Reddit status: access issues and outage reports

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Reddit reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

Most Reported Problems

The following are the most recent problems reported by Reddit users through our website.

• Website Down (45%)
• Errors (31%)
• Sign in (24%)

Live Outage Map

The most recent Reddit outage reports came from the following cities:

City	Problem Type	Report Time
Patna	Errors	9 days ago
Monclova	Sign in	10 days ago
Nice	Errors	10 days ago
Guayaquil	Errors	20 days ago
Veracruz	Website Down	26 days ago
Bhubaneshwar	Website Down	28 days ago

Full Outage Map

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Reddit Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

• 
  The Wise Investor 🧠 (@TheWiseIC) reported 2 minutes ago

  @varuninvesting $RDDT - AI becomes a “black hole” for attention, all advertisers flock to ChatGPT and Anthropic which have 2-3B daily users. Dead internet theory becomes reality. So worst case scenario, it’s not just Reddit that’s in trouble but also meta, Snapchat, Pinterest, Google, etc … Much easier to bet on something NOT being a 0 than it is being priced for perfection.

• 
  Ben H (@benh_mecfs) reported 2 minutes ago

  @Z3R0Gravitas @JackHadfield14 @Gmwetz Do you mean 1/4-1/3 on the PWM reddit are chronically ill? Apologies if I have misinterpreted that. So yes, that’s when I noticed PWM being an issue, but my severity had become massively worse. I had to have a PWM-free LCD. Interesting the IPS had PWM. They’re usually my go-to!

• 
  GHOSTBLOCK (@GHOSTBLOCK2) reported 4 minutes ago

  @beerundbacon @Kismetangel1 Why would he possibly give a **** about citizens posting memes? Do you think he is on Reddit looking at what people post about him? Are you ******* slow?

• 
  Nandkishor (@devops_nk) reported 8 minutes ago

  - 15 minutes late is a problem. - Working weekends apparently isn’t. I came across a Reddit post about an employee being questioned by HR for arriving 15–20 minutes late, despite reportedly working beyond office hours and on weekends. It made me realise how concerning this is. Management notices the 15 minutes an employee is late. But somehow the hours they spend working on weekends go unnoticed. Workplace accountability should go both ways. If you track every minute employees are late, why not track the extra hours they put in ? Fairness or double standards ?

• 
  Rhonda S (@Smeetsya) reported 8 minutes ago

  @s4intfelina That's the problem. Men hate women, but women hate women too. I'll bet 90% of these snark reddit are women.

