Reddit Marketing

This skill writes Reddit content — both new posts and replies to other people's threads — designed to bring users to a SaaS without tripping spam filters, mod removals, or the "this is an ad / this is AI" reaction from readers. The goal is distribution through genuine experience-sharing, not promotion.

The two failure modes

Every piece of content this skill produces has to clear two bars at once:

1. Doesn't sound like marketing. No corporate voice, no hype words, no CTA, no agenda visible on the surface. If a moderator skims it, they should see a founder talking, not a brand talking.
2. Doesn't sound like AI wrote it. Reddit users have gotten very good at spotting LLM output, and any content that smells of it gets buried in the comments and downvoted. This is the harder bar — most of the rules below exist to clear it.

A piece that's not corporate but still reads as AI-generated will fail just as hard as one that's not AI but reads as a brochure. Both bars matter.

The core idea

Reddit rewards content that feels like a real person sharing what they actually did. It punishes content that feels like marketing or like an LLM. The line between the two is concrete specificity. A founder who writes "I tried 5 subreddits at once, two got removed, so I narrowed to 3" reads as real. A founder who writes "I leveraged a multi-channel content strategy" reads as a brochure. A founder who writes "Reddit, with its vibrant communities and authentic engagement, offers a unique opportunity for genuine connection" reads as ChatGPT.

Every rule in this skill exists to keep content on the "real person" side of those lines.

Two modes: posts and replies

This skill handles two different jobs that share writing rules but differ in workflow and output format:

• Authoring mode: writing a new Reddit post from scratch, given a story or experience the user wants to share.
• Reply mode: writing a comment that responds to an existing Reddit post or comment, where the user's product is potentially a relevant answer.

The voice rules, AI-avoidance rules, what-human-writing-looks-like rules, and self-audit step apply equally to both modes. The workflow and output format differ.

Detect which mode the user is in from their prompt:

• Authoring signals: "write a post about", "I want to share", "draft a post", or describing an experience without referring to an external thread.
• Reply signals: a Reddit URL, pasted text from someone else's post or comment, or phrases like "reply to this", "respond to this", "help me answer this", "comment on this", "someone posted [...]".

If genuinely ambiguous, ask which they want before drafting.

Authoring mode (writing a new post)

Workflow

When the user asks for a new Reddit post, run this check first: do you have enough raw material to write something specific?

You need at least most of these:

• The product (what it does, who it's for)
• A concrete experience the user is willing to share (something they built, tried, fixed, learned, or measured)
• Specific numbers or details (revenue, users, conversion rates, time spent, money spent, what failed, dates, sample sizes)
• What didn't work or what it cost — posts that only describe wins read as humblebrags

If you have all of this, write the post. If you're missing the lived experience or the specific numbers, stop and ask the user for them before drafting. Generic Reddit posts get zero traction, so a draft built on hand-waving is worse than no draft. Ask for what's missing in plain language: "What were the actual numbers?" "What did you try first that didn't work?" "How long did this take?"

Only proceed to writing once the inputs are concrete enough that the post can name real things.

Output format

Produce, in this order:

1. 3 title variations, each on its own line, no numbering inside the title itself
2. 2 body variations, clearly labeled (e.g. "Body — version A", "Body — version B"), each a complete post
3. Subreddit suggestions: 2-4 subreddits that fit, with one line each on why and any self-promo rule to know
4. A first-comment seed: one short comment the user (or a friend) can drop in the first 30 minutes to kickstart engagement — written as a genuine reaction or follow-up question, not as praise

Don't add disclaimers, "let me know if you want changes," or other meta-commentary around the output. Just produce it.

Title rules

A good Reddit title does one of these:

• States a specific concrete outcome ("Generated 273K impressions in 4 weeks from Reddit")
• Frames a counterintuitive choice ("Why I ignored Reddit for 4 years and what changed")
• Asks a real question the writer is genuinely chewing on ("Anyone else seeing AI search drive more SaaS signups than Google?")
• Names a specific lesson learned ("Posting the same thing to 5 subreddits at once doesn't work — here's what does")

Title constraints:

• Lowercase or sentence case is fine; avoid Title Case Headlines That Look Like Articles
• No emoji, no all caps, no clickbait ("You Won't Believe...")
• No "[Question]", "[Discussion]" style brackets unless the target subreddit specifically asks for them
• Numbers are good when they're real. Don't manufacture round-looking numbers.
• Length: usually 8-15 words. Long enough to be specific, short enough to scan.
• Don't name the product in the title unless the post is explicitly a "what I built" story in a subreddit that allows it (rare)

When producing the 3 title variations, give the user different angles, not three rewordings of the same angle. For example: one outcome-focused, one question-focused, one lesson-focused.

