
I made a fresh Reddit account for a product a while back, spent a good twenty minutes on a reply in a sub where the exact question I could answer had just been asked, hit comment, and watched it disappear. The removal message said the account did not have enough karma. It did not say how much karma. I went to the sub rules, nothing there either. I now paste every Reddit draft into a notes file before I submit it, which is a stupid habit for a grown adult to have and I know plenty of people who do the same thing. the number nobody will tell you The part that got me is that this is on purpose. Reddit's own help page on poster eligibility says the karma and account age thresholds communities use are not disclosed "to deter potential misuse". So the gate exists, it is enforced by automod, it refreshes on a schedule, and the one thing you are not allowed to know is where it sits. You find out by losing a comment. I get why. If the number were public, the spam rings would clear it by lunch. But the person who actually eats the cost is the founder who found the sub on launch week, has one account, and wrote something real. From the automod's side those two people look identical, a new account with low karma mentioning a product. There is no field for "but I meant it". the advice is correct and useless Every thread about this ends in the same two suggestions. Go comment in the friendly subs for a few weeks, and just be a good contributor. Reddit's own karma page literally says not to set out to accumulate karma. Which is fine advice if you have no date on your calendar. I tried the friendly route for one weekend and I honestly recommend you look at what the account history looks like afterwards. New account, random pet subs, short agreeable comments, and then suddenly a post in r/SaaS. That is the exact pattern mods are trained to screen for. I had built myself a bot's resume by hand. The other thing I tried was reading the rules properly before posting. Sub rules say one thing, the automod does another, and the mod who could explain the difference is a volunteer who gets a pile of these messages every week. Actually, wait, I should be fair here, a couple of mods did reply and were kind about it. The answer was still "build karma first". so I built the thing I kept wishing existed Karma Farm is a Chrome extension that sits next to Reddit and helps you write the comment or post you were going to write anyway, in the register that particular sub actually uses, and then gets out of the way. You press post, it never does. Concretely, it reads the thread you are on, pulls the parent comment and the comments around it, and drafts a few replies. Each draft comes with a confidence read, a rough guess at whether that sub will upvote it or torch it. r/programming and r/Entrepreneur do not want the same sentence, and the drafts for each come out noticeably different because the extension studies recent top posts in the sub before it writes. The thing I rewrote the most was the promotion part. When a thread is genuinely about the problem your product solves, Karma Farm will help you mention it the way people on Reddit actually do, story first, link last or not at all. Early versions could not resist putting the link in the first sentence, and most of the prompt work went into making it stop. There is a checkbox for it, and nothing surfaces your project unless you tick it. It also keeps a memory of the subs you are working in, the voices you like writing in, and the projects you might mention, so the second week is better than the first. about the name I called it Reddit Karma Farming on the store because that is what people type when they have this problem, and I expect to get grief for it. I should be clear about what it is not, since the name invites the wrong guess. Nothing gets submitted by it, it never votes, there is one account involved, and no karma is bought or traded anywhere. Every draft sits in Reddit's own text box until you decide. If you want a bot that posts for you, this is not it and I would gently suggest the bot is going to get your account banned anyway. The AI part runs on your own key. Groq, OpenAI, Gemini, OpenRouter, Together, or a local Ollama if you are that kind of person. The key stays in your browser and the calls go straight from your browser to the provider. Webmatrices only checks whether your Pro license is active, it never sees your Reddit text or your prompts. I did not want to be a middleman on anyone's Reddit account and I did not want to be billing per message either. where it stands The Chrome Web Store listing currently shows 17 users and two ratings, which is nothing, and I am fine saying that out loud. Pro is $9.99, you pay once, there is no subscription, and the AI cost is whatever your provider charges you, which for Groq or Ollama is often zero. The install and setup is on the Karma Farm page, and the extension itself is on the Chrome Web Store. What I still do not have a good answer for is the week one problem. The extension makes your comments better, it cannot make the automod forgive an account that was created on Tuesday. If you have found a sub where new founders can actually talk without getting filtered, I want to hear about it, I am building a list inside the extension and it is shorter than I would like.