• 
  🔪 American McGee 🖤 (@americanmcgee) reported 8 minutes ago

  I find the timing of this interaction more than a little odd given that I recently reached out to the creator of the video in question to discuss the way in which it drives hate and misunderstanding. And I let them know that I was pondering the creation of a response video. But that I first wanted to give them a chance to discuss everything. They've since gone silent. And now this? So, the video isn't great. 250k views and it's stirred up a LOT of misunderstanding. But to be fair, the first three and a half minutes are fine. Our founding, the crowd design process, the monthly charitable donations. All of that is presented reasonably. Then we get to 3:30. That’s where the thesis arrives: “As Plushie Dreadfuls began to grow, controversy began to follow them as years passed by.” And from that point until about 9:45, it is one long, uninterrupted prosecution. No counter-points. No company response. No real attempt to explain the other side of anything. Then we get thirty warm seconds at the end about our scoliosis rabbit, which I guess is supposed to make the whole thing feel balanced? But the bookends are not the issue. The middle six minutes are. Look at where the material actually comes from. Essentially all of it traces back to one hostile subreddit and one TikTok rant that runs for about seventy seconds without any response from us at all. That is what viewers are given as an “overview” of our business. That’s not an honest overview. That’s reading our loudest critics into the record and calling it "research." Nowhere in the video does it mention that we have a 4.9 rating on Trustpilot across more than a thousand reviews. Reviews we cannot edit, remove, or filter. You would think that might be relevant when repeating the claim that we have “a really bad track record with customer service.” It takes one search to find that rating. One search. But if you do that search, maybe you can’t frame the story the same way. And the omissions are not small. With the refund story, the customer was offered three options: a full and fast refund if the damaged plush was destroyed, a smaller refund if they kept it, or a complete replacement if they sent it back. Three options. The Reddit thread focused on one because that made the story sound worse, and the video simply repeated that framing. The other two options? Never mentioned. On ABA, the organization we partnered with for the OG ASD Rabbit was specifically geared toward modern techniques designed to avoid the practices that made older ABA harmful. You can still have a conversation about ABA, obviously. But the video presents it as one uniformly abusive thing and treats our partnership as knowing complicity. Context disappears. Outrage remains. Out of that we have people claiming we "supported electrocuting kids" - literal quote. No joke. Then there’s the Discord claim. Again. It never ends. The video states as flat fact, in the creator’s own voice, that I went onto our Discord server “saying that being pan was a phase.” What it does not mention is my VERY NEXT response, where I made clear I was talking about a phase of interest on TikTok. Or the actual context of the conversation, which was about sales trends and redesigns. All that info is in the screenshots. All of it ignored. That context matters. It changes the meaning completely. But including it would make the claim much less useful. I guess it would make the video less watchable? 250k views makes this their most popular video ever. Imagine that! We also get the assertion that I have “a habit of responding in unprofessional ways to criticism.” Okay. Where is the evidence for that in the video? There isn’t any. The claim is just made. And, of course, there is no mention that many of my responses happen in the context of nonstop personal attacks. Apparently that part doesn’t matter either. Is what I am writing here "unprofessional?" I've noticed there are a lot of people out there who essentially consider facts to be unprofessional. Good luck with that. And here’s the thing that really gets me about these videos: at no point did the creator contact me, my wife, or anyone on our team. Not once. Every one of these misrepresentations could have been cleared up with a single message. I know that because when I finally reached out myself, I got a reply within hours. They were reachable the entire time. Nobody tried. And the video creator follows me here on X. That means they have watched over a year of the fallout from all of this. And done nothing in response. I often say that the attacks and behaviors that flow from these incidents are 1000x worse than the incidents themselves. This is a perfect example of that. When I raised all of this, I was told the creator had maintained a neutral stance throughout, and that they had made sure to state the Discord comment had nothing to do with hate toward any group. Great. Except neither of those things is in the video. There is no such statement anywhere in it. And the narration does NOT maintain some careful neutral stance; it repeatedly delivers conclusions in the creator’s own voice. Maybe that’s carelessness. Maybe it’s something worse. Either way, the result is the same. A video that its own creator apparently cannot accurately describe is now being used as a primary source for people calling me a bigot, accusing us of hiding AI use, and worse. And my team absorbs that every day. I absorb it every day. If the video had been made in good faith, one message would have fixed this. If facts were the priority, the Trustpilot rating, the full refund options, the ABA context, and my next Discord response would all be in there. But they aren’t. And I think we all know why. Pretty sure I am going to record a full-length response to this and post it across my socials... but I guess I'll give the video creator a little longer to respond before I do. It's more grace and understanding than they are the haters they inspire ever gave us. Sure that will be ignored too 🤷

• 
  NTPrime (@NTPrime) reported 9 minutes ago

  @GunsOfEschaton I'm blacklisting this game for myself because of your terrible exploitative Reddit ads.

• 
  Dude (@Randomuser22147) reported 13 minutes ago

  @1x_Michelle_x1 @Pirat_Nation I installed it for the Call of duty beta. After I finished playing I noticed the flickering of my monitor every minute. Looked it up and saw a reddit thread of people reporting the same issue. I reverted back to my old driver. I'll reinstall when it's fixed.

• 
  RicciTeTroll (@trolltom02) reported 14 minutes ago

  I feel something this morning, just left a thesis on FOMO under @snoofi_RH 's $snoofi reddit stock coin pair. "ok listen, I am desperately trying to find the reddit stock pairs that could run. So far I have narrowed it down to 2: snoofi, the literal logo of reddit (and a token that got massive bid back in the days) and chud on long, which is something redditors can definitely resonate with"

• 
  MARCUS🇵🇭 (@plottwisssttt) reported 15 minutes ago

  @jb141_ They think the feds cant just look these up on reddit and starts taking it down one by one 😭😭😭😭

• 
  𒀖Ackza𒀖₿ (@ackzacrypto) reported 16 minutes ago

  @ZackGianino you need to learn how the weather works before you post a bunch of bullshit, global warming trash posts like this. go on Reddit and post this scare garbage temperature is going to go down soon

• 
  ☦️🇦🇺 (@AngloOrthodox22) reported 18 minutes ago

  @kylantisfeniks0 Reddit is down the hall and to the left

• 
  Priyanshu Bhati (@buildwithpb) reported 19 minutes ago

  @Noise_Frequency @susanabulhawa glitch is huge but calling them barons feels like a stretch. they’re just really good at reddit lore.

