A platform for structured idea validation — and proof-based professional portfolios.
I’m solo-building IdeaBridgeHub, and I’m still fixing and polishing things — not launching yet.
But I wanted to share the direction and get early IndieHackers feedback.
The problem I keep seeing:
Founders try to validate ideas with scattered notes, random interviews, or gut feeling.
Professionals (mentors, advisors, analysts, etc.) have no real way to build a proven portfolio of their impact.
What I’m building:
A platform that helps founders run structured validation — and helps professionals build proof-based portfolios through co-sign reviews.
Core features so far:
• Validation sprints (interview, survey, landing-page, etc.)
• Evidence engine with snapshots, versions, and pro-sign reviews
• Team & collaborator workflow
• Founders and Professionals both have separate journeys
• Pro-sign system (professionals give structured reviews → becomes part of their portfolio)
• Messaging + cofounder search engine
• Full RLS security on Supabase (I learned this the hard way 😅)
Not looking for testers yet — just honest feedback.
Curious:
If you’re a founder or a professional, would you use something like this?
What would make this valuable enough to try
Interesting concept. Validation is usually chaotic, so a structured way to collect and organize evidence feels useful. The pro-sign idea also adds real value for professionals who want proof of their impact. Curious to see how this develops.
Hello Soren, thanks a lot for the thoughtful take, really appreciate you checking it out. You're absolutely right about validation being chaotic. That’s the exact pain I’ve seen repeatedly, and why I’m trying to build a cleaner way for founders to turn interviews, surveys, and experiments into structured evidence rather than scattered notes.
The pro-sign angle is something I’m excited about too, giving professionals a way to build a proof-based portfolio instead of just testimonials. It feels like a win-win if it’s implemented right.
Still early, still polishing, but feedback like this really helps shape the direction. Thanks again for taking the time.
As a heads up, the logo in your site banner isn't loading for me and
Full Name (optional)isn't an optional field on your signup form.Beyond that, as someone starting something, the idea of finding people who fit my ICP quickly and are somehow incentivized to talk to me honestly would be very compelling.
Beyond that, even having a means to search or chat and learn specifics about where people like my ICP spend their time would be compelling by itself. <- i'd feel a lot more comfortable sharing who I want to speak with and learning about the communities they engage with than sharing my idea outright online.
Hey Josh, thanks a lot for checking it out
Yep, you’re right about the header. I actually haven’t added the final logo yet. just got it designed and still wiring it in, and good catch on the “Full Name (optional)” thing. That label isn’t supposed to behave like a required field. Fixing that shortly.
Your point about finding people who match your ICP quickly really resonates. That’s exactly the kind of direction I want IBH to lean into , helping founders talk to the right people without needing to reveal everything publicly.
Thanks again for the thoughtful input, it genuinely helps shape the next steps.