Explore fully customizable tooltip components built for React, Next.js, Tailwind CSS, and Shadcn UI.
A collection of 7 customizable and interactive tooltip components built with React, Next.js, Tailwind CSS, and Shadcn UI.Types of Tooltip ComponentsThese ready-to-use tooltip patterns are designed to provide helpful information, contextual guidance, validation feedback, and additional details without cluttering the interface.Hover Blog Card TooltipA rich hover tooltip for displaying blog information and content previews without leaving the current page. Perfect for blogs, content platforms, and editorial websites.Content TooltipA simple content-focused tooltip for displaying helpful information, explanations, and contextual guidance when users interact with UI elements.Animated Avatar TooltipAn interactive tooltip with smooth animated transitions, designed to create a more engaging and polished user experience.Rounded TooltipA clean and modern rounded tooltip style that fits naturally into contemporary interfaces and design systems.Positional TooltipA flexible tooltip with different positioning options, making it suitable for buttons, icons, navigation, forms, and other interactive elements.Avatar TooltipAn avatar-based tooltip for displaying user information and profile details. Ideal for team sections, social platforms, collaboration tools, and user profiles.Error TooltipAn error-focused tooltip for displaying validation messages, warnings, and helpful feedback when users interact with an invalid field or action.Why Use Tooltips?Tooltips provide additional context without taking up permanent space in the interface. They can help users understand icons, actions, form fields, and unfamiliar UI elements while keeping the overall design clean and focused.Explore 👉 Shadcn Tooltip Today
after 4 apps and $0 in revenue i made myself one rule for the fifth thing. research first. no code until something survives. so i spent two days hunting for a chrome extension i could actually sell. reddit, x, the web store, keyword planner. nothing survived. seven ideas are dead and one is on life support. here's the graveyard, because the way each one died taught me more than the ideas did. my method was broken from the start i searched "is there an extension that" and "i wish there was an extension" and then checked if the web store looked empty. empty store means opportunity, right. turns out an empty store usually means one of three things. nobody wants it, it already exists as a normal saas, or the platform will kill you for building it. i managed all three. the graveyard whatsapp web crm. looked perfect. people post about paid users in week one. then i read how whatsapp handles unofficial clients: it flags the connection itself, before you even send a message. you can't out-behave that. i found a founder who started as an extension, ran into ban risk, and rebuilt everything on the official api. there are also about 10 near identical whatsapp crm extensions already. dead. whatsapp order taking for small shops. same ban problem. and the one guy i found who built this for home bakers has zero users. getting shop owners to try anything new is the actual boss fight. i know that fight. i lost it four times. invoice autofill for xero and quickbooks. hubdoc comes free with xero business plans, and free is a hard price to beat. it only grabs 4 fields, no line items, so there IS a gap. someone is already selling into it. ai sidebar for netsuite or servicenow. i watched a builder get around 50% paid conversion with an ai sidebar for google apps script and wanted to copy the pattern on a bigger platform. then servicenow, netsuite and salesforce all shipped their own ai assistants this year. a netsuite search already shows 9 extensions. mv2 replacements. i fully bought the "53 million installs losing support on aug 31" thing. then i checked chrome's own timeline. mv2 got disabled for everyone on july 24, 2025. august 31 this year only removed the store listings. everyone who needed a replacement found one over a year ago. port portal checker for truck dispatchers. dispatchers paste container numbers into a port portal one at a time, every morning. store search showed zero extensions and i got excited. then the portal turned out to sell that exact data as an api, the dispatch software already plugs into it, and the only demand i could find was one post with 2 upvotes. not dead dead. on life support. ad change log for ppc people. agencies juggling google, meta and amazon ads can't remember what they changed on monday when numbers tank on thursday. empty store