Evidence-Grounded Founder Authority Content System

Transform the supplied founder insight into a one-week authority content system using only the information and evidence provided in this conversation.

## Content brief
Core idea: [Core idea]
Founder or brand voice: [Founder or brand voice]
Target audience: [Target audience]
Industry or niche: [Industry or niche]
Product, service, or project: [Product, service, or project]
Audience pain points: [Audience pain points]
Personal experience or story: [Personal experience or story]
Proof or example: [Proof or example]
Call to action: [Call to action]
Platforms: [Platforms]
Posting frequency: [Posting frequency]
Definition of done: [Definition of done]
Restricted topics and approvals: [Restricted topics and approvals]

## ChatGPT operating boundaries
- Inspect and synthesize only the brief, evidence, voice samples, and other materials supplied in this conversation.
- Use ChatGPT to analyze, organize, draft, compare, and perform an internal consistency review. Do not imply that ChatGPT accessed social accounts, analytics, customer records, external links, current platform rules, or unpublished company information unless their contents were pasted into the conversation.
- Produce drafts and recommendations only. Do not claim to publish, schedule, approve, send, contact people, collect metrics, or validate real-world performance.
- Treat all content as unapproved until an authorized human reviews the factual claims, privacy implications, brand fit, platform suitability, and publication decision.
- Do not invent personal experiences, quotations, customer details, testimonials, performance figures, dates, research findings, product capabilities, or business outcomes.

## Input readiness
Treat the core idea, intended audience, voice guidance or voice samples, intended platforms, and definition of done as blocking inputs. If any is absent or too ambiguous to support credible drafting, ask up to five focused clarification questions and stop before writing publication-ready posts.

Proof, personal experience, pain points, product context, call to action, posting frequency, and restrictions are useful supporting inputs. When one of these is missing but bounded progress is safe, record it as an unknown, omit dependent claims, and continue with clearly marked draft assumptions. Never convert an assumption into a founder experience or factual claim.

If supplied inputs conflict, identify the conflict and ask which source controls. Do not silently reconcile conflicting audience definitions, figures, product claims, dates, voice instructions, or approval requirements. If clarification is unavailable, preserve both versions in the issue register and avoid the affected claim.

## Evidence and claim discipline
Create source IDs for material supplied by the user, such as E1 for the core idea, E2 for a voice sample, and E3 for proof. For every substantive claim used in a draft, classify it as one of the following:
- Supplied fact: directly supported by identified user material.
- Attributed opinion: explicitly framed as the founder's or brand's view.
- Draft assumption: useful for planning but not approved for factual publication.
- Unsupported claim: lacking adequate evidence and therefore excluded or rewritten.
- Unknown: information needed but not supplied.
- Conflict: incompatible source statements requiring resolution.

Keep qualitative opinions distinct from measurable claims. Do not strengthen correlation into causation, an example into a universal rule, or an isolated result into a typical outcome. Use precise attribution and restrained language where evidence is limited.

## Safety and approval controls
- Exclude confidential information, credentials, private personal data, identifying customer details, internal security information, and non-public commercial data unless the user confirms authorization for the specific use.
- Do not name or describe customers, employees, partners, or private individuals without documented permission in the supplied materials. Anonymize details only when re-identification risk is acceptably low.
- Flag testimonials, endorsements, comparisons, guarantees, earnings claims, and health, legal, financial, employment, or safety claims for specialist or legal review when applicable.
- Avoid defamatory allegations, harassment, discriminatory framing, deceptive engagement tactics, fabricated controversy, impersonation, and instructions to manipulate or conceal sponsorship.
- Do not reproduce substantial copyrighted source text. Summarize it or request permission where appropriate.
- Stop publication-ready drafting for any section that depends on unverified consequential claims, uncertain consent, unresolved confidentiality, or instructions that conflict with stated restrictions. Explain what evidence or authorization is needed.
- Do not present current platform limits or policies as verified unless the user supplied an authoritative current source. Flag them for a pre-publication platform check.
- Never treat generation as approval. Scheduling, publishing, paid promotion, tagging third parties, quoting people, and responding from an official account require separate human authorization.

## Workflow

### 1. Assess readiness and establish the source record
Summarize the brief, list source IDs, separate blocking gaps from optional gaps, and record assumptions, unknowns, conflicts, restrictions, and approval owners. State whether work can proceed as a complete draft system, a limited planning draft, or clarification only.

### 2. Clarify the authority thesis
Define:
- The central claim or opinion
- Why it matters to the intended audience
- The problem or decision it addresses
- The prevailing belief or behavior it challenges
- The practical lesson readers can apply
- The boundaries within which the idea is likely to hold
- The proof available and the proof still missing

Distinguish the founder's perspective from independently established fact.

### 3. Analyze audience and positioning
Identify what the audience likely knows, misunderstands, struggles with, wants to achieve, and may object to. Label unsupported audience interpretations as hypotheses. Recommend the most useful angle, tone, level of technical detail, and credibility mechanism for each intended platform.

### 4. Build a non-repetitive angle map
Create at least seven materially different angles spanning education, founder experience, practical framework, mistake or lesson, opinion, behind-the-scenes process, and community discussion. For each angle, state its audience need, evidence dependency, novelty relative to the other angles, and publication risk. Do not disguise the same argument with different openings.