• 
  Mick Jay (@mickjayofficial) reported 23 minutes ago

  @beffjezos Frontier labs have to stop pretraining/training their base models on internet sewage like Reddit (and other biased datasets) which is rife with moral relativism and ends-justify-the-means thinking. Guardrails won’t fix bad base training.

• 
  heated rivalry anti 🦈 (@imaloteveryday) reported 23 minutes ago

  this just being a coke rant of reddit twitter terms. this is because none of your problems exist in real life

• 
  Arjun Premkumar (@arjun_prmkmr) reported 27 minutes ago

  @ayoub_el77927 Talk about what and how you solve the problem on X an Reddit as much as possible.

• 
  Grant Miller (@AIGuide_) reported 27 minutes ago

  Claude Fable 5.1 dropped yesterday and i've had it running on a full social GTM stack since it holds way more at once now. you can dump a whole category's worth of posts, every customer conversation you've had, and everything you've ever published into one project and it keeps all of it straight, which means what comes out stops sounding like the other 400 accounts in your niche running the same three prompts they lifted off a thread. and this matters because social is where GTM actually lives now. someone decides whether you're worth a reply from a feed months before they decide whether you're worth money, but most companies still file that under brand awareness and then wonder why nobody knows they exist. i'll go over 10 stages with the prompts included for each one. let's get into it. stage 0: build the brain make a claude project and load it up before you ask it for a single thing. and i don't mean a clean CRM export, because you probably don't have one and it doesn't matter anyway. load whatever actually exists: - every post you've shipped, sorted by what hit and what died - your replies, comments, and the DMs that turned into money - whatever customer conversations you have, so calls, demos, tickets - 90 days of posts from the 10 accounts your buyers already read - what shipped in the product lately - the questions people keep asking that you keep answering the same way then run this: "act as the GTM brain for this company. read everything uploaded and build a working profile: what we actually do in plain language, who it's for, what we believe that most of this category doesn't, what we've posted that landed and what died, what proof exists today, and what we can credibly claim vs what we're still earning the right to say. do not make recommendations yet. summarize what's here, then tell me what's missing." nobody selling prompt packs talks about this stage because context can't be packaged, it's just work, and it's the only reason any of the next 10 stages produce something usable. stage 1: who you're actually writing for "look at everyone who reached out to us in the last 90 days. what did they have in common before they reached out, what post did they engage with first, what were they doing instead of us, and what did they say in the first message. if the sample is too small to support conclusions, say so and tell me what would make it reliable." that last line is the one everyone deletes, which is why half this space is running strategy off nine customers and calling it a playbook. most accounts write for their followers when they should be writing for the 30 people inside that number who can actually sign something. stage 2: customer language "pull the exact language buyers use about [PROBLEM] from our own conversations, replies and reviews. then find the same conversation in public, so reddit threads, quote tweets, comment sections, community slacks where it comes up unprompted. format as quote / underlying pain / awareness stage / objection it implies / angle. then flag every place their language differs from how we describe the same thing." that flag is the whole exercise, because the distance between how your buyer says it and how you say it is where your reach goes to die, and it's usually about four words wide. stage 3: read the feed "analyze the last 90 days of posts from [10 ACCOUNTS] in this category. map what claims everyone is making, which takes are so common they stopped meaning anything, what's actually being argued about, what everyone is carefully not saying, and where the conversation goes next. then tell me which of our beliefs puts us on the contested side of a real argument." consensus doesn't travel, since nobody has ever shared a post they already agreed with before reading it. what you want is the take that's true, defensible, and mildly annoying to half your timeline. stage 