again. then i searched outside the store and found adrecap doing it for $19 a month, google only. i killed it on the spot. remember that one, it comes back. the one that actually hurt google ads change history exporter. this was going to be it. the google ads api only gives you 30 days of change history. the google ads ui shows 2 years. so every api based tool is stuck at 30 days, and an extension reading the ui could hand you 2 years on day one. something the competition literally can't do. i was already picking which test account to make. then i opened the actual change history page and looked at it properly. there's a download button. it exports csv. for free. keyword planner agreed with the button. zero volume for "google ads change history exporter", and out of about 100 suggestions not one was about change history. people search "edit google ads" 50k times a month. nobody searches for my thing. i sat there with the csv open for a while. two days of research and the product had been a button the whole time. just static. the checks i run now search outside the web store before getting excited about an empty one if the platform has an official api for it, you're probably building the wrong shape one complaint post is noise. count different people open the actual product and click around for a free button first keyword planner. no volume and no related suggestions means nobody is looking check if the platform wants you to exist at all funny part is what passes all six. ai chat organizers. your chats only live in your logged in session so there's no api anyone can build on, the platforms dont block them, and native folders are still bad. superpower chatgpt has 420k downloads. easy folders posted $3.7k mrr and $42k in six months. it's packed now, obviously. on the non ai side the big ones are gmass for gmail and closet tools for poshmark resellers, last i saw $130k and $42k a month. both are tools for people who make money inside one platform all day. that's the shape i'd copy. what i got wrong remember adrecap. i killed the ad idea because a competitor existed. a competitor charging $19 a month is proof people pay. i should have asked what they can't do and stayed. and on all 8 ideas the real blocker was me. no accounts in those industries. no credibility. no way to reach a single customer. same wall as my 4 apps, i just hit it earlier this time. i guess thats progress. what's left on my list is cs2 and steam trading tools, creator analytics overlays, and sourcing tools for sellers. if you've shipped in any of those, how bad did platform risk get once you had real users? genuinely asking, im still figuring it out.

Hi everyone, I need some honest feedback regarding my website OdiaTyping.com (https://www.odiatyping.com/). It is a free English-to-Odia typing/phonetic transliteration tool where users can type in English and get Odia text instantly. I have applied for Google AdSense three times over the last three months, but my site has been rejected every time. I have already tried to address the common issues such as adding About, Contact, Privacy Policy and other necessary pages, improving navigation, making the site mobile-friendly, using HTTPS, ensuring the content is original, improving the explanatory content around the tool, and fixing the obvious SEO and technical issues. The site is also indexed in Google and currently receives around 5–10 organic clicks per day and approximately 1,000 impressions per day in Google Search Console. What I cannot understand is what exactly could still be wrong. Since the website is primarily a useful online tool rather than a traditional blog or content website, I am wondering whether Google considers it a low-value or thin-content site even though the tool itself is functional and provides a genuine service. I would really appreciate it if someone could take a look at the website and give me an honest AdSense-focused review. Is the amount of content insufficient? Is there anything wrong with the design, navigation, user experience, or technical setup? Should I create more supporting pages or articles around Odia typing? Does the fact that the site is focused on the Odia language have any relevance? Is my current traffic too low, or is traffic generally unrelated to AdSense approval? Most importantly, what would you personally change before I submit another AdSense application? I have already been rejected three times, so I don't want to simply keep making random changes and reapplying without understanding the actual problem. Any specific suggestions or criticism would be greatly appreciated.
