"User requesting some feature." This is an observation. "Ten users requesting very similar features." This is a pattern. It took me way too long to figure out that our five most frequently requested features were actually the same one feature under different names because the exact wording was never the same.
I figured this out while manually re-reading three months of support tickets on a lazy Sunday morning, which clearly isn't a scalable solution. I wonder how other people find such patterns without filtering out all the important signals or being alarmed by everything coming in as a request.
Product Hunt s new forum UI is great, but the notification system forces a tough choice: get spammed by every individual thread notification, or miss out on important posts entirely. The solution? Add a "Follow Forum" option so users can subscribe to topic hubs directly.
There sa common assumption in SaaS that faster support always equals better retention but I m starting to doubt that. Dropping everything to reply instantly can actually distract you from high-impact work while training users to rely on you for simple answers.
Taking a bit longer to respond often pushes users to explore the product or read the FAQs which builds better long term habits.
For those running small products or indie software: how do you set boundaries on support time without making customers feel ignored?
For a long time I treated everyincoming support message like an absolute emergency. It was exhausting and constantly pulled me away from actually building and fixing the product.
When I was forced to slow down my response time recently nothing broke. In fact churn didn't go up at all and users started using our docs instead of waiting on me.
It made me rethink my whole support strategy. Curious how other founders handle this what s your realistic response window and have you noticed any downside to taking a few hours to reply?
Today, I read a TechCrunch article about what investors are no longer looking for in SaaS, or rather, what to avoid if you don't want to lose their interest.
The red flags were:
Too easy to replicate light AI wrappers, generic horizontal tools, basic CRM clones, generic productivity or project management tools.
No real depth products where differentiation is mostly UI and automation, anything without proprietary data, surface-level analytics.
Becoming obsolete workflow automation tools that coordinate human work (agents are taking over), integrations as a moat (MCP is making connectors a commodity), and "workflow stickiness" products trying to keep humans inside their software.
I've seen a lot very early stage startup (especially SaaS) running social media and stuck with double-digit followers for al long time until they eventually shut down... including mine. So I'm curious if any early stage startup (without huge momentum/connection from founders) actually got successful with their twitter/IG account?