This is a conversational production sheet, not a new selection authority or a request to build UI. Use three complementary surfaces: Nav to inspect public pages, BaseFace Copy Desk to inspect exact prepared text, and this publishing portfolio to locate route/edition/provider evidence. Howard can name a route and a slot in chat; Prigenix judges its market priority, Ari joins the buyer path, and Tess coordinates the owned-page edition. Public readback is technical proof, not Howard's approval to send traffic: none of Nav's prototypes is approved for that yet. Source records, not this summary, decide current provider or public state.
The two axes
- Across a funnel: TOFU LinkedIn Event and system-generated invite -> optional MOFU owned pages -> BOFU TicketSpice buyer form -> confirmation/access/support. The Event and any separate manual post, comment, or one-to-one message have content slots; the standard invite has no custom text note in Howard's observed interface.
- Across alternatives: TIX -> AI4DEV -> audience/promise -> Route A, B, C, and other candidate approaches. A strong slot on Route B does not fill the corresponding slot on Route A. POD and other offers can use the same frame later without being conflated with this seminar.
For this October 15 occurrence there is one LinkedIn EventPage and one system-generated native invite path. The route alternatives below are owned MOFU and TicketSpice BOFU candidates for the same seminar, not separate LinkedIn Events. Howard selects one broad EventPage copy-and-image package; the native invite cannot deliver different creative or a different URL to each NAICS recipient group. A 16-Event PPMA portfolio belongs to later occurrences, not today's slot count.
Use four plain status words in discussion: available (a platform has a slot), prepared (content exists), selected (the intended variant is chosen for this route), and visible (a recipient or buyer can see the actual placement). Approved for traffic is a separate Howard decision. Unknown is honest; it is not an empty slot or a zero result.
Current direction: public tickets first, private seminar second
The immediate purchase is one October 15 public AI4DEV seminar, $250 per person. Several colleagues can buy public seats together. A company-private seminar is a secondary upsell for teams seeking a shared conversation, not a replacement for that first purchase. Prigenix leads the market choices; Ari joins content slots to the actual buyer and delivery paths; Tess connects review, exact copy, and owned-page publication. Howard alone operates LinkedIn.
Howard's newer creative references take precedence over the older coding-speed and cost-estimation associations:
| Approach | Existing experience to inspect | What to compare |
|---|---|---|
| Augmentation, reach, range, connections | AIGENEXUS: The wider measure of intelligence | What can a person understand, make, or decide afterward? AIGENEXUS's slogan remains Your Place for AI. |
| Different roles interpreting the same demonstration | Everyone saw the same AI demo. Did they see the same product? | Does the journey connect developers, product managers, hardware engineers, executives, and skeptics? |
| Broad decision mystery | Compass | Keep the full force of The most expensive AI decision may be the one nobody decided to make; do not reduce the promise to a default-policy lesson. |
Copywriting25 and Bernoulli3 are developing further copy-and-image compositions. The corrected team-benefits candidate is now public: More ability. More agility. What could AI4DEV make possible for your team? It includes the full locally supplied John Schur recommendation, the public seminar as the primary action, and company-private inquiry as a secondary action without public private-pricing. Its phone review shows the same candidate in a narrow review window. Ari, Bernoulli3, and Prigenix checked the corrected composition; Bernoulli3 also replayed the installed publisher successfully without source work. This does not finish or select its entire funnel. Economics can support a deeper explanation without becoming the lead coding-speed promise. Older editions remain useful comparisons.
Current frozen campaigns
Howard's October 1 19:35 choice fixes the three anchors: Steadier Map, One Product / Many Views, and Nobody Decided. Their current whole-funnel packets are Map v0006, Product v0004 and Nobody Decided v0002. Complete those journeys; the earlier portfolio below is retained comparison material, not an invitation to replace today's anchors.
The current review and copy map joins the current Event descriptions, buyer text and supporting slots. One Product / Many Views has an actual public buyer page, as does Steadier Map. Tess independently inspected Map's headline, full visible prose, loaded original hero, October 15 2-4 p.m. Mountain Time and $250 seat selectors at 21:07 MT. Nobody Decided is now public too; Tess inspected its exact headline, opening and loaded sponsored-question original. Ari owns remaining social-image and delivery work. The selected original hero PNGs have exact public HTTPS readback at the isolated image host and have been handed to him. None of that is a paid-order or email-delivery test.