Went into OpenAI's Astra announcement Thursday night expecting to be mildly annoyed and got there faster than usual. The first paragraph says Astra "saturates ARC-AGI-3 with a 99.9% score." I've followed that benchmark since the first prize round because it's the only one where I actually understand what's being tested, so I clicked over to ARC Prize's own post about the run, figuring it would say the same thing with more detail. Their number is 62.7%, and I read it three times because I assumed I'd opened the wrong post. Both numbers are real, which is what makes it annoying. The ARC folks run every model through the same harness for the leaderboard, and that harness gives the lower score. They also let OpenAI run a second harness that keeps the model's hidden reasoning alive between turns, and that one gives the headline score. Both sit in one table in their post with the cost next to each, and the near-perfect run was the cheaper of the two, not the more expensive one. I still don't know what to do with that. It feels like it should mean something about the harness mattering more than the model, but I'm not confident enough to say it out loud. OpenAI's writeup prints the headline score, adds a footnote saying the run used "our responses API harness", and moves on, which is exactly the kind of sentence I used to send back with a comment. The lower number just isn't there. I looked twice, because I figured I was being unfair. So I did the thing I used to do to release notes, which is find every number in the table and check whether the sentence above it survives. (For the record I timed myself with and without Copilot this spring and came out slower with it, after months of feeling faster, so I am not a neutral reader of AI launches and I'm not going to pretend to be.) This ate most of Saturday and I didn't finish. There's a wall of footnotes at the bottom of the announcement, more than something that's mostly charts has any business having. I read most of them, the ones hanging off claims I cared about, and gave up on the rest. Someone with more patience can finish. What held up: the science terminal benchmark, the reverse-engineering one, ARC-AGI-2, GPQA. Real wins against real competitors, no footnote needed. If they'd built the whole thing around those I'd have read it once and gone to bed. What didn't. Humanity's Last Exam is in their own table and Astra loses it to every Claude model listed, the newest one by a lot, and the text above the table never mentions the row. I kept scrolling back up thinking I'd skipped a paragraph. The Artificial Analysis index is the same story, Astra near the bottom of the pack, which nobody is obligated to write a paragraph about, but still. Then the footnotes start doing work. One says the "Fable 5.1" number on a couple of rows is really Mythos, which is Fable with fewer safeguards and not something I can use, so I'm not sure who that comparison is for. One says Claude was left out of a few science rows because it refused most of the questions, so the "new record" on those rows is against OpenAI's own previous model and nobody else. And under the new exploit chart, where the old model looks like it barely showed up, the footnote says that tiny score is mostly an artifact of a turn limit and that the benchmark may not be solvable all the way by anything. I read that, looked at the chart again, and it was a different chart. One sentence in the safety section I'm just going to leave here, because I don't have anything to add to it: Our evaluations found Astra's written reasoning harder to monitor than GPT-5.6 Sol's. Last one, and I know it's petty. One of the demo videos is the model filling out a Form 1040. I paused it and checked the math, because apparently that's who I am now. The tax line uses the bracket formula, which is what I'd have done too if I didn't know better. At that income the IRS makes you use the tax table instead, and the table comes out $3.50 higher. The form itself is an HTML mockup, not the real PDF, and that bothered me more than the math did. Yes, three dollars and fifty cents. They also chose that demo, out of everything the model can do, to show people it can handle their paperwork. I would have flagged it in review. It isn't my model. Where that leaves me is somewhere I don't love. The model is clearly very good at a set of things. The announcement is also very good at a set of things, and I don't think the two sets overlap as much as it wants me to believe. I'll still probably use it. I timed myself slower with Copilot and I still use Copilot. If you've run Astra on your own tasks and have a number you'd stand behind, I'd like to see it, including if it makes this look silly. Coffee, a spreadsheet, and a weekend, not a lab.