4: angles "build 5 content pillars from stage 1 and the gaps in stage 3. for each: the belief it attacks, who it's aimed at, the proof required to make it land, the objection it pre-empts, and where it sits in the funnel." then run every one of them through this: "if a competitor could post this word for word and it still makes sense, cut it and tell me what's missing." try that filter on the content plan you're already running and watch how much of it evaporates. stage 5: voice everyone skips this one and then wonders why their AI content reads identical to every other account using AI. "analyze everything we've published. build a voice profile: sentence length and rhythm, how we open, how we handle disagreement, what we'll be wrong about in public, words we use constantly, words we'd never use, how technical we go before simplifying, whether we hedge or commit. then write the anti profile, the exact phrasings that would immediately read as not us. include every cliché in this category we'd be embarrassed to post." then before anything ships: "score this draft against the voice profile 1-10 and tell me which lines would get flagged as not written by us." and the anti profile ends up doing more work than the profile does. stage 6: write the posts "write 5 posts on [PILLAR] in the voice profile from stage 5. every post needs one number, name or detail that could only come from having done the thing. no question as a hook. end on the line that starts a reply. then flag anything we can't back with proof yet." it'll get you about 80% of the way there, and the last 20% is you, which no prompt is getting for you. stage 7: hooks the first two lines decide whether the other 40 get read, so treat them as their own job. "take these 5 posts. rewrite the opening two lines of each 6 ways: the specific result, the contrarian claim, the thing everyone thinks and won't say, the mistake we made, the number that sounds wrong, and the flat statement with no setup. for each tell me who it pulls and what it promises. then flag any hook the post doesn't actually pay off." that last flag is the one that matters most, because a hook you don't pay off costs you the next post too, since people remember getting baited. stage 8: distribution posting is only half of it, because the other half is showing up where the attention already sits. "list the 20 accounts our buyers already read. for each: what they post about, how much their audience overlaps ours, and what we could add in a reply that their audience isn't already getting from them. rank by overlap, not follower count." then: "given [X hours a week], design a posting and engagement system we can actually sustain. cadence, format mix, how much time on replies vs original posts. be honest about what we should not attempt at this volume." a 12k account full of your buyers beats a 400k account full of other marketers, and most content plans die because they were built for a team of four and end up getting run by one person at 11pm. stage 9: audit "compare the last 30 days to the prior 30. for each pillar and format: reach, engagement, and who engaged, so title, company type, whether they're ICP. flag anything that got reach from the wrong audience, anything that got low reach from exactly the right one, which pillars produced conversations and which produced nothing, and any drop over 20%. then tell me whether the problem is the hook, the pillar, or the claim underneath it." composition beats volume, so 40 engagements from your ICP is a better month than 4000 from people who do what you do. if your replies are all peers then you built a conference and called it pipeline. stage 10: scale "compare 30, 60 and 90 day windows by pillar, format and hook type. find what works across all three, not what spiked once. tell me what to double, what to hold, what to retire. if a sample is too small to call, say so instead of guessing." then: "build next month's roadmap: 2 pillar tests, 2 hook format tests, 1 cadence test. for each: hypothesis, metric, minimum sample to call it, and what happens if it wins." you need a minimum sample on all of it, or you're just reading noise and shipping it as strategy. the loop: - inbound tells you who you're writing for - their language becomes the angles - angles become the posts - posts become the replies - replies become the conversations - conversations sharpen the angles - the audit picks what gets written next month every output feeds the next one, so run it for 90 days and you end up with something your competitor can't copy by screenshotting your posts.

