I watched 5 beta users ghost me in one week.
Same pattern every time:
- They loved the idea
- Tried it once
- Never came back
I thought:
product broken?
messaging unclear?
follow-up bad?
Turns out: all three.
The posts I generated sounded like AI wrote them. Em dashes everywhere. Corporate speak. Generic transitions.
One user said: "sounds like AI slop"
That hurt.
But it was the wake-up call I needed.
I rebuilt the generation engine from scratch:
- Removed 47 AI "smell" patterns
- Added voice fingerprinting from user's past posts
- Tested until friends couldn't tell AI vs human
The difference is brutal.
Before: "Moreover, it's important to note that..."
After: "This works. Tested it."
I'm running beta again. Free until April 15.
The pitch: you send idea, I generate posts for Twitter/LinkedIn/Reddit/Telegram/Facebook.
Not generic AI versions. Your voice. Each platform's format.
Takes ~30 min. Free while testing.
Two asks:
1. If you post across multiple platforms, want to try?
2. What's your #1 frustration with AI-generated content?
Try it: trytov.vercel.app
The ghosting isn't the failure — it's the signal. 5 users is too small to draw conclusions but the pattern tells you something. Were they the right users? Did they have the problem you're solving badly enough to stick with a new tool? Before iterating on the product, I'd step back and stress-test the premise. Sometimes the problem is real but the audience is wrong. Or the audience is right but the pain isn't sharp enough.
thanks for such good questions, I'll think about them. What do you mean by a stress test?
A stress test means throwing your idea at models that are designed to break it — not confirm it. One model plays Devil's Advocate and tries to kill the idea. Another runs unit economics to see if the numbers work. Another checks if a solo founder can realistically build it. You don't get "great idea!" — you get "here's exactly where this falls apart." That's a stress test.
how can I do a stress test for my idea?
Quickest way: pitch it to 5 people in your target market and ask "would you pay for this today?" — not "do you like it." If most hesitate, dig into why.
If you want a faster read, try founderjury.ai — 8 AI models debate your idea simultaneously and flag the weak spots. Free to run.
Thanks, i'll try it.
Btw you have to fix adaptive design :) (no hate)
Thanks for trying it! Let me know what you think after your first run.
And good catch on the responsive design — it's on the fix list. Appreciate the feedback 🙏
I tried. Your review models sometimes use German, thats funny but I can't really understand some answers. Your models think about legal, I wasn't particularly interested in that, because I would like to receive an answer regarding the idea itself.
Thanks for trying it — really appreciate the honest feedback! You're right on both counts. I'm pushing a fix this week: (1) forcing English-only output across all models, and (2) rebalancing the debate to focus on idea viability and market potential first, not legal risk. Would love for you to try again once it's updated. What was the idea you submitted?
oh got it
"Sounds like AI slop" is brutal feedback but the best kind. At least they told you.
I'm building AgileTask (.ai) — AI sprint planning for solo founders. Hit the same wall early: the AI was generating tasks that sounded like a corporate PM wrote them. Completely disconnected from how indie hackers actually think about their work.
The voice fingerprinting approach is smart. Did you find that the platform context (Twitter vs LinkedIn) needed separate training or does the voice transfer across?
Running a free beta too — timing is interesting. Good luck with the April 15 deadline.
Thanks for sharing.
About platform context: I sat separately and studied each algorithm for each platform, it took me about 20 hours for everything, I'm not kidding. Therefore, Tov is well trained and writes posts for each platform, knows the algorithms and the necessary parts of the post such as the hook, body, and cta.
That's serious research investment — respect for going that deep on the algorithms rather than guessing. The per-platform training makes total sense, each one has completely different engagement patterns.
Curious: did you find LinkedIn needed the most re-training from scratch, or was X the hardest to get right?
Tbh, the most difficult was reddit, where you need to write posts carefully and it's veeeeeery easy to get blocked. For linkedin, there's also an interesting algorithm for writing posts - there are business people there, and you need to please them
Reddit making sense — the community radar for self-promotion is extremely sensitive. Value-first or don't bother.
LinkedIn is interesting because our ICPs (solo founders, indie hackers) are there but they behave differently than on X. More formal, less raw.
For AgileTask I'm focusing X first since that's where builders hang out authentically, then IH, then maybe Reddit r/SaaS carefully. LinkedIn feels like a later stage play once there's social proof to point to.
What's your conversion rate from social to trial so far?