Approve these numbered steps for how people join and share?

The question

Do you approve the five-step trust path and three peer-share rules below as the written plan for later launch design? This choice does not authorize any live contact.

In one sentence

If I approve, we lock only this written path and share rules for later planning; no live invites, group circles, contacts, or sends start from this decision.

Terms (only if needed)

Warmer Path — Specialized AI prepares marketing work for human review.
Hand-raise — A clear, on-purpose signup for one next step only.
Keep / change / skip / send — Four choices after reviewing one prepared draft under your name.
Peer share — Asking one person if they want the sample — only after they say yes.

Summary

You approve a written plan only: five join steps and three peer-share rules.
Nothing goes live here: no invites, group talks, contact lists, or automated messages.
Audience filter still holds: expert-creators who care about craft, not get-rich-quick seekers.
No proof yet that people will sign up, finish a review, or introduce a peer.

What we know

Earlier journey write-up was unclear; nothing from it is locked.
First audience: independent expert-creators with a public offer. Prefer craft over get-rich-quick seekers.
Promise locked: prep under their name; early fit is keep / change / skip / send after one piece.
A friend must raise their own hand; you keep contacts and every send.
No launch calendar, live invites, craft circles, or outreach until this path is approved.

Market evidence summary

External findings (with sources):
- Offer page: prep for human review, warm paths, personal sending (https://warmersun.com/warmerpath/).
- Indie Hackers: experts keep judgment human while using AI for bounded work.
- Hacker News: skepticism of inflated AI marketing claims; read work before publishing.
Null results (searched, found nothing):
- No public opt-in, review-completion, peer-intro, or payment proof for this offer.
Open questions (deferred to ops experiments):
- Will an expert continue after one useful review? Do not claim results until a live test answers this.

What you’re deciding on

Written plan only — not permission to contact anyone.
Five-step trust path
- Step 1 — Public sample: Read https://warmersun.com/warmerpath/ with no account and no email.
- Step 2 — Hand-raise: Sign up for one named next item only (one note or walkthrough); stop anytime.
- Step 3 — Notes they asked for: Low-frequency messages they requested, with one-click unsubscribe.
- Step 4 — One-piece review: Review one prepared draft; choose keep, change, skip, or send. Nothing auto-publishes.
- Step 5 — Paid terms only after Step 4: Show paid prep terms only after that review. Pricing not set here.
Three peer-share rules
- Rule 1 — Ask first: After a useful review, ask one matched peer privately; share only after yes.
- Rule 2 — Share only sample + one sentence: sample link plus “It prepares the work; I still send under my name.”
- Rule 3 — Peer starts over: They read the sample and raise their own hand; never added to a list by the sharer.
Not decided yet
- No live invites, cold messages, craft circles, contact lists, launch calendar, or outcome claims.

Our recommendation

Approve the five steps and three peer-share rules as written
Lock only this written plan for later launch design. Live outreach, group circles, contacts, and sends stay blocked.
Rationale
- Indie Hackers and Hacker News favor prep-plus-human-judgment over autopilot. So a public sample, then a hand-raise, then one-piece review matches how this audience already talks.
- Zero public opt-in or peer-intro proof. Option 1 plans with modest claims. Option 2 waits for a tiny live hand-raise test first.

Options

Option 1: Approve the five steps and three peer-share rules as written (recommended)

Lock this written plan only. Later planning may use only these steps and rules — still no live contact.
Pros
- Clear enough that a non-marketer can picture each step.
Cons
- Still unproven whether anyone will raise a hand, finish a review, or introduce a peer.
Tradeoff: Plan with modest claims now versus waiting for a tiny live test.

Option 2: Hold until a tiny sample test shows one hand-raise

Do not lock. Run a safe tiny sample/signup test first, then return here.
What would change: Launch planning stays blocked; only a bounded sample/hand-raise test is designed next.
Pros
- Resolves the biggest unknown before shaping a launch calendar.
Cons
- Slows planning; needs a safe test plan and item-by-item copy approval.
Tradeoff: Evidence first versus planning with modest claims.

How to respond

Comment on the Kanban card:

“Approve”
“Approve with changes: …”
“Choose option 2 because …”
“Combine: …”
“New option: …”
“Reject — …”
“Hold — …”
“Need more discovery — …”
“Unclear — …”

Appendix

Everyday picture of each step (examples only)

Step 1 example: Someone opens the Warmer Path page, reads what prep looks like, and leaves — no form required.
Step 2 example: They click “send me one walkthrough of a prepared review” and enter an email for that item only.
Step 4 example: They receive one draft for their own offer and pick keep, change, skip, or send. We never send for them.
Peer share example: After a useful review they text one peer: “Want this sample?” Only if yes do they paste the link and the one sentence.

Reject path

If none of this works, reply Reject and name what to redesign (for example different order, no notes step, or no peer share yet).

Decision taken

Date: 2026-07-13
Chosen: Approve the five steps and three peer-share rules as written (Option 1)
Summary: Approved the five-step trust path and three peer-share rules as the written plan for later launch design. Live invites, craft circles, contacts, and sends stay blocked until separate approval.
Human reason: —
Constraints going forward: Use only the approved five-step trust path and three peer-share rules for later launch planning. No live peer invitation, multi-person craft circles, outreach, contact lists, or sends until separately approved. Permission does not transfer; peers raise their own hand. Prior audience/strategy constraints still apply: prioritize craft-focused expert-creators; no get-rich-quick primary targeting; human keeps audience, reputation, contact, and sending.