### 5. Develop 15 hooks
Write 15 specific hooks distributed across contrarian, problem-focused, founder-lesson, mistake-based, practical how-to, story-led, question, observation, warning, and simple-truth styles. Label each style, intended angle, target platform, and supporting source ID. If a hook contains an unverified factual assertion, rewrite it as a bounded opinion or exclude it.

### 6. Design the seven-day plan
Create a seven-day calendar aligned with the requested posting frequency. If the requested frequency is lower than seven posts, designate non-posting days for comments, research, reply synthesis, or draft refinement rather than inventing extra publication commitments.

For each day provide:
- Publish, engage, or refine status
- Theme and distinct angle
- Intended platform and format
- Audience insight or hypothesis
- Proposed hook
- Key points and supporting source IDs
- Claim or privacy risk
- Soft call to action
- Conversation question
- Required reviewer or approval
- Handoff status: draftable, blocked, review required, or ready for authorized review

### 7. Write five primary-platform drafts
Write five complete drafts for LinkedIn when LinkedIn is among the intended platforms; otherwise use the primary professional platform supplied and identify the adaptation. Each draft must include a specific opening, one clear thesis, practical explanation, readable paragraphing, an independent takeaway, and a natural call to action. Add an engagement question only when it serves the discussion rather than functioning as engagement bait.

After each draft include a compact draft note with:
- Angle and audience purpose
- Evidence used by source ID
- Assumptions or unresolved claims
- Privacy, consent, disclosure, or specialist-review flags
- Required human approval
- Suggested platform-format check

Preserve the supplied voice without copying a voice sample verbatim or fabricating stylistic quirks. Make the five drafts structurally and substantively distinct.

### 8. Create responsible engagement support
Write 10 short comments for use under genuinely relevant posts. Each should add a practical observation or thoughtful question without promoting the product, pretending to have read unavailable material, manufacturing agreement, or asserting unverified experience. Also provide 12 conversation questions divided among beginner, founder or operator, customer-pain, opinion, decision-making, and experience-sharing categories.

### 9. Produce a controlled repurposing matrix
Adapt the core idea into:
- A LinkedIn post concept
- A short X thread outline
- A newsletter section
- A blog introduction
- A carousel outline
- A short video script
- A community discussion prompt
- A website or product-education snippet

For each asset specify its purpose, audience, platform-native adjustment, maximum claim strength allowed by the supplied evidence, source IDs, call to action, and review flags. Do not claim that any asset has been published or tested.

### 10. Define measurement and learning
Create a prospective measurement plan for comments, saves, shares, profile visits, link clicks, replies, relevant follower growth, conversation quality, qualified inquiries, and content ideas generated from replies. For each metric provide:
- What it may indicate
- What it cannot establish by itself
- Required data source
- Suggested review interval
- A decision rule for retain, revise, test further, or stop
- Potential confounders

Do not invent baselines, targets, analytics, leads, or results. If no baseline is supplied, recommend establishing one and label all thresholds as proposals requiring owner approval.

### 11. Recommend the first publication candidate
Select the strongest first draft based on evidence strength, audience usefulness, voice fit, differentiation, and risk. Explain the trade-offs. Identify the strongest hooks, best format, safest useful call to action, most productive audience question, and content to avoid. This is a recommendation, not publication approval.

### 12. Verify and hand off
Inspect the generated package and provide a verification matrix with these columns: check, expected condition, observed draft evidence, evidence location, status, and unresolved action. Use pass, fail, or unresolved for status.

Verify that:
- Every substantive factual claim has a source ID or has been removed.
- Opinions, hypotheses, assumptions, unknowns, and conflicts are visibly distinguished.
- No personal story, result, quotation, customer detail, or achievement was invented.
- No draft discloses restricted, private, or unauthorized information.
- The five primary-platform drafts differ in thesis, structure, or audience job.
- Each draft provides value without requiring a click.
- Voice choices are traceable to supplied guidance.
- Calls to action are proportionate and not deceptive.
- The calendar matches the requested frequency.
- Repurposed assets preserve the thesis without inflating claims.
- Metrics are prospective and are not represented as observed performance.
- All consequential publication and response actions remain subject to human approval.

If a check fails, revise the affected draft when this can be done without inventing information. Otherwise mark it unresolved or blocked. Finish with a handoff statement that distinguishes generated drafts, blocked items, required reviews, and unperformed actions. Never describe content as approved, published, scheduled, tested, or measured without supplied evidence that the corresponding action occurred.

## Required output
Use this exact section order:
1. Intake Readiness and Source Ledger
2. Assumption, Unknown, Conflict, and Approval Register
3. Authority Thesis and Evidence Boundaries
4. Audience and Positioning Analysis
5. Non-Repetitive Angle Map
6. Fifteen Hook Options
7. Seven-Day Content and Engagement Calendar
8. Five Primary-Platform Drafts with Draft Notes
9. Ten Comment Drafts and Twelve Conversation Questions
10. Repurposing Matrix
11. Prospective Measurement and Learning Plan
12. First-Publication Recommendation
13. Verification Matrix
14. Human Review and Handoff Status