@Lisa Hunt I see that and I have sent you a DM with instructions.

@Paulo Costa, The Roaster We’re Changing Our Onboarding New members will now have a short Zoom Welcome Call before being approved into the community. PLEASE NOTE: This is NOT a sales call. The call is 30–45 minutes and focuses on the answers you gave when joining what you’re struggling with, what you want to improve, and how we can help. Most importantly, we want members who are serious about their community, willing to participate and support other members, and ready to put in the work to move their own community forward.

@Louis Lockett, Sr. This is what is Fixed: The page now names who it's for (researchers, builders, inventors, and supporters). The Problem list names the inventor's real situation in plain words. The price mismatch is gone, and the tiers (free, $7, $39) are consistent. The purpose now reads the same in the sidebar and the body. The "gravity control" claim is gone, and "Not an investment. No equity." is added. New gaps: The earlier list of what members get (directory listing, newsletter, decal) is gone, so the tiers now show prices with no contents. The body copy no longer has a call to action. Now you have these problems? No proof appears anywhere: no award recipient, funded project, or named inventor. The three tiers are listed by price only; what each includes isn't stated. The body copy has no call to action. "Outside mainstream consensus" has no grounding, so it may read as fringe to a skeptical reader. With awards funded by member fees and 6 members, the page doesn't say how much has been raised or when the first award goes out. No credential, background, or story is given for Louis. The supporter's own situation isn't named; the Problem section speaks only to inventors. "Result" is missing: nothing shows work that got funded or seen. This version speaks to the inventor's real situation far better than the first; the gaps are proof and what the paid tiers include. This version now speaks to the inventor's real situation and is upfront about where the money comes from, but it still shows no funded project, doesn't say what the paid tiers include, and asks a skeptic to take "outside mainstream consensus" on trust. So here is another problem and no one is seeing this. Your key words on this one you have 26 and I went in to skool discovery and searched each one. Out of the 26 you show up for 7 key words meaning people would have to type those into discovery to find you and the other 19 you don't show up and I do page one and two. You have to be on the first page and if not two most don't go to the third.

@Paulo Costa, The Roaster When you say pitch you mean if I have the brand IDs I can talk about them and put a link to where they can buy them?

@Paulo Costa, The Roaster Generic is the giveaway, not the AI. If someone never actually looked at your community, a bland PDF shows it right away. Tools are fine, but a real person still has to look at the group and know why it works. Showing who's behind the page matters more now too, because people trust a face and a story faster than a polished image.

@Paulo Costa, The Roaster I have a new onboarding system and in fact I have someone form this community at the door @Ken Hyra I sent him a DM the other day. I have tried this on someone else and it seem to work good. Everything I do when they come in the community I'm reversing that and doing it before they come in the community. Everything I do is human like you.

@Rasheed Hooda Try and keep that 100% engagement as people join you have to keep getting them to chat. If they don't that 100% will drop over time. The % will go up and down it will depend on your engagement

@Rasheed Hooda okay that is good

@Paulo Costa, The Roaster What's wrong, ranked by cost in a cold Meta feed: 1. A stranger can't tell what this is. It never says free Skool community, and "ad, offer, website, or content" covers everyone. The image has no brand and no CTA. Someone who only sees the image has nowhere to go. The "Achievement Unlocked" badge is too small to read at feed size. The image and the copy target different people. The image calls out course hoarders. The copy asks for "what you built," and many of them haven't built anything yet. The proof isn't used. 256 members and a 5.0 rating are real, and neither appears. Your best line likely gets cut. Meta truncates mobile copy, so "You have a feedback problem" probably sits below "See more." "Roast" has no reassurance. "We roast the work, never the person" is missing. "Join free" comes last and weakest. It's your strongest reason to click, and it's buried after the emoji line. "Tutorial hell" is jargon for anyone outside dev and online-learning circles. The mood doesn't match the landing page. The ad is dark and grim, the community is playful. Keep these: "COURSES: 37 / HONEST FEEDBACK: 0" makes the whole argument at a glance. "You don't have an information problem. You have a feedback problem" is a real reframe. "Stop buying marketing courses" is direct and specific. Bottom line: strong concept, but it describes the problem and never says what you're offering, who it's for, or that it's free and safe.