Hi iH, I love this community, it is made up of cool creative people with good values, and that is why I want to act with care and good faith :)
My question is both general and specific. To start with the general one, how to handle competition among fellow indie hackers? As the community grows and many of us are building openly it's natural that eventually, we will be colliding within the same market, with little IP to protect our ideas.
Now to the specifics: I started building Twitter Growth a couple of weeks ago, motivated by the fact that in order to sell anything! a thriving Twitter account was a natural first step, similarily as to how Linkedin works for employees.
As I was preparing a soft launch here in IH, I stumbled with the Twitter group and browsing through some posts, I found I built a better Twitter analytics tool and How to Grow Your Twitter Audience from Scratch.
The issue with the first post is that while the tool promoted in the first post and the one I developed, have different purposes, features, and quality. To a certain extent, they could be considered as "substitutes" for a subset of customers. Given that my business plan involved onboarding the first batch of users for free once the MVP was ready. I might be hurting @dr business, which is not my intention. What would be then the best approach to deal in that regard?
The issue with the second post is that, as I was doing research on how to grow a Twitter audience, I've noticed that replying to high-follower accounts was a good strategy, but I was nowhere close as to how @simplisticallysimple summarizes the strategy in his post. When browsing through his product it came to my surprise, that what was advertised in his very popular post is not part of his product! Would it be ethical, to grab some of the concepts exposed on the post and turn them into features for Twitter Growth?
I'm looking forward to hearing thoughts from you.