Google sent an email on September 1 that most people will skim and delete. From February 17, 2027, AdSense and Ad Manager stop counting a display impression when the ad starts downloading and only count it once the creative has loaded and started drawing on screen. Google calls it begin-to-render. I dont run AdSense. They rejected me three times. I still spent most of Thursday evening on this because of how my converter site actually earns. Why this is aimed at sites like mine Median session on the converter site last month was 41 seconds. 8,140 sessions in August, most of them one page. Paste a value, copy the result, leave. Thats the traffic pattern AdSense called low value for 14 months, and its also the traffic pattern where the visitor is gone before the ad has finished rendering. Under the current count-on-download rule that impression still counts the moment the creative starts arriving. Under begin-to-render it doesnt exist. So the sites that will see the biggest drop in reported impressions are exactly the utility and tool sites that get pushed toward impression-based networks in the first place. Content sites where people read for four minutes will barely notice. What is actually changing I first read this as a viewability change and got it wrong. Its not viewability. Begin-to-render only means the ad loaded and started painting. It does not mean anyone scrolled to it. Google says as much in the Ad Manager help doc. The count just moves one step later in the chain. And this isnt Google inventing something. The IAB and MRC pushed the industry toward count-on-begin-to-render back in 2016. Video has counted this way for years, native and app inventory on Google already do. Display banners on web were the last holdout. Google is late, which tells you how much unrendered inventory they were comfortable counting until now. No percentage from Google. They say it varies per publisher. I believe that, because it depends on two things, how fast your ads paint and how fast your visitors leave. How to measure your own gap before February If you are on Ad Manager you can see the number today. Google has been recording both counts in parallel since mid August. Historical report, start date after August 12, 2026. Metrics. Ad server impressions next to Ad server begin to render impressions. Dimensions. Device category first. Then inventory format and inventory type (expanded) if you want to know which slots are the problem. The difference between the two columns is roughly what disappears in February. Do the mobile row seperately, that is where I expect the gap to be ugliest. If you only have plain AdSense the second metric isnt exposed anywhere I could find, so you are guessing until the switch happens. The sysadmin part I spent two years watching servers in Timișoara before any of this, and begin-to-render is a latency problem, nothing else. The creative has to travel from the exchange through however many hops to the browser and start painting before the visitor closes the tab. Every extra script in the chain, every synchronous tag, every heavy creative that trips Chrome's heavy ad limits, pushes that moment later. The monetization checker on here flagged my mobile pages at 6 seconds earlier this year. Same problem, different metric. The one that will bite people is lazy loading. Everyone put ad slots on lazy load for Core Web Vitals in 2023 and 2024, me included. A lazy slot below the fold on a page the visitor leaves in 41 seconds never renders, and from February it never counts either. Google says this directly in the doc. So there is now a real tradeoff between your LCP score and your impression count and I dont think most people have priced it yet. I started writing a paragraph here about how the same fight happened with viewability around 2015 and how long it took networks to catch up. Different post. What I still dont know Monetag pays the converter site. Media.net runs on the blog. Neither has said a word about which method they count on, and I emailed Monetag support on Wednesday and got the standard 48 hour reply. My guess, and it is a guess, is that both are still counting on download and both follow Google within a year, because once the buy side measures on render nobody wants to be the network whose numbers look inflated next to it. Which means every alternative network comparison out there, including the one I wrote in April, is quoting impression numbers that are 10 to 20 percent softer than they look. The money side I am less worried about than the reporting side. Advertisers were already paying for rendered impressions in their own systems and discounting the rest. What changes is that your dashboard finally shows the same number theirs does. The converter site did 19,340 Monetag impressions in August against 8,140 sessions. Ive no idea how many of those actually painted. If anyone here is on Ad Manager and has run the two columns side by side, what gap did you get on mobile?