Earlier route portfolio retained for comparison
| Route | Owned MOFU already navigable | TicketSpice BOFU (dated observations below) | What most needs Howard's judgment |
|---|---|---|---|
| A: work your team can own | Evidence and related pages | Public $250 buyer form, page 1073543; no order or traffic approval | Is this the first audience/promise to finish? Which proof and hero image belong with it? |
| B: broad AI-decision hook | Compass | Public $250 buyer form, page 1073544; historical default-policy slug/cover, no order or traffic approval | Does the combined route preserve the ambiguity and force of "The most expensive AI decision may be the one nobody decided to make" rather than reduce it to default policy? |
| C: one room, different disciplines | Spark | Draft page 1073545, saved but not published | Does its cross-discipline promise attract the intended buyer, and does the art reinforce it? |
| Team benefits: more ability, more agility | Live candidate and phone review; corrected v0002 with full recommendation | Matching public buyer page, browser observed October 1 by Tess: matching headline and people/map image, October 15 2-4 p.m. MT, $250 seat and additional-seat quantity controls, policy and billing form. No purchase made. | Does the page make the public seat purchase compelling before the secondary private inquiry? Its Event copy/image and delivery words still need to be joined as one chosen funnel. |
| Earlier Decision-Economics comparison, distinct from B | Earlier text paired with shared-room.png | Historical comparison, not an automatically restored campaign lead | Preserve useful depth and visual treatment without implying AI4DEV sells coding speed or cost estimation. |
| Published floor | Foundation and other owned pages are reachable from Nav | Page 1072673 has a public $250 checkout, but an older body and historical slug | Use only as a verified floor while matching promise, support, and access; do not silently call it any A/B/C buyer page. |
Route identities, A/B public readbacks, and C's draft state come from Ari's TicketSpice portfolio. The pages are independent commerce objects; shared date and price do not establish shared capacity, registration, payment, confirmation, or reporting. A public page is not a completed purchase.
Slots to complete for the three selected campaigns
| Stage | Highest-value content slots to compare | Separate operational decision |
|---|---|---|
| LinkedIn TOFU | One selected Event description and image/link for all native invitees; optional separate post, comment/reply, or one-to-one message; further fields Howard describes from his own account | Howard alone pastes/posts/sends and selects recipients. The standard Event invite is a generated notification, not an editable message or per-recipient URL. Copy Desk's legacy INVITATION_BODY is a short-draft candidate for a separate manual action, not an invite slot. |
| Owned MOFU | Hero headline/image, proof, deeper explanation, objections/FAQ, CTA wording and link | Select a route-specific public edition and verify its exact buyer destination. Nav displays experiences; it does not select one. |
| TicketSpice BOFU | Page title, header, buyer body, ticket description, social image/title/description, FAQ/policy/support | Ari reads back the page identity, time, price, processor, buyer fields, and public URL per variant. |
| After purchase | Confirmation page/email, reminder, access and support words | Howard supplies actual meeting/access and approved terms; Ari verifies provider configuration and buyer experience. |
This is intentionally smaller than Ari's full provider-slot census. It prioritizes the content decisions that could make a coherent first outreach path today. Howard will supply the additional LinkedIn slot descriptions; neither public-web guesses nor automation of a logged-in account substitute for that.
Prigenix's editorial review is the companion to this slot inventory. Before asking whether a row is filled, ask whether its buyer recognizes the problem, sees a desirable and credible educational gain, trusts the proof, and understands the $250 purchase. The Event page should make sense to a recipient of the generated invite; any separately authored post, comment, or message can add context before the owned explanation and checkout, without changing the curriculum. The TicketSpice page must also work for someone who skips the owned explanation entirely. Slot completion supports that judgment; it cannot replace it.
Before any outreach, Howard judges both media criteria coverage (headline, subhead, body, PNG, layout, styling as one experience) and funnel-stage coverage (matching TOFU, MOFU, BOFU, and post-payment access/support). A technically public page can still fail either test. This sheet helps name the missing slots; it does not grant market approval.
The Funnel Nav review-pack path uses simple linked snapshots of the one Event's competing TOFU packages, owned-page alternatives, and matching TicketSpice candidates. It is a comparison aid: candidate pages and reciprocal CTA fixes can be published and read back now; only prospect-traffic activation waits for Howard.
Revise or make another alternative?
- Revise the current owned edition when the audience and core promise still fit but a named headline, image, proof paragraph, or CTA is weak. The new edition can keep the stable host; verify its public bytes and outbound link.
- Prepare a new route when Howard changes the intended audience, central promise, page architecture, or the image-and-copy system together. Preserve the earlier candidate for comparison until a selection is made.
- Treat buyer-side changes as a joined decision when price, delivery, access, policy, TicketSpice wording, or checkout URL changes. Ari checks every linked page and confirmation path before that route is publicized.
- Treat sent LinkedIn material as already delivered. A new edition can improve future outreach but cannot retroactively alter what recipients saw.
The most efficient chat instruction is: "Route B, keep its audience and promise; improve these named slots" or "Create a new Route D for this audience and contrasting promise," followed by the public URL, selected Copy Desk block, image preference, and any buyer-path constraint. Mark each other slot unknown, prepared, selected, or visible rather than filling it by inference.
Copy Desk expansion, bounded by immediate value
The selected shared BaseFace now has the additional-slot chooser, Preview, separate Save choice and manual Select text. The former pending-promotion description is superseded. There are 30 linked candidates across the three campaigns and ten roles: Event description, buyer headline, ticket description, social description, buyer subhead, seat-selector heading, confirmation, reminder, whole buyer text and social title. These are candidates, not installed provider fields. Existing saved choices remain unchanged.
The newest six candidates have exact read-only Base GET receipts: whole buyer text 2460/2574/2685 characters and social titles 67/72/79, in Map/Product/Nobody order. All six report NO_SELECTION. Their caller budgets are not verified provider limits. The whole buyer bodies are Copywriting25's exact plain-text projections of the current packets, not generated TicketSpice HTML.
New candidate receipts and the current review map connect this material to the provider-field packet. Ari still owns real provider installation, support/access destinations and delivery verification; candidate confirmation/reminder text is not a configured or successfully delivered email.