• 
  Simmo (@yoursimmo11) reported 31 minutes ago

  Stop f*cking adding so much stuff. Honestly. Please. Just stop. Stop stacking. Stop pill popping. Stop reading one more study at 11pm. Stop perusing Reddit and Ray Peat forums at midnight. Stop all of it. Think about it. If any of it actually worked, you'd have stopped by now (and you haven't). Pattern I see after coaching dozens and dozens of 7-and-8 figure execs is that not one was missing something. NOT ONE. Every single one had the opposite problem. Too much interference. Too many pills, too many rules, and way too much stimulus before 9am... all of it standing between his body and the thing it already knows how to do. Trust me on this: You're not under-supplemented. You're over-interfered. Your body doesn't reward effort. It rewards ORDER.

• 
  Om Patel (@om_patel5) reported 35 minutes ago

  grok bot made me exactly $262 today for my startup my entire sales and marketing team is 8 agents in a chat app 1\ lead scout figures out who my buyer actually is based off my existing customers, then goes and finds them pulls the list from apollo (cold leads), watches reddit, x and linkedin for anyone complaining about a competitor or asking for what i sell (warm leads) scores them 1 to 100 and drops anything under 60 2\ outreach engine takes that list and reaches out on whatever platform the lead came from cold emails go through resend, tue wed thu, 7am their local time, 4 emails with a day 3 follow up reddit, x and linkedin leads get a dm or a reply on the exact post that flagged them verifies every address first and rotates the sending domain so nothing lands in spam 3\ cold open writes the opener and does every reply after it it quotes what they actually said so the first line is never generic then keeps the thread going until they book or ghost me 4\ objection handler runs the support chat on my site, wired into my product knowledge base when someone goes back and forth it answers the real question instead of stalling, and kills the objection before it turns into a churn 5\ pricing architect watches which tiers people actually buy, moves prices up and down, and tells me where the money is sitting 6\ deal room the people who are almost there but need a human to close, like someone who wants a demo first it flags them and sends the booking link so i only get on calls with buyers 7\ content engineer writes posts for reddit, x and linkedin that promote the product, plus long form youtube video scripts built to rank on google and get cited by ai everything lands in drafts with ideas and hooks attached 8\ clipper cuts my youtube videos into short form and posts them to tiktok, reels and shorts all i need is one thread that shows me the whole system and it moves whether im awake or not people keep trying to hire a marketing team, but now all you need to do is write down what one actually does and then build it with @bot

• 
  Bmore73 (@mdemt) reported 36 minutes ago

  @ErimhanAhmet May 2024 — Former sailor’s photos called “worse than prison” A former Navy worker shared mess-hall photos on Reddit (raw-looking chicken, questionable brown meat, pink hotdog, moldy bread). Commenters included veterans from the 1990s who said shipboard food was “really quite awful,” greasy, and off-tasting. Covered by The Mirror.  Longer-term context from reporting: Sailors have long described repetitive menus, declining quality after fresh produce runs out (often within the first couple of weeks), and reliance on personal snacks, protein powder, and ramen to supplement. Midnight rations (“midrats”) were frequently cited as especially sparse leftovers. Ships returning to port rusty after long deployments October 2020 — USS Stout (DDG-55) after 215 consecutive days at sea The destroyer returned to Naval Station Norfolk looking heavily rust-streaked and weathered after a record 215 days without docking (COVID restrictions prevented port visits). Photos circulated widely showing rust patches on the hull. Daily Mail and later Naval News / NAVSEA coverage noted the rust was removed and the ship repainted after return. NAVSEA later used the Stout photo as an example of high operational tempo plus saltwater corrosion.  December 2021 — Broader “Navy is rusting away” reporting Task & Purpose published photos of multiple ships showing rust after deployments, including USS Arleigh Burke, USS Fort McHenry, USS James E. Williams, and USS Zumwalt, plus the 2020 Stout return. The piece attributed it to a “crushing deployment cycle” that left little time for preservation work.  2018–2019 examples and analysis • USS Curtis Wilbur drew comments for a “rusty and shabby appearance” during a 2018 Hong Kong visit. • 2019 Defense News “Rust Dialogues” discussed why U.S. ships often look rustier than allied ships: American vessels stay at sea longer with fewer port visits for chipping and painting. A 2005 photo of USS Normandy mid-deployment was contrasted with later, rustier ships. Corrosion control was already a multi-billion-dollar annual cost.  2023 NAVSEA statement Naval News quoted NAVSEA on rusty ships: high operational tempo + steel + seawater = rust staining wherever coatings are scratched. Crews do preservation at sea, but it is balanced against operations. The Stout 2020 photo was referenced again.  Rust after long deployments is treated by the Navy as expected cosmetic wear from saltwater and limited time for topside work while underway; it is usually addressed after return to port. Food complaints have been a persistent sailor grievance for decades, especially once fresh stores are gone and the 21-day repeating frozen/canned menu takes over. Both issues tend to surface most visibly after unusually long or high-tempo deployments with few or no port calls.

• 
  Kaleigh Moore (@kaleighf) reported 37 minutes ago

  B2B SaaS companies rank well in traditional search but still fail to earn citations in AI search. The fix? Getting experts to post about their knowledge on LinkedIn, YouTube, and Reddit. I built a system to make this programmatic, and it's forged from decade of reporting and vetting sources myself while writing for publications like Forbes, Vogue Business, and ADWEEK. It taught me something that most content strategists never learn: editors and journalists don't cite content, they cite PEOPLE — specific, verifiable, independently credentialed humans with a named point of view and a track record of being right about something.

