Founder Content
Complete content creation and multiplication system for solo founders and indie hackers. Use for any content task including writing social posts, repurposing...
Description
name: founder-content description: Complete content creation and multiplication system for solo founders and indie hackers. Use for any content task including writing social posts, repurposing content, creating threads, build-in-public updates, or content planning. Triggers on "write a post", "create content", "repurpose this", "thread", "build in public", "ship update", "content calendar", "turn this into posts", or any content creation request. metadata: {"category": "content-creation", "platforms": ["twitter-x", "linkedin", "xiaohongshu"], "features": ["build-in-public", "repurposing", "multi-platform", "voice-guide"]}
Founder Content System
Everything for creating and multiplying content as a solo founder or indie hacker.
Master Content Creation Workflow (Must Follow)
Core Principle: Research → Extract → Adapt → Write
Every piece of content must go through this workflow:
Step 1: Research Hot Content (REQUIRED)
Before writing ANY content, research what is working:
1. Search for viral/high-engagement posts on target platform
2. Find 3-5 top-performing posts on similar topic
3. Note: hook structure, format, engagement type, tone
4. Identify what makes them work (specifics, emotion, contrarian angle)
Search patterns:
[platform] [topic] viralsite:[platform].com [topic] lessons learned[topic] founder thread high engagement
Step 2: Extract Winning Patterns
| What to Extract | Why |
|---|---|
| Hook formula | First line determines if people read |
| Number usage | Specifics add credibility ($400 → $180) |
| Emotion triggers | What makes people react (cringe, saved, wasted) |
| Story arc | How tension and payoff are structured |
| CTA design | What drives comments vs likes |
Step 3: Adapt with Founder Voice
Brand Voice Principles:
- 真实 (authentic) — real stories, not theory
- 硬 (sharp) — specific numbers, direct claims
- 带点自嘲 (self-deprecating) — own failures openly
- 不鸡汤 (no fluff) — substance over motivation
Adaptation Rules:
- Keep the winning hook structure
- Replace content with real stories from the user
- Add specific numbers (e.g. $3,000 wasted, saved $1,000+)
- Include genuine emotion (still cringe, learned the hard way)
- Avoid: vague claims, motivational fluff, humblebrags
Step 4: Platform-Specific Polish
| Platform | Key Adaptation |
|---|---|
| Twitter/X | Punchy, <280 chars, threads for depth |
| Longer, professional vulnerability, spaced lines | |
| 小红书 | 口语化, 情绪词 (亏麻了/稳了), search-optimized titles |
Quick Reference
| Task | Section |
|---|---|
| Write posts from scratch | Build-in-Public Workflow |
| Multiply existing content | Repurposing Framework |
| Thread formula | Thread Formula |
| Voice rules | Voice Rules |
| Platform defaults | Platform Defaults |
Build-in-Public Workflow
Step 1: Gather Context
From version control (auto mode):
- Recent commits since last post
- PR titles and descriptions
- Release notes if tagged
From user input (manual mode):
- What shipped (feature/fix/improvement)
- Who it helps
- Why now
- One metric (optional)
- One lesson learned
Step 2: Extract the Story
Every post answers 5 questions:
- What changed? (the ship)
- Who benefits? (the user)
- Why it matters now? (the context)
- One proof (metric, example, before/after)
- One takeaway (lesson or insight)
Step 3: Render for Each Platform
Twitter/X: Under 280 chars, concise, slightly spicy, one insight + one proof
LinkedIn: 8-20 lines with spacing, narrative + framework + takeaway
小红书: Chinese-first, structure: 背景→步骤→结果→踩坑→总结
Step 4: Quality Check
- No identical cross-posts
- Each post has a takeaway
- No banned patterns (see Voice Rules below)
- 小红书 passes sensitivity check
- Metrics/proof included where possible
Repurposing Framework
Core Principle: One Excellent Piece → 7-10 Platform-Native Derivatives
Step 1: Evaluate Source
High-Value (prioritize): Evergreen topics, top performers, content with data/frameworks, long-form (>1000 words)
Skip: Trend-based, low performers, thin content
Step 2: Extract Atomic Units
| Element | What to Extract |
|---|---|
| Hook | Opening line, attention-grabber |
| Stats | Numbers, percentages, metrics |
| Frameworks | Step processes, models |
| Quotes | Memorable phrases |
| Stories | Anecdotes, case studies |
| Takeaways | Key lessons, actionable tips |
Step 3: Apply STEPPS (from Contagious)
Every derivative needs at least one:
- Social Currency — Makes sharer look smart
- Triggers — Connected to daily habits
- Emotion — Evokes awe, surprise, anger
- Public — Visible behavior
- Practical Value — Useful, saves time/money
- Stories — Narrative that carries message
Step 4: Make It Stick (SUCCESs)
- Simple — One core idea
- Unexpected — Break patterns
- Concrete — Specific details
- Credible — Proof points
- Emotional — Care about individual
- Stories — People remember stories
Step 5: Schedule Distribution
Day 0: Original published
Day 1-2: Tease/announcement
Day 3-7: First wave derivatives
Week 2-3: Second wave
Week 4+: Evergreen rotation
Content Pillars
Suggested pillar mix for technical founders:
- Technical Build — AI, tools, architecture decisions, tech comparisons
- Building in Public — Process over results, real learnings, metrics
- Cross-Cultural Founder — Unique perspective from background/geography
- Systems Thinking — Workflows, optimization, productivity
Weekly mix: 2-3 posts from pillars 1-2, 1 post from pillars 3-4
Voice Rules
Always:
- Include one takeaway per post
- Adapt content per platform
- Use metrics when available
- Keep 小红书 titles search-optimized
Never:
- Motivational fluff ("believe in yourself")
- Humblebragging / name-dropping
- Vague claims ("game-changing", "revolutionary")
- Thought-leader cringe
- Dunking on competitors by name
Voice Summary:
- 真实 (authentic, not performative)
- 硬 (direct, earned confidence)
- 带点自嘲 (self-deprecating humor)
- 细节感强 (specific details)
- 不鸡汤 (no inspirational soup)
Platform Defaults
| Platform | Language | Cadence | Format |
|---|---|---|---|
| Twitter/X | English | 3-5/week | <280 chars, threads rare |
| English | 1-2/week | 8-20 lines, spaced | |
| 小红书 | Chinese primary | 2/week | 干货 + 踩坑 mix |
Thread Formula
Tweet 1 (Hook): Surprising stat or contrarian take
Tweet 2-5: One key point per tweet with proof
Tweet 6: Common mistake / "what most get wrong"
Tweet 7: The solution/framework
Tweet 8: CTA + callback to original
Write 10-15 versions of hook before publishing.
