Keeprer

I’ve revamped the UI/UX today, and the next step is to try and find the first group of customers.

Google verification is submitted. Keeprer creates a calendar event when you accept a booking, which needs a sensitive scope, and sensitive scopes get reviewed. Until it clears, anyone connecting their calendar meets a full-page red "Google hasn't verified this app" screen. That is expected and it does not mean anything is broken — the way through is Advanced, then Go to Keeprer. The app now says so before you press Connect, in both languages, because the shock is what makes people back out, not the warning itself.

If you are shipping a Google integration yourself, the part I did not expect: the review is not really about your code. Mine came back on an automated check that could not find the app name on my homepage. It was there five times. Just not in the H1.

The site now has a Thai version at /th. Not a language toggle. The old one translated the DOM in the browser after load, which meant every crawler and every unfurl bot only ever saw English, and there was no Thai URL to rank or to share. Now /th serves Thai HTML from the server, both versions declare each other with hreflang, and a visitor in Thailand lands on the Thai one. Crawlers are never redirected — serving a bot something different from what a reader sees at the same address is cloaking, and it gets punished.

And if you want to connect Google Calendar right now: you will see the unverified screen, click through Advanced, and everything works normally after that. Keeprer only adds bookings you accept, and never reads what is already on your calendar. If you would rather wait for the review, nothing else in the product needs it.

I built an AI screening layer for inbound work requests. You write your rules in

plain sentences — who you say yes to, your rate floor, the categories you never

take. Requests hit those hard rules first, then an AI judge for the ambiguous

middle, and anything it isn't confident about gets flagged rather than guessed.

Each one arrives with a verdict and a reply drafted in your voice. You approve;

nothing sends on its own.

Two hours a night after work, alone. Then I went looking for the first 20 users

and got it wrong twice.

First guess: streamers. Wrong. A mid-tier streamer gets maybe three sponsorship

offers a month. They don't want to filter inbound — they want more of it. My

product only has positive value for someone already drowning.

Second guess: tattoo artists, photographers, anyone with a months-long waitlist.

Genuinely overwhelmed, so that part fit. Then I opened the contact page of ten

studios in a row. Every one funnels to WhatsApp, Instagram DM or LINE. Not one

form.

Which makes sense once you see it. A tattoo enquiry is inherently multi-turn —

reference photos, placement, size, then price. A one-shot form dies at step two.

The rule I ended up with:

Whoever sends the request determines the shape of the channel.

A company sends email. It has the details in hand and needs a record, so its

request is already form-shaped.

An individual sends chat. They don't know what they want yet, so they ask first.

If that's right, my segment isn't an industry at all. It's anyone whose inbound

arrives from organisations rather than individuals.

It's live and free, zero users. One person's work and it shows — onboarding has

more steps than it needs, and whoever books you doesn't get a confirmation email

yet. I know about those; I'd rather hear the ones I don't. You don't need an

account to see it work: keeprer.space/beam

Postscript: I posted a shorter version of this to r/SideProject earlier and it

was auto-filtered for having 1 karma. Building a screening tool and then getting

screened out has a certain symmetry to it.

Two things I'd genuinely like answered:

Has anyone here made a form work in a market that defaults to chat?

And where's your line — what would you never let something else answer for you,

even with an approve button in front of it?