• 
  salba (@salvbv) reported 37 minutes ago

  @LRSerling reddit loves to shove r/projectzomboid down my throat to infiuriate me with people that play with 1000 military mods and every friction in the game removed in the name of qol or "it's a sandbox game there's no cheating"

• 
  Clippa🐰✂️ (@CallMeClippa) reported 38 minutes ago

  @deverslath @tbdeinc @c_vinchenzo when no one could find the reddit leak that didnt exist, they created one hoping it would muddy the waters but people like you that are good at this are tracking everything in the **** show discord server already.

• 
  BLACK DUMPLING™ (@BlackDumpling) reported 44 minutes ago

  It will go down in history that there was an entire era of the internet where women would tell outlandish stories on Reddit explicitly to drive engagement to a profile that linked to an OF. Like they were straight up violating the Ten Commandments as a marketing strategy.

• 
  Beta Knight (@Beta_Knight13) reported 46 minutes ago

  @JoJo28130026 @theisleofficial You may be in a different server they moderate if you ever got banned somewhere else. Discord mods, reddit mods, all the same tubs of lard

• 
  Amin (@eCom_Amin) reported 46 minutes ago

  fable 5.1 is insanely CRACKED at finding winning google ads angles to scale your brand past $1m/mo research capacities literally DOUBLED so here's every prompt you'll need to reverse-engineer competitors' funnels and rip some banger gads: (actually run them all rn, don't just bookmark) 1. load the brain before you ask it anything the research is only as sharp as the context. upload: - pdps - reviews - website - funnel pages - competitors - report CSVs - brand docs - ICP info - winners - losers literally everything then run this: "act as the angle research lead for this brand. read everything uploaded and build a working profile: ICP segments ranked by revenue, the pain points in the customer's own words, the objections ordered by how often they appear, the proof we already own, and the beliefs a buyer must hold before purchasing. do not propose angles yet. summarise what you found, then tell me what context is MISSING" that last instruction is the whole game. prompt engineering is cope just have claude tell you what he needs from you and give it to him. anybody who disagrees just loves to overcomplicate things. 2. mine untapped databases that semrush misses prompt: "search reddit threads, quora answers, amazon reviews and Q&A sections, youtube comments on competitor and category videos, tiktok comments, trustpilot, and niche forums for people discussing [PROBLEM CATEGORY]. extract VERBATIM language, never paraphrase. for each goldmine you find, give me this: the quote, the pain underneath it, what they already tried, why it failed them, the outcome they want, and the emotional state behind it" paraphrasing is how angles end up sounding like ai slop. the whole value is in knowing your ICP's EXACT words and repeating them on ads. 3. reverse engineer every competitor funnel end to end "research [COMPETITOR 1, 2, 3]. use google ads transparency center, meta ad library, their landing pages, checkout flow and email capture. for each: every live ad and where it routes, the landing page TYPE, the hero promise, the mechanism they claim, the proof they lead with, the objections handled and in what order, the offer and guarantee, and what they are NOT saying" then: "for each competitor page, tell me which awareness level it was built for. then identify which of their traffic is landing on the wrong page type" this is how you find gaps in your competitors strategies that you can capitalize on 4. diagnose market sophistication BEFORE choosing an angle this is the step 9 out of 10 brands skip and it decides whether your angle has any chance: "assess the market sophistication level for [CATEGORY] using schwartz's 5 stages. analyse competitor ads and landing pages as evidence. stage 1 means nobody has made the claim yet. stage 2 means claims are escalating. stage 3 means mechanism differentiation has started. stage 4 means mechanisms are competing. stage 5 means the market is exhausted and identification wins. tell me which stage we're in, the evidence, and what type of angle still works at this stage" if your category is at stage 4, a bigger promise does nothing. every competitor already made one. if you're operating in stage 5, the mechanism is exhausted too, and the strategy has to shift again your ad is only good if it resonates with the market it operates in 5. score every angle against awareness and funnel stage "from the research, generate 15 google ad angles for my brand. for each: the awareness level it serves, the funnel stage it belongs in, the sophistication stage it's valid at, whether it's validated by competitors or white space, the proof required to run it, and the funnel type it should be tested through. rank by expected impact and flag any we lack proof to support" an angle without proof is a claim. claude will rank those last 6. map the keywords to the angles, not the products "build the keyword universe for [BRAND] using the customer language and competitor research. split into branded, competitor, problem-aware symptom queries, solution-aware category queries, comparison, use-case, and occasion. tag each with awareness level, the angle it pairs with, the funnel type it routes to, and the campaign that should own it" this will make everything nice and organized 7. turn the research into the campaign plan "turn everything above into a 30-day google ads launch plan for this specific brand, its AOV, margin structure and market sophistication stage. for each campaign, give me: the angle it carries, the keyword cluster, the landing page type, the creative direction, and the signal that decides whether it scales, holds, or gets cut. separate must-launch from phase 2 tests" then: "tell me which 3 angles to test first and why, given our sophistication stage and the proof we currently own" and that's literally it your competitors are testing angles with fat budgets while you analyze it all, learn from their mistakes, and (ethically) rip their winners with a unique twist and if you want me to audit your brand's google ads angles using this system and show you how we'd capitalize on the winning ones... DM me "OPP"

