I made a tool for founders who are tired of hearing “looks great!” from people who are clearly lying.
It’s called ShameMySite.
You paste in your website, and it tells you what’s wrong with it.
Not in a corporate, “there may be opportunities to improve the user journey” kind of way.
I mean in a:
“this headline says nothing”
“this layout is fighting itself”
“why does this button look afraid”
kind of way.
Because a lot of websites don’t fail dramatically.
They fail quietly.
They just stand there looking decent-ish while visitors leave with absolutely no idea what the product does.
That felt like a problem worth building for.
So ShameMySite gives brutally honest feedback on messaging, design, trust signals, UX, and overall first impression. The goal is to help founders fix the stuff polite people will never mention.
Basically:
less “nice work!”
more “be serious.”
Would love honest feedback on the idea and execution:
https://shamemysite.com
This is actually a really sharp angle - especially the "polite feedback is useless" insight.
Totally agree that most sites don't fail loudly, they just quietly confuse people.
One thing I've been noticing alongside this is that there are kind of two different types of feedback:
The second one is interesting because most users won't ever write detailed feedback, but they will respond to something lightweight if it is right there:
It is obviously not as detailed as what you are generating, but it helps catch those "silent failure" moments while they are happening.
Feels like both approaches could complement each other really well - one gives depth, the other gives volume.