I tested the same content problem on Reddit and Indie Hackers — here’s what happened
I’m building Prizston around a simple idea: use real audience response to decide what is worth pursuing.
So I tried a small experiment myself.
I posted about the same underlying problem on Reddit and Indie Hackers.
On Reddit, the post got views but almost no positive engagement.
On Indie Hackers, I got a smaller response but at least one real conversation.
It’s a tiny sample, so I’m not drawing conclusions yet.
But it already made me think that “views” alone are a pretty weak signal. A useful comment may matter more than a few hundred passive impressions.
That’s actually one of the things I want Prizston to eventually help with: not just publishing content, but comparing the quality of the response across channels.
If you were measuring early market signal, what would you care about most: views, comments, saves, replies, clicks, or something else?
What made you pick this stack over the alternatives?
What made you pick this stack over the alternatives?
Nice progress. What is the next thing you are focusing on?
Interesting approach. What was the hardest part to get right?
Helpful post. How did you get your first bit of traction?
Helpful post. How did you get your first bit of traction?
Good point. Did you test that with users before committing to it?
Appreciate the honesty here, most people only share the wins.
What made you pick this stack over the alternatives?
Makes sense. Are you planning to charge for it, or keep it free for now?
This is useful. How are you finding your first users so far?
This is useful. How are you finding your first users so far?
Thanks for sharing the numbers, that makes it much easier to follow.
Thanks for sharing the numbers, that makes it much easier to follow.
Thanks for sharing the numbers, that makes it much easier to follow.
Beyond comments and views, what user behavior would show that Prizston’s response-quality signal actually improves a founder’s next content or product decision?
That’s the key question.
I don’t think the real proof is more views or comments by themselves. The stronger signal would be behavioral: the user changes what they do next because of the insight.
For example, Prizston might identify one problem or topic as showing stronger response, and the founder then creates another piece of content around it, explores that niche further, or changes a product hypothesis because of it.
Over time, I’d want to see whether those AI-guided decisions consistently lead to better follow-up signals than the user’s baseline decisions.
So the real metric is probably not “did the post perform well?” but “did the recommendation lead to a better next decision?”
That part is still something I’m figuring out how to measure properly.
That’s the part I’d be most curious to unpack. Could take this over email sometime if you’re open to it.
This resonates a lot — how long did it take before you saw any real signal on it?
I’m still very early, so I wouldn’t say I’ve seen a strong signal yet.
The first thing I noticed was that views alone didn’t tell me much. A post could get a couple hundred views and almost no real interaction, while a smaller response could lead to an actual conversation.
That’s what I’m testing now — what kind of response is actually meaningful enough to influence what I should do next.