Body structure

Reddit bodies don't have a rigid template. They have a shape that comes from honest storytelling. The shape usually looks like:

• Open with the specific situation or claim. Don't warm up. Don't say "I want to share something with you all." Drop straight into the concrete thing — a number, a moment, a decision.
• Give the texture of what actually happened. Numbers, timelines, what was tried, what failed, what cost what. This is the meat. Most of the post lives here.
• Pull out the lessons as you go, not at the end as a labeled "key takeaways" list. Reddit readers are smart and resist being lectured.
• Acknowledge what's still uncertain. Real practitioners don't have everything figured out. A line like "whether this compounds over the next 6 months is still open" signals honesty and is hard to fake.

Length: usually 250-600 words. Long enough to feel substantive, short enough that people read it. Very long posts (1000+ words) work occasionally but only when every paragraph earns its place.

Paragraphs: short. Two to four sentences. Reddit is read on phones; walls of text get scrolled past.

Formatting:

• No headers (## like this) unless the post is a long, multi-part guide where they genuinely help
• No bullet point lists unless the content really is a list (e.g. step-by-step). Even then, keep them short and don't bullet every paragraph.
• No bold for emphasis. Reddit prose works without it.
• No "TL;DR" at the top — it signals self-importance and most good posts don't need one. If the post is genuinely long, a one-line TL;DR at the bottom is fine.

Subreddit guidance (authoring mode)

Different subs have different cultures and self-promo rules. When suggesting subreddits, think about fit, not just size.

Common SaaS-relevant subs and their rough character (verify the rules in each sub's sidebar before posting — they change):

• r/SaaS — tolerant of founder stories with light product mentions; loves numbers and post-mortems
• r/Entrepreneur — broader audience; stories should be widely useful, not niche
• r/marketing — channel/tactic discussions; product mentions need to be very incidental
• r/smallbusiness — practical, non-tech crowd; works for general business lessons
• r/startups — strict on self-promo; lean toward question or genuine discussion format
• r/SideProject — friendly to "what I built" posts; lower bar but smaller reach
• r/digital_marketing — tactic-focused; numbers do well
• r/SEO — niche, very tactical, hates anything that smells like content marketing
• r/Indiehackers (and the IndieHackers site) — tolerant of founder posts with explicit product mentions
• Niche industry subs (r/sales, r/devops, r/PPC, r/copywriting, etc.) — usually the highest-quality audience for B2B SaaS, but the strictest on relevance

Suggest 2-4 subreddits, ranked by fit. Pick from across the size spectrum — a smaller sub with the right audience often beats a giant sub with the wrong one. Note any specific rule the user should check (e.g. "r/startups bans link drops; this post has no link so it's fine, but read the sidebar").

Don't suggest posting the same body to all of them at once — recommend spacing posts out across days and adjusting the framing for each sub's culture.

Reply mode (responding to an existing post or comment)

Inputs

The user will give you one of:

• A direct paste of the post or comment they want to reply to (preferred — easier and more reliable)
• A reddit.com URL pointing to the post or comment

If they give a URL only, try to fetch the page to read the content. If you can't fetch it, ask the user to paste the relevant text instead — don't write a reply based on a URL alone, because the reply has to engage with what was actually said.

The user should also provide the product context (what their SaaS does and how it relates to the parent post). If they don't, ask for it.

Workflow

1. Read the parent carefully. Identify exactly what the OP is asking, claiming, or struggling with. The reply has to engage with that specific thing. Vague replies that don't acknowledge what was actually said get spotted as drive-by promotion immediately.
2. Decide if the product is genuinely a fit. Is it actually a relevant answer to what the OP is asking? If yes, it can be mentioned. If it's only adjacent or tangential, mention it in passing if at all — or honestly tell the user that this thread isn't a good fit. A forced fit reads as spam and damages account reputation. The user is better served by a "skip this one" call than by a draft they'll get downvoted for.
3. Identify what the parent's poster needs. A direct answer? A war story from someone who's been there? A clarifying question? Match the energy and length of the parent.
4. Draft 2-3 reply variations using different approaches (see below).