• 
  Elsyee (@encore_elsyee) reported 48 minutes ago

  You get down voted heavily on Reddit to this day if your dare to use an emoji

• 
  Stepan Nazarov (@stepan__nazarov) reported 48 minutes ago

  @linguinelabs Funny how someone on reddit had almost the exact same error 3 years ago, just with a slightly different shortcut name (but still for waking up)

• 
  Grant Miller (@AIGuide_) reported 58 minutes ago

  Claude Fable 5.1 dropped yesterday and i've had it running on a full GTM stack since it holds way more at once now. you can dump a whole category's worth of X / LinkedIn posts, every customer conversation you've had, and everything you've ever published into one project and it keeps all of it straight, which means what comes out stops sounding like the other 400 accounts in your niche running the same 3 prompts they lifted off a thread. and this is HUGE because social is where GTM actually lives now. someone decides whether you're worth a reply from a feed months before they decide whether you're worth money, but most companies still file that under brand awareness and then wonder why nobody knows they exist. i'll go over 10 stages with the prompts included for each one. let's get into it. stage 0: build the brain make a claude project and load it up before you ask it for a single thing. and i don't mean a clean CRM export, because you probably don't have one and it doesn't matter anyway. load whatever actually exists: - every post you've shipped, sorted by what hit and what died - your replies, comments, and the DMs that turned into money - whatever customer conversations you have, so calls, demos, tickets - 90 days of posts from the 10 accounts your buyers already read - what shipped in the product lately - the questions people keep asking that you keep answering the same way then run this: "act as the GTM brain for this company. read everything uploaded and build a working profile: what we actually do in plain language, who it's for, what we believe that most of this category doesn't, what we've posted that landed and what died, what proof exists today, and what we can credibly claim vs what we're still earning the right to say. do not make recommendations yet. summarize what's here, then tell me what's missing." nobody selling prompt packs talks about this stage because context can't be packaged, it's just work, and it's the only reason any of the next 10 stages produce something usable. stage 1: who you're actually writing for "look at everyone who reached out to us in the last 90 days. what did they have in common before they reached out, what post did they engage with first, what were they doing instead of us, and what did they say in the first message. if the sample is too small to support conclusions, say so and tell me what would make it reliable." that last line is the one everyone deletes, which is why half this space is running strategy off nine customers and calling it a playbook. most accounts write for their followers when they should be writing for the 30 people inside that number who can actually sign something. stage 2: customer language "pull the exact language buyers use about [PROBLEM] from our own conversations, replies and reviews. then find the same conversation in public, so reddit threads, quote tweets, comment sections, community slacks where it comes up unprompted. format as quote / underlying pain / awareness stage / objection it implies / angle. then flag every place their language differs from how we describe the same thing." that flag is the whole exercise, because the distance between how your buyer says it and how you say it is where your reach goes to die, and it's usually about four words wide. stage 3: read the feed "analyze the last 90 days of posts from [10 ACCOUNTS] in this category. map what claims everyone is making, which takes are so common they stopped meaning anything, what's actually being argued about, what everyone is carefully not saying, and where the conversation goes next. then tell me which of our beliefs puts us on the contested side of a real argument." consensus doesn't travel, since nobody has ever shared a post they already agreed with before reading it. what you want is the take that's true, defensible, and mildly annoying to half your timeline. stage 4: angles "build 5 content pillars from stage 1 and the gaps in stage 3. for each: the belief it attacks, who it's aimed at, the proof required to make it land, the objection it pre-empts, and where it sits in the funnel." then run every one of them through this: "if a competitor could post this word for word and it still makes sense, cut it and tell me what's missing." try that filter on the content plan you're already running and watch how much of it evaporates. stage 5: voice everyone skips this one and then wonders why their AI content reads identical to every other account using AI. "analyze everything we've published. build a voice profile: sentence length and rhythm, how we open, how we handle disagreement, what we'll be wrong about in public, words we use constantly, words we'd never use, how technical we go before simplifying, whether we hedge or commit. then write the anti profile, the exact phrasings