Solo dev here. I have been building a dating app for a few months and I have just started paying for traffic. The result was humbling enough that I would rather show you the numbers than pretend.In the first 24 hours of ads, 111 people landed on the page. Zero of them clicked through to the signup form. Not a low conversion rate. Zero. Every single visitor loaded one page and left.So before I spend another euro, I would rather ask people who have been through this.What the thing actually isIt is a dating app where the deck is ordered by a weighted commonality score rather than by who is nearest or newest. Specifically:Shared favourites count triple, shared interests double, shared languages once. Naming the same band beats a generic "we both like music" match on purpose.Favourites are resolved to canonical entities at save time, so typing Mettalica still lines you up with everyone who typed Metallica, while short words stay strict so Cats never merges into Cars.You can name up to three nationalities you would like to meet, out of 241, and those people rank above every other signal in your deck.People looking for the same kind of relationship come first, then commonality, then distance.Chat translates automatically in 26 languages. Each person picks, per conversation, the language they write in and the language they read in, and either side can tap to see the original wording. Nobody has to switch to English.Browsing, matching and chatting are free and unlimited. No card, no trial clock. It runs in a browser, no install.Where I am honest with youIt is early and the user base is small. I know that is the elephant in the room for a dating product, and I suspect it is part of the answer. I am not going to pretend otherwise, and I am not asking anyone to believe there is a crowd waiting.What I would genuinely like to knowIn the first five seconds on the page, is it obvious what this is and who it is for? Or does it read as another swipe app with a paragraph of copy?Is "ranked by what you have in common" a reason to sign up, or is it a nice-to-have that nobody switches apps for?What would make you create an account on a dating app that is clearly early, if anything would?Does "free and unlimited, no card" read as honest or as a catch? I keep wondering whether it makes people trust it less rather than more.If you got as far as the signup form, what stopped you? Username, email and password, nothing else.Here is the page people actually land on, no signup needed to look around:bizzzy.app/how-it-worksTear it apart. I would rather hear why it does not work from you than keep paying to learn it slowly.
Hi everyone,My website, https://oldagecomics.com/, was rejected by Google AdSense for “Low Value Content.”The website publishes original, family-friendly comics and articles about ageing, senior life, retirement and everyday experiences of older adults. I have also added important pages such as About, Contact, Privacy Policy, Disclaimer, Terms and Conditions, Editorial Policy and author information.Most posts contain original comics along with explanations and supporting written content. However, I am still unsure what Google considers low value on the site.Could anyone experienced with AdSense please review my website and give me honest feedback?I would especially appreciate advice on:Whether the articles appear repetitive or templatedWhether the written content is detailed and useful enoughThe quality of the site design and navigationPossible indexing, crawling or technical issuesPages or content that should be improved, removed or combinedWhat I should fix before applying for AdSense againI am not posting this for promotion or backlinks. I genuinely want to understand the problems and improve the website.Website: https://oldagecomics.com/Thank you for your time and assistance.
Reject with generic "Policy violation" for a sports statistics tool after deep rebuild. Need advice.
Hello everyone,I am looking for some guidance on why my website (https://euroranking.pl) keeps getting rejected. Initially, I applied a few times and got rejected for "Low-value content". I completely understood that – it's a sports statistics tool (focused on UEFA country/club coefficients and simulations), and it lacked textual context.To fix this, I did a major overhaul:1. Rebuild the homepage to provide more structured context.2. Added comprehensive FAQ pages to explain the math, access lists, and rules.3. Added a detailed "About" page explaining the proprietary algorithms and data source (public UEFA data).4. Ensured strict compliance with privacy requirements: I use a Google-certified CMP (AdSense GDPR message banner) for Consent Mode v2, and have a highly detailed Privacy Policy and Contact page in the footer.Today, I received a rejection, but the reason changed to a generic "Policy violation" (with a link to the general publisher policies guide), instead of the previous "Low-value content".My tool runs 100,000 Monte Carlo simulations to calculate mathematical advancement probabilities (percentage-based) for clubs in European competitions. I have a few suspicions and would love some feedback from experienced publishers:- Gambling/Betting trigger words: Could terms like "probabilities", "calculations", or "projections" be falsely flagged by automated bots as betting-related content? (Note: The site has absolutely no betting odds, bookmaker links, or gambling content. It's purely educational/mathematical).- UEFA IP/Copyright: The site displays statistics regarding UEFA clubs. Could the automated reviewer perceive this as a copyright violation, even though the data is purely statistical, public, and we explicitly state we are not affiliated with UEFA?- Render issues: Since it is a data-heavy app, could the AdSense bot be failing to render the dynamic tables, seeing an "empty" page? (The core text and FAQ are fully rendered server-side via PHP).I would highly appreciate it if someone could take a quick look at the site and point out what might be triggering the "Policy violation" flag. Thank you in advance!