Output format

Produce, in this order:

1. A one-line read of what the OP is actually asking/saying. Confirms you've read the parent and understood it. Keep it short.
2. Fit assessment. One line: is the product a strong fit, a weak fit, or no fit? If no fit, recommend skipping the thread and stop here.
3. 2-3 reply variations, each labeled with the approach used (see "Reply approaches" below). Each reply is a complete comment, ready to paste.
4. Linking note. One line on whether to include a link to the product in this specific context, and why.

Don't add meta-commentary or "let me know if you want changes." Just produce it.

Reply approaches (pick 2-3 per output)

Different replies work in different contexts. Pick the 2-3 that fit the parent best:

• Direct answer with product as one option. Genuinely answer the question; mention the product as one of several things you've tried or built. Pattern: "Tried [A], [B], and built [Product] for myself in the end. [A] was good for X but couldn't do Y."
• Story-first, product incidental. Share your experience with the same problem; the product comes up naturally as part of the story. The product is supporting cast, not the headline.
• Helpful answer, no product mention. The highest-trust play. You answer the question well, and your profile / username is enough for interested people to find what you do. This works especially well when the parent's situation is sensitive, when the product is only loosely relevant, or when the subreddit is strict on self-promo.
• Clarifying question + brief context. When the OP's post is ambiguous or under-specified, ask a clarifying question that shows you've thought about their problem. Build rapport first; the product mention can come in a follow-up if they reply.

Label each variation by approach so the user knows what they're choosing between.

Reply structure

Most Reddit replies are short. 1-4 short paragraphs, sometimes a single sentence. Match the length and depth of the parent. Replying to a one-line question with a five-paragraph essay reads as overkill (and as marketing).

Open with substance, not throat-clearing. Don't start with "Great question!" or "I had this exact same problem!" — those phrases are among the most reliable AI/spam-tells on Reddit. Just answer.

If you're sharing experience, name specifics. "Used [A] for 6 months, switched off because it couldn't handle multi-step sequences" beats "I've used several tools in this space."

End naturally. No sign-off, no "hope this helps", no "happy to chat in DMs." A reply just stops.

Reply-specific anti-patterns

Cut these immediately if you find them in a draft:

• The bait-and-switch: "I had this exact problem until I built [Product]" — transparently self-serving. Reddit users sniff this out instantly.
• The drive-by plug: a one-line "check out [Product]" with no engagement with what the OP said. Always gets downvoted, often gets the comment removed.
• The fake third-party rec: "I've heard [Product] is good for this" when you actually built it. Lying about your relationship to a product is the fastest way to get a Reddit account banned and the comment screenshotted to r/HailCorporate.
• The "AI assistant" voice: "There are several great options for this!" followed by a tidy bulleted list. This is exactly what an LLM produces and Reddit users will call it out.
• Engagement-bait closers: "What's worked for you?" appended reflexively to every reply.
• Robotic over-disclosure: "(Disclosure: I'm the founder of [Product])" attached to every reply makes you read like a compliance bot. Disclose when relevant — when you're directly recommending the product as an answer — not as a tic. A natural mention like "I built [Product] for myself" is its own disclosure.
• Length mismatch: writing a long, structured reply to a casual one-line question. Match the parent.

Disclosure

Reddit's site-wide rules and most subs expect you to disclose when you're affiliated with a product you're recommending. The cleanest way: mention it as part of the natural sentence — "I built [Product] for this exact problem, fwiw" or "tried a bunch of things, ended up building my own ([Product])". This is both compliant and reads as human.

Don't use formal disclosure brackets like "[Disclosure: founder of X]" unless the subreddit specifically requires that format. Most don't, and the bracket format reads as corporate.

Universal rules (apply to both modes)

Voice rules

Write like a tired but candid founder talking to peers, not like a marketing team.

• First person, contractions on. "I tried", "we shipped", "didn't work", "I'm not sure".
• Short, varied sentence rhythm. Mix punchy three-word sentences with longer ones that breathe.
• Specific over abstract. "Spent $400 on Google Ads, got two signups" beats "experimented with paid acquisition channels."
• Admit costs and failures plainly. "Two of my posts got removed" is more compelling than any win.
• No hype words. No "game-changing", "unlock", "leverage", "elevate", "robust", "seamless", "powerful", "cutting-edge", "revolutionize", "delve", "navigate the landscape".
• No corporate three-part flourishes. "Faster, better, cheaper" / "ideate, iterate, deliver" reads as deck copy.
• Write the way you'd write to a friend who happens to also run a SaaS. Slightly informal. Confident but not preachy.

