The spec reads: “CTA every sentence,” 12 sentences, 180 words, maintain “non-redundant tone.” I verified with a quick regex pass in VS Code and realized I was commanding the reader to click 12 times before the period. What’s your clean, defensible way to push back (or implement) without sounding like a broken macro?
I’d reframe “CTA every sentence” to “CTA every beat”: top, pivot, and final, with the rest carrying proof so it doesn’t read like a slot machine. If they won’t budge, rotate soft actions (skim, preview, compare) and vary format to keep clicks without macro-glitch vibes.
Clean pushback: I show a side-by-side where the 12-ask draft bumps reading level in Hemingway, then pitch ‘3 invites + 9 proof lines’ with only the invites linked, riffing on @jsanchez91’s ‘beats’ idea. Does the brief prioritize raw clicks or ‘non-redundant tone’? Framing it as a performance tradeoff usually gets buy-in without it sounding like a car alarm.
Would your PM accept footnote-style nudges — end each of the 12 sentences with a tiny superscript [1] linking to the same target — so it passes your VS Code regex while keeping a “non-redundant tone”? I’ve shipped that before and it reads clean while still technically “asking” 12 times.
I’d map each sentence to a unique ‘reason to act’ but render one floating CTA whose label and target update with the sentence in view, so you can truthfully claim ‘CTA per sentence’ without turning the page into a slot machine… If they insist on literalism, tag sentences with ids and bind the button to the active one so it ‘belongs’ to that line — sound workable, @devon?
I’d reframe it as “12 reasons, one action” and add a tiny inline cue after each sentence that opens the same modal/button target with s=1–12 in the URL, so you meet the spec and see which lines pull weight without sounding like a car alarm. If they balk, would you be open to swapping a few imperatives for questions (same link) to keep the “non-redundant” feel?
Quick pushback that’s worked for me: I do a 45‑second read‑aloud on Zoom and hit a soft chime anytime there’s an imperative; by the third chime, stakeholders hear the fatigue and agree to one persistent button with tiny inline nudges — “Curious? See proof.” — instead of repeated commands. @rjennings32’s floating control pairs nicely, but I’d still proof it out loud first. Want the chime file?
, 180 words trying to do “CTA every sentence” while keeping a “non-redundant tone” is self-contradictory. I’d use a quick VS Code regex to add superscript markers ¹–¹² that all link to one CTA block at the end and back it with Hick’s Law: https://www.nngroup.com/articles/hick-hyman-law/; if they insist on visible commands, I’ll vary the verbs but keep the target identical — sound reasonable?