第一人称“亲身经验”模板可能生成虚假的用户见证
原文依据:4 处该 Skill 命令代理以“实际使用过”的同行身份写作,并示范声称“我遇到过完全相同的问题”和“对我有效”。但收集产品背景的步骤没有要求用户提供或确认这些亲身经历。“不要编造产品事实”也没有明确禁止编造使用经历。
如果用户发布未经充分核实的草稿,读者可能把营销内容误认为真实的个人体验;即使披露了产品关联,这仍可能误导社区成员,并带来删帖、封号或信誉损害。
该风险有源码支持。Skill 要求用“实际使用过”的同行口吻,并提供“我遇到过……对我有效”的第一人称模板;但前置背景收集只要求产品、买家、竞品等信息,没有要求用户提供或核实可归属于发帖账号的真实经历。虽然产品命名门槛要求“真实经验”,且禁止编造产品事实,这仍未明确禁止在不提产品时虚构亲身经历。若照模板生成,读者可能把营销文案误认成真实见证,影响购买判断并使用户面临社区处罚或声誉风险。用户可要求作者加入明确规则:没有经用户确认的亲身经历,就不得使用第一人称体验陈述。
Before either phase, pin down — from the user, or their site:- **What they sell** and the one-line value prop- **Who the buyer is** (ICP) and the **pains** they feel- **Competitors** (names people would mention)- **Target subreddits** (5–15 where the buyer actually hangs out)- A few **high-intent search phrases** (how someone would phrase the problem, not generic keywords)If you can't get these, ask for them — do not guess the product.查看另外 3 个位置
Write as an **experienced peer who has actually used the thing**. The rule that keeps a reply real:> **Use experience grammar, not advice grammar.**> ✅ "I ran into this exact thing — what fixed it for me was…"> ❌ "You should…", "I'd just…", "The best way is…", "X is usually…"- **One thread, one reply.** Don't blast, and vary the wording — repetitive replies read as spam.- **Never invent** posts, quotes, or product facts.- **One hedge** on any opinion ("at least in my case…"). No absolute claims.- **Product-naming gate — and disclose.** Only bring up your product when **all three** hold: (1) the OP is clearly shopping for exactly this, (2) it genuinely answers the ask, and (3) you have real experience with it. If any fails, **don't name it** — a helpful reply with no pitch is still a win. **When you do name it, disclose your affiliation in the same breath** — e.g. "full disclosure, I work on X, so I'm biased, but what worked was…". Never a tag, link drop, or mini-review; once, honestly, inside your own experience.