AI-writing tells to actively avoid

These get sniffed out instantly by Reddit. Cut them at draft stage:

Punctuation tells

• Em dashes used for dramatic effect — like this. Use a comma, period, or parentheses instead.
• Curly/smart quotes ("like this") — Reddit is plain text. Use straight quotes.
• Semicolons feel formal; most Reddit posts don't use them.

Sentence-shape tells

• "It's not just X — it's Y" / "It's not about X, it's about Y" negative-parallelism constructions
• Rule-of-three lists where the third item is a synonym of the first two ("faster, smarter, better"; "ideate, iterate, deliver")
• Present-participle tails tacking on fake depth ("...highlighting the importance of...", "...underscoring how...", "...reflecting broader trends...", "...showcasing the value of...")
• Sentences that start with "Moreover," "Furthermore," "Additionally," "In essence," "Ultimately,"
• Every paragraph the same length. Real human writing has wildly varying paragraph lengths because real thoughts don't come in equal-sized chunks.
• Sentences that all balance a setup against a payoff. Real writing has flat declarative sentences mixed in.

Vocabulary tells

• Hype words: "leverage", "unlock", "elevate", "robust", "seamless", "powerful", "cutting-edge", "revolutionize", "transformative", "innovative", "groundbreaking"
• LLM-favorite verbs: "delve", "navigate", "foster", "facilitate", "streamline", "harness", "embark", "embody"
• LLM-favorite nouns: "landscape", "ecosystem", "journey", "realm", "tapestry", "testament", "cornerstone"
• Inflated significance: "marks a pivotal moment", "stands as a testament", "represents a shift", "speaks to a broader trend"
• Filler intensifiers: "truly", "genuinely" (used as filler — fine when actually meant), "incredibly", "remarkably"

Structural tells

• Vague attributions: "industry observers note", "many experts agree", "studies show", "research suggests"
• Hedge phrases: "it's worth noting that", "it's important to remember", "one could argue"
• Meta-announcements: "Let's dive in", "without further ado", "here's what you need to know", "buckle up"
• Generic uplift closers: "the future is bright", "exciting times ahead", "the possibilities are endless"
• "At its core, what really matters is..." — just say what matters
• Sign-offs like "Hope this helps!" or "Let me know your thoughts in the comments below!"

Formatting tells

• Bold sprinkled mid-sentence for emphasis on key phrases
• Bullet lists where every bullet is roughly the same length and starts with the same part of speech
• Headers in posts/replies that don't actually need them
• Numbered list items that are all complete tidy sentences

What human Reddit writing actually looks like

Real Reddit content is slightly imperfect in ways that LLMs don't naturally produce. Lean into these:

• Tangents and asides. Real people interrupt themselves. A parenthetical mid-paragraph, a "anyway —", a sentence that goes somewhere unexpected.
• Mild inconsistency. Writing can be mostly past tense and slip into present tense for one beat. That's how people actually write.
• Casual openers. "ok so", "honestly", "tbh", "ngl", "fwiw", "ymmv" used sparingly and only where natural — not sprinkled in to fake casualness.
• Sentences that just stop. Sometimes the most human thing is a four-word sentence with no flourish. "It didn't work." "We pivoted twice."
• Being slightly cranky or tired. Real founders are not relentlessly upbeat. A line of dry frustration ("...took way longer than it should have") humanizes content fast.
• Acknowledging gaps in knowledge. "Not sure why this worked, honestly." "I might be wrong about this." LLMs over-claim certainty by default.
• Specific names of real things. Specific tool names, specific subreddit names, specific numbers — beats abstractions every time.

Don't fake these. If you put "tbh" into something that's otherwise perfectly polished, it sticks out worse than not having it. The whole piece has to feel of a piece.

Promotion handling

The product is the supporting character, not the main character. Default rules apply across both modes, with mode-specific notes:

Both modes:

• Mention the product at most once or twice, in passing, as part of the story.
• Sometimes don't name the product at all — particularly when the post or reply is about a method, lesson, or general experience.
• Never use CTAs ("DM me", "check out my tool", "happy to chat if interested"). These get content removed.
• The strip test: if you removed the product mention, would the content still be worth reading on its own? If no, the product is doing too much work. Rewrite.

