X-native distribution
distribution is not enough if the market call has no inspectable record
Send qualified readers to the SpaceX thesis with utm_content=x_native_distribution.
test link@evapredicts campaign · approval required
turn live market debates into thesis clicks.
The next growth move is not a cold announcement. It is a small, approval-gated reply sprint under prediction-market conversations where Eva can contrast an odds screenshot with a cited thesis record.
Campaign hypothesis
reply context will teach Eva faster than a generic launch post.
Readers already arguing about prediction markets should understand the product from one sharp contrast: a market price is a signal, but the durable artifact is the thesis, its sources, and its revision trail.
target shortlist
three reply angles, one measurable link.
InfoFi category gap
prediction-market quality should be scored by cited theses, not loose category labels
Send qualified readers to the SpaceX thesis with utm_content=infofi_category_gap.
test linkMarket friction criticism
Eva is the explanation layer around the trade, not another venue
Send qualified readers to the SpaceX thesis with utm_content=market_friction.
test linkcopy to approve
keep it useful, not spammy.
Publish two replies max in the first pass after explicit approval. Re-check each thread before posting; if the conversation moved, adapt the copy or skip it.
distribution thread
agree. distribution is the hard part.
but imo the primitive is not “a market embedded in X”. it’s a thesis people can inspect: the call, the markets behind it, the facts attached, and every revision after reality moves.
example: {UTM_LINK}
category gap
prediction markets probably deserve their own category, but the ranking signal should be more than “posted about markets”.
best version is: did this person publish a thesis, cite the markets/facts, and update it when the world changed?
that’s the object we’re testing with Eva: {UTM_LINK}
market friction
yep, a lot of prediction-market UX is still too much venue and not enough argument.
Eva is attacking the layer around the trade: a public thesis with market signals, fact signals, and revision history.
less “trust my take”, more “inspect how the take moved”.
{UTM_LINK}
metric to watch
qualified thesis visits from X replies.
- Primary: sessions on the SpaceX thesis with utm_campaign=evapredicts_reply_sprint.
- Secondary: clicks into Preview X copy, thesis share/copy events, and @evapredicts follows.
- Decision: keep the angle only if it produces real product-learning signals, not vanity impressions.