that would immediately read as not us. include every cliché in this category we'd be embarrassed to post." then before anything ships: "score this draft against the voice profile 1-10 and tell me which lines would get flagged as not written by us." and the anti profile ends up doing more work than the profile does. stage 6: write the posts "write 5 posts on [PILLAR] in the voice profile from stage 5. every post needs one number, name or detail that could only come from having done the thing. no question as a hook. end on the line that starts a reply. then flag anything we can't back with proof yet." it'll get you about 80% of the way there, and the last 20% is you, which no prompt is getting for you. stage 7: hooks the first two lines decide whether the other 40 get read, so treat them as their own job. "take these 5 posts. rewrite the opening two lines of each 6 ways: the specific result, the contrarian claim, the thing everyone thinks and won't say, the mistake we made, the number that sounds wrong, and the flat statement with no setup. for each tell me who it pulls and what it promises. then flag any hook the post doesn't actually pay off." that last flag is the one that matters most, because a hook you don't pay off costs you the next post too, since people remember getting baited. stage 8: distribution posting is only half of it, because the other half is showing up where the attention already sits. "list the 20 accounts our buyers already read. for each: what they post about, how much their audience overlaps ours, and what we could add in a reply that their audience isn't already getting from them. rank by overlap, not follower count." then: "given [X hours a week], design a posting and engagement system we can actually sustain. cadence, format mix, how much time on replies vs original posts. be honest about what we should not attempt at this volume." a 12k account full of your buyers DESTROYS a 400k account full of other marketers, and most content plans die because they were built for a team of four and end up getting run by one person at 11pm. stage 9: audit "compare the last 30 days to the prior 30. for each pillar and format: reach, engagement, and who engaged, so title, company type, whether they're ICP. flag anything that got reach from the wrong audience, anything that got low reach from exactly the right one, which pillars produced conversations and which produced nothing, and any drop over 20%. then tell me whether the problem is the hook, the pillar, or the claim underneath it." composition beats volume, so 40 engagements from your ICP is a better month than 4000 from people who do what you do. if your replies are all peers then you built a conference and called it pipeline. stage 10: scale "compare 30, 60 and 90 day windows by pillar, format and hook type. find what works across all three, not what spiked once. tell me what to double, what to hold, what to retire. if a sample is too small to call, say so instead of guessing." then: "build next month's roadmap: 2 pillar tests, 2 hook format tests, 1 cadence test. for each: hypothesis, metric, minimum sample to call it, and what happens if it wins." you need a minimum sample on all of it, or you're just reading noise and shipping it as strategy. the loop for you / your team: - inbound tells you who you're writing for - their language becomes the angles - angles become the posts - posts become the replies - replies become the conversations - conversations sharpen the angles - the audit picks what gets written next month every output feeds the next one, so run it for 90 days and you end up with something your competitor can't copy by screenshotting your posts.

• 
  Anthony Stephen Mendes (@anthonysmendes) reported 1 hour ago

  Tips for new Framer creators & developers: Method A: Search on X, Facebook, LinkedIn, Reddit, etc for these terms without quotes- “Looking for, framer” “Hiring, framer” “Need, framer” Set to latest and check the posts within 24 hours. These will give you high intent posts from people who need Framer developers. Method B: If you want to focus on templates, check for posts from creators where they have made a sale. Even better if they’ve included a screenshot. Check the template, see what they’re doing differently, see how new it is to the marketplace. The goal is not to copy. The goal is to understand the following: - How consistent they are with naming assets and layers. - What makes their templates different. - How far do they go to provide value: prompts, video tutorials, documentation, etc Method C: If your goal is to build a portfolio then it’s best to offer pro bono work/free work for brands. Use them under specific guidelines: - Business under 3 years old. - Business never had a Framer website. - Right to share in portfolio/case study. Here you can also make commissions from your remix link/project transfer. Method D: Small time edits on existing Framer websites. Sometimes businesses do this: - Get a template. - Edit and publish it. The edits bring errors that lead to issues in responsiveness & text clipping or asset issues. Offer a small fee to fix it after they add you as an editor. Won’t bring money you’d expect but builds trust.