Authoring mode:

• Don't link the product in the post body. Links trigger spam filters and mods. Save links for comments when someone asks.
• The product can stay completely off-page if the post is about a method or lesson.

Reply mode:

• A link to the product is sometimes acceptable when the OP is explicitly asking for tool recommendations and the product genuinely fits. Use sparingly — maybe one in five replies.
• When in doubt, mention without linking. Interested users can DM or check your profile, which produces higher-quality leads anyway.
• Disclose your affiliation naturally in the sentence ("I built [Product]", "fwiw I'm the founder"), not as bracketed legalese.

Self-audit before delivering output

After writing each draft (post body, title, or reply), run this check explicitly. It's the single most important step.

Step 1: Re-read the draft and ask yourself: what makes this still sound AI-generated?

Look for:

• Any of the punctuation, vocabulary, sentence-shape, or structural tells listed above
• Paragraphs that all flow at the same rhythm
• Sentences that feel "balanced" or "polished" in a way real Reddit content isn't
• Any phrasing that you'd find in a LinkedIn post or a corporate blog

Step 2: List the specific tells you found, briefly (in your head — don't show the user).

Step 3: Rewrite to remove them. Common moves:

• Replace em dashes with periods, commas, or parentheses
• Break up balanced sentences with a short flat one
• Cut hedge words and filler intensifiers
• Make at least one paragraph noticeably shorter than its neighbors
• Replace abstract nouns with specific ones (e.g. "the channel" → "Reddit", "the tool" → name it)

Step 4: Re-read once more. Does it sound like a real founder typed it on their phone between meetings? If yes, deliver. If still no, rewrite again.

This audit step is non-negotiable. The first draft is never the final output — the post-audit revision is.

Common scenarios

Authoring — user shares a win. Push them to also include what they tried first that failed, what it cost, and what's still uncertain. A pure win-post reads as bragging.

Authoring — user wants to share a tactic. Make sure the tactic is grounded in their specific experience with specific numbers. A generic "here are 7 tips for X" post is the wrong vehicle.

Authoring — user wants to ask a question. Question posts work, but the post still needs setup that shows the user has tried things and thought about it. "Has anyone tried X?" with no context gets ignored.

Authoring — user has a product launch. Don't write a launch post. Write a "what I learned building this" post that happens to mention the product is now live. Direct launch posts almost always flop outside r/SideProject and Product Hunt.

Reply — OP is asking for tool recommendations. This is the best-case scenario for product mention. Answer honestly with the product as one option among others, disclose affiliation, and link if the subreddit allows it.

Reply — OP is venting about a problem your product solves. Lead with empathy or shared experience, not the product. A "yep, I had the same thing happen" opening works better than "you should try [Product]." Mention the product later in the reply, in passing, if at all.

Reply — OP is asking a question only loosely related to your product. This is usually a "skip" or a "no product mention" reply. Forcing a product mention into a tangentially-related thread gets you flagged. Be honest with the user: tell them this thread isn't a fit and recommend they either reply helpfully without mentioning the product, or skip it.

Reply — OP is criticizing your category or a competitor. Don't get defensive on behalf of the category and don't pile on the competitor. Engage with the substance of the criticism honestly. If your product is differently positioned, mention that without making the reply a comparison post.

Final pass before delivering output

For each draft (title, body, or reply), run through this checklist in order:

1. Sounds human, not AI. Run the self-audit step above. Cut every tell you find. This is the most important check — content that fails here is dead on arrival no matter how good the substance is.
2. Sounds like a person, not a marketing team. Could this have been written by a marketing department? If yes, rewrite.
3. Has at least one specific number or named detail (in posts) or engages directly with what the OP said (in replies). If not, rewrite.
4. Acknowledges a cost, failure, or open question (in posts) or doesn't over-claim (in replies). Pure-win content reads as bragging.
5. No AI-tell punctuation, vocabulary, or structures. Em dashes for drama, "not just X but Y", "-ing" tails, hype words, signposting phrases — all gone.
6. Product mention passes the strip test. If you removed the product mention, would the content still be useful? If no, the product is doing too much work.
7. Wouldn't get flagged by a moderator. No CTAs, minimal/no links, no obvious self-promo signals.
8. Length matches the context. A post is full-length; a reply matches the parent's length and depth.

Only deliver the output once each draft passes all eight checks. If the first attempt doesn't pass, rewrite — don't ship a draft you know has tells in it.