WeProcess is live. Two months ago this community asked if it was stretched too thin.
Two months ago I posted a Show IH here asking whether an integrated thinking platform was a real category or another all-in-one stretched too thin. The pushback in that thread was the sharpest feedback I got anywhere pre-launch. It forced me to say out loud what I was actually betting on.
Today WeProcess is live: https://weprocess.jp/en
What shipped:
The core loop — write an outline, it becomes a mind map on the whiteboard, one click turns nodes into tasks, and tasks flow through kanban, gantt and burndown. Ideation to execution without switching tools. There are 15-second demo clips on the site showing the actual flow.
The marketplace — the part I defended hardest in that thread. No purchases. Authors publish templates, users give appreciation, appreciation converts to points, points convert to monetization. The appreciator earns too, just for participating. I wrote back then: "Appreciation becomes monetization. All of it ships at launch." It shipped.
Also live: free plan (no credit card), 12 languages, team members on paid tiers, CSV import, and a gamification layer — XP, ranks, and a work-style radar I'm weirdly proud of.
What the two months in between taught me came mostly from this community: polish was my shield (beatsp said it first), warm relationships don't automatically become paying customers (ReleaseLog's line), and my explanation of the product got worse the longer I built it — a recent thread here nailed exactly why.
The real test starts now. My claim in the Show IH thread was that the bottleneck isn't feature depth — it's whether a community forms around the circulation of process knowledge. Until today that was a thesis I could defend with arguments. From today, it's something the data will answer.
If you have 5 minutes, poke at it and tell me where the "integrated" pitch falls apart. Free plan, no card: https://weprocess.jp/en
ReleaseLog — you said tag you when the moment comes. Delivered.
One thing I found interesting is that your biggest risk doesn't seem technical anymore.
If people adopt WeProcess for the execution tools but never contribute or reuse processes, you have software. If they start sharing how they work, you have a network. That's a very different business, and probably the real hypothesis you're testing now.
Right framing, and yes — that's the hypothesis I'm testing. Software if people just use the tools, network if they start sharing how they work.
The appreciation-to-monetization loop is the bet on the second. It only works if process circulates rather than just gets consumed. And this isn't a fast signal — the two outcomes look identical early on. Whether circulation compounds is a question measured in quarters, not weeks.
I think that's the part I'd keep pulling on.
Reading your reply made me notice a consequence of that network hypothesis that isn't obvious early on, precisely because the two paths look almost identical at first.
It's difficult to unpack the reasoning properly in a thread without skipping the important parts.
If you're open to it, what's the best email to reach you on?