Example Transformation
Input (commit message):
feat: connect database MCP to content scheduler
- Added automatic content storage
- Triggers on push
- Posts to 3 platforms
Output:
Twitter/X:
Just wired up Claude → database → auto-posting pipeline.
Push to repo now triggers content across 3 platforms.
The surprising part: 80% of the work was tone adaptation, not infra.
LinkedIn:
Shipped: automated "build in public" pipeline
What it does: commits → AI-adapted posts → 3 platforms
What I learned: The hard part isn't automation—it's maintaining authentic voice at scale.
Next: adding human-in-the-loop approval.
小红书:
标题:用 Claude + 数据库搭了个自动发帖系统
背景:每次提交都想分享,但手动发三个平台太累
做法:Claude 读 commit → 生成三版本 → 数据库存储 → 自动发
踩坑:以为难点是技术,其实是语气适配
总结:自动化不是复制粘贴,是让机器学会"变脸"
Input/Output Examples
Example 1: Build-in-Public Update
User Input:
"We just shipped a feature that lets users generate brand-consistent ad creative in one click."
Expected Output:
Twitter/X:
Shipped: One-click brand-consistent ad creative.
Before: 3 rounds of "make it more on-brand" feedback.
After: 90% first-pass approval rate.
The hard part wasn't the AI. It was teaching it what "on-brand" actually means.
LinkedIn:
We just shipped one-click brand-consistent ad creative.
Here's what changed:
Before:
• Designer creates ad
• Brand team reviews
• "Can you make it more on-brand?"
• 3 rounds of revision
• Finally approved
After:
• AI generates with brand memory
• 90% first-pass approval
• Designer focuses on strategy, not iteration
The insight: "On-brand" isn't subjective. It's computable.
We spent 6 months building the math behind brand consistency. Now it takes one click.
What's the most frustrating feedback loop in your creative process?
Example 2: Content Repurposing
User Input:
"Turn this blog post into social content: [paste 1000-word article]"
Response Pattern:
- Extract atomic units: hooks, stats, frameworks, quotes, stories, takeaways
- Apply STEPPS framework to select the most shareable elements
- Generate platform-native content for each platform
Example Output Structure:
## Extracted Atomic Units:
- Hook: [most contrarian/surprising claim]
- Stat: [most specific number]
- Framework: [step-by-step model]
- Quote: [most memorable phrase]
- Takeaway: [core lesson]
## Derivatives:
**Twitter Thread (7 tweets):**
1/ [Hook tweet]
2/ [Supporting data]
[continues...]
**LinkedIn Post:**
[Full expanded version]
**小红书:**
标题:[search-optimized Chinese title]
[Full Chinese adaptation]
## Distribution Schedule:
- Day 1: Twitter thread (9 AM local)
- Day 2: LinkedIn (8 AM local)
- Day 3: 小红书 (8 PM local)
Example 3: Cross-Platform Adaptation
User Input:
"This tweet performed well — adapt it for LinkedIn and 小红书."
Expected Output:
## Original Tweet Analysis:
- Hook type: Contrarian ("Everyone thinks X, but Y")
- Key element: Specific number ($3,000 wasted)
- Engagement driver: Relatable failure story
## LinkedIn Version:
[Expanded with more context, spaced lines, professional framing, ends with question]
## 小红书 Version:
[Chinese adaptation with 口语化 tone, 情绪词, structured as 背景→经过→结果→教训]
## Adaptation Notes:
- LinkedIn: Added "Here's what I learned" framework
- 小红书: Localized dollar amounts to local currency context
- Both: Kept the core contrarian insight
Reviews (0)
No reviews yet. Be the first to review!
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!