10,020 Visitors, 2,070 Signups - Here's What We Learned Going Silent

10,020 Visitors, 2,070 Signups - Here's What We Learned Going Silent
PostAutopsy growth update: Why we stopped posting and what happened next

The Numbers
After 744 days of building in public:

10,020 visitors
2,070 signups
5,046 posts analyzed by real users

But here's what's more interesting than the numbers: how we got here.

The Strategy Shift
For the first few months, we were loud.
We leveraged personal brand. Posted daily. Engaged everywhere. Built initial traction through visibility.
Then we went silent.
Not accidentally. Not because we gave up. Strategically silent.
And people asked: "Why no updates?"

The Counterintuitive Lesson
Early stage: Noise is necessary. You need rocket fuel. Personal brand. Constant visibility. Building trust loudly.
Growth stage: Noise becomes distraction. Once the rocket is up, you don't keep holding it.
You let the product do the work. You let trust compound. You focus on what actually moves the needle.
For us, that meant:

Pushing through other channels (not just social)
Building features users actually needed
Optimizing conversion over content
Letting usage speak louder than updates

What "Going Silent" Actually Meant
We didn't disappear. We redirected.
Instead of:

Daily social media updates
Constant "we shipped X" posts
Tagging and noise
Building in public theater

We focused on:

User feedback loops
Product iteration
Distribution experiments
Channels that converted (not just got likes)

The result: 5,046 posts analyzed. Real usage. Real validation.

The Indie Hacker Dilemma
There's pressure to build in public. To post updates. To show progress.
And it works... for a stage.
But there comes a point where building in public becomes performing in public.
Where you're optimizing for engagement on your updates instead of engagement with your product.
The hard question: Are you building for your audience or for your Twitter followers?

What We'd Do Differently
Keep doing:

Using personal brand as rocket fuel early
Building trust through visibility initially
Posting when there's something worth saying

Stop doing:

Daily updates for the sake of updates
Tagging for reach when it doesn't add value
Confusing content performance with product performance

The shift: From "look what we're building" to "here's what's working."

The Metrics That Actually Mattered
Not follower count. Not post engagement.
These:

Signup conversion rate (how many visitors → users)
Activation rate (how many signups → actually used the product)
Usage depth (5,046 posts analyzed = people are using it repeatedly)
Retention (are people coming back?)

2,070 signups from 10,020 visitors = ~20% conversion.
That's not vanity. That's validation.

What PostAutopsy Actually Does
For those who haven't tried it yet:
PostAutopsy is the brutally honest LinkedIn editor.
Before you publish a LinkedIn post:

Write your draft
PostAutopsy scores it (Hook, Clarity, Novelty, Emotion, Structure, CTA)
Get a score out of 10
See exactly what's weak
Get AI rewrites to improve it
Publish with confidence

The problem it solves: Most LinkedIn posts fail before they're published. Weak hooks. Missing CTAs. Poor structure.
The solution: Know if your post will work BEFORE you waste it on the algorithm.
5,046 posts analyzed = founders are using it to optimize their LinkedIn content.

The Stage-Based Approach
Stage 1: 0 to First 100 Users (Loud Phase)

Leverage personal brand
Build in public actively
Engage everywhere
Create initial traction through noise

Stage 2: 100 to 1000 Users (Transition Phase)

Start measuring what actually converts
Reduce noise, increase signal
Focus on channels that work
Let product quality do the talking

Stage 3: 1000+ Users (Execution Phase)

Go deep on distribution
Optimize everything
Build quietly, ship loudly (when it matters)
Let usage speak

We're somewhere between Stage 2 and 3 now.

Distribution Channels That Worked
Beyond social media (which we reduced):

Direct outreach - Personal messages to people who'd benefit
SEO - Content that actually ranks
Product-led growth - Free tier that shows value immediately
Word of mouth - 5,046 posts analyzed = people are telling others
Strategic partnerships - Working with creators who need this

Social media became one channel, not the channel.

The Mental Shift
Early on, I measured success by:

Post engagement
Follower growth
How many people saw my updates

Now, I measure success by:

User activation
Usage depth
Retention
Revenue (eventually)

The shift from audience builder to product builder.
Both are valid. But at some point, you have to choose where to focus.

Lessons for Indie Hackers

1. Building in public is a tool, not a religion
   Use it when it serves your goals. Reduce it when it doesn't.
2. Noise ≠ Progress
   5 posts a week with no signups < 1 post a month with 100 signups
3. Trust compounds
   Early visibility creates trust. That trust works for you even when you're silent.
4. Usage > Updates
   5,046 posts analyzed tells a better story than 100 Twitter threads about building
5. Choose your stage
   Early stage = be loud. Growth stage = be strategic. Scale stage = let the product speak.
6. Metrics matter
   Track what actually matters (conversions, usage, retention), not vanity metrics.

What's Next for PostAutopsy
We're in a good position. Clear direction.
Focus areas:

Double down on what's working
Improve activation (signups → active users)
Build features users are requesting
Scale distribution (the quiet way)

Not doing:

Daily update theater
Chasing social media metrics
Building features for the sake of announcements

The Honest Take
Going silent was scary.
There's comfort in constant updates. In being visible. In building in public momentum.
But there's also a trap.
The trap of optimizing for content performance instead of product performance.
We chose product. And the numbers validate that choice.
10,020 visitors. 2,070 signups. 5,046 posts analyzed.
That's not vanity. That's usage. That's validation.

Questions for You
If you're building right now:

Are you optimizing for engagement on your updates or engagement with your product?
What would happen if you went silent for a month and just focused on product?
How do you decide when to be loud vs when to execute quietly?

If you're using PostAutopsy (or curious about it):

What's the biggest challenge you face with LinkedIn content?
How do you currently know if your post is "good enough" to publish?

Drop your thoughts. I read every comment.

Try PostAutopsy
If you're building in public on LinkedIn and want to ensure your posts actually perform:
Website: postautopsy.com
What it does: Scores your LinkedIn posts before you publish. Tells you what's weak. Rewrites to maximize engagement.
Free to try. No credit card needed.
5,046 posts analyzed by real users. Join them.

Final Thought
Silence wasn't absence. It was focused execution.
If you're building quietly right now, keep going.
The work compounds even when the updates don't.

Day 744 of building. More focused than ever.
Connect: linkedin.com/in/arunachalam-numismatician

What stage are you at? Loud phase or execution phase? Let's discuss in the comments.