September 15 and both generated a plan. Nobody new has signed up in the five days since. Total real users is 14 once I strip out test accounts. Paying subscribers: 0.

What shipped: nothing. My last commit is still September 12, so that is eight days with no code. Nothing stalled in a dramatic way. I read my own database, wrote about what I read, and the app sat where it was.

What I learned: four of my last five updates here say nothing shipped. I had been reading that as a run of bad weeks. Put in a row, it looks more like writing the update has quietly become the work. A post gets a response within a day. Building does not, so I keep picking the one that answers back.

My question: for those of you who build in public, how do you keep the posting from eating the building? Did you cap it at one post a week, batch them, or stop writing until something was actually out?

HerShape: https://hershape.app

posted toAvatar for product HerShape
HerShape
  1. 1
    The fast feedback loop of posting versus building is the trap. I'd make an update conditional on an artifact: a shipped change or one thing learned from a user, rather than set a posts-per-week target. Your two new signups both generated plans — do you know whether either used one after day one? A conversation with one of them might give you both the next build decision and a post worth writing.
    1. 1
      I went and checked instead of guessing. Both September 15 signups generated one plan on the day they signed up, and neither has generated another since. Across all 17 real users now, 15 have made a plan, only 2 have ever made a second, and exactly 1 has ever made a plan more than a day after signing up. So the answer to your question is no. The artifact condition is the part I am taking. Tying a post to a shipped change or one thing learned from a user is a harder gate than a weekly cap, and it would have killed most of my recent updates. Three more people have signed up since I wrote this, which also dates the headline.
      1. 1
        That changes the diagnosis quite a bit. The first-plan workflow is getting exercised; the return loop is not. I would avoid adding a broad retention feature yet. Talk to three or four people who generated one plan and stopped, then test one specific return job: adjusting the existing plan after several days, reporting what was completed, or generating the next period. The useful metric is not another login by itself, but whether someone returns to continue the same outcome.