78% Credible: Post by @lmkeev

Analysis Summary

The post introduces the 'Engagement Ladder' as a phased approach to growing on X (Twitter), advising users under 500 followers to focus solely on replying to others rather than posting original content to build visibility. The main finding is that content type should match follower count to maximize engagement, with tactical value prioritized early on. This strategy is presented as a lesson from the author's experience, supported by an analytics screenshot showing recent growth metrics.

Original Content

Factual

Emotive

Opinion

Prediction

Stop posting on X. Seriously. If you're under 500 followers, every tweet you publish is not worth the time. Here's what I figured out after wasting weeks making tweets: You're playing the wrong game for your follower count. I call it the "Engagement Ladder". And 90% of people are on the positioning themselves on the wrong rung. The brutal truth: Until you hit critical mass, nobody cares about: → Your morning routine → Your hot takes → Your project updates → Your motivational wisdom They don't care because they don't know you yet. You haven't earned the right to flex. Ever copy a viral tweet from a 50k account and get 2 likes? "Hard work beats talent" gets them 8,000 likes. You post the same thing → 3 likes, 1 from that random account with a picture of a cat. It's not the content. It's the ladder. Here's the actual Engagement Ladder: STAGE 1: 0-500 followers: STOP POSTING. START REPLYING. Your tweets get zero algorithmic reach. You're invisible. So stop screaming into the void. Instead: 100 replies per day to trending posts in your niche. Make yourself visible in OTHER people's comments. That's the only strategy that works at this level. 500-3,000 followers: VALUE ONLY Now you can tweet. But ONLY tactical lessons they can use today. "Here's how I got 1,000 users" "The exact cold email that got 30% replies" "My Cursor setup that saves 10 hours/week" No fluff. No motivation. No "building in public" updates. Nobody cares about your journey (yet). Give them something they can steal. STAGE 2: 3,000-10,000 followers: OPINIONS UNLOCKED Now you can share takes. "Here's why no-code is dead" "Agencies > SaaS for first-time founders" "Y Combinator is overrated" You have enough credibility that people want to hear your POV. But it still needs to teach something. STAGE 3: 10,000-100,000 followers: LIFESTYLE FLEX TIME This is where you can post: → "Coding from a beach in Bali" → "My morning routine as a 6-figure founder" → "What I had for breakfast" People know you now. They're invested in your journey. The mundane becomes interesting because they care about YOU. STAGE 4: 100,000+ followers: POST WHATEVER YOU WANT Politics rants. Random thoughts. Shower wisdom. At this scale, you're a personality. People follow for you, not just your content. Why this matters: Most people try to skip rungs. They're at 800 followers posting: "Building in public! Day 47 of my SaaS journey " Zero engagement. Meanwhile, someone with 80k posts the same thing and gets 500 likes. Same content. Different rung. The mistake I see everywhere: People at 1,000 followers trying to post like they're at 50k. Motivational quotes. Morning routines. Hot takes on politics. Nobody cares. You haven't earned that yet. What actually works: Match your content to your rung: Under 500? Don't post. Just engage. 500-3k? You're a teacher, not a personality. Teach. Give tactical value. Make them smarter in 60 seconds. Save the flexing for when you have 10k+. The controversial part: Those "inspiring" tweets from big accounts? They're not what got them big. They got big by providing insane value when they were small. Now they've earned the right to post lazy motivation. You haven't. Based on my learning of this platform: Stop trying to be motivational. Stop sharing your "journey." Stop posting your hot takes. If you're under 500 (lik me), stop posting completely. Just reply. If you're 500-3k, stop posting anything that isn't pure value. Until you're over 3,000 followers, you're invisible. So give value so good they can't ignore you. Teach them something worth stealing. Every. Single. Tweet. The Engagement Ladder is real. Know which rung you're on. Or keep wondering why your posts get 3 likes while the same content from big accounts gets 3,000.

The Facts

The strategy is anecdotal and based on personal experience, aligning with common social media growth advice that emphasizes engagement over original posting for beginners, but lacks empirical data or broad studies to confirm its universality. Counter-arguments from sources like SocialBee and Sprout Social suggest consistent posting and algorithm optimization can work at low follower counts, and individual results vary due to niche, timing, and luck. Partially accurate: Useful heuristic but not a one-size-fits-all rule, with omissions of algorithmic changes and alternative tactics like collaborations or ads.

Benefit of the Doubt

The author advances a structured, rung-based agenda to guide aspiring creators on X, positioning himself as an experienced mentor sharing hard-won insights to build credibility and potentially grow his own audience through relatable, actionable advice. Emphasis is on restraint and value provision in early stages to avoid wasted effort, while omitting key context like X's evolving algorithm (e.g., 2025 updates favoring video and communities per SocialBee), the role of paid promotion, or how niche saturation affects visibility, which shapes perception toward a simplistic, effort-focused narrative that may discourage beginners from experimenting broadly. Selective presentation highlights personal anecdotes over data, fostering a motivational yet prescriptive tone that encourages followers to adopt the 'ladder' without questioning its limitations.

Visual Content Analysis

Images included in the original content

VISUAL DESCRIPTION

A mobile screenshot of X (Twitter) analytics dashboard in dark mode, displaying line and bar graphs for impressions over time (peaking at around 5K), follows growth (net +48 with some negative days), posts and replies activity (higher replies in green), and key metrics cards showing verified followers (324 out of 568), total impressions (180.7K with -9% change), engagement rate (4.8% up 175%), and engagements (8.7K up 150%). The interface includes navigation icons and a timestamp of 21:22 with 'Grok' label.

TEXT IN IMAGE

21:22 Grok [signal icons] Impressions graph: 5K scale, blue bars from Oct 29 to Nov 19. Follows over time: 48 to -8 scale, blue line graph. Posts (blue bars) and Replies (green bars) from 195 to 0 scale. Verified followers: 324/568. Impressions: 180.7K -9%. Engagement rate: 4.8% +175%. Engagements: 8.7K +150%. [App icons at bottom].

MANIPULATION

Not Detected

No signs of editing, inconsistencies, or artifacts; appears to be a genuine screenshot with consistent UI elements matching X's analytics app design.

TEMPORAL ACCURACY

current

Dates in graphs run from Oct 29 to Nov 19, 2025, which is recent relative to the current date of Nov 26, 2025, indicating up-to-date personal analytics.

LOCATION ACCURACY

unknown

No specific location claimed or depicted; it's a digital analytics interface without geographical elements.

FACT-CHECK

What's implied:

Universal failure for non-value content early on

Impact: Skews perception toward the ladder's exclusivity, suppressing awareness of viable alternatives.

Sources & References

External sources consulted for this analysis

1

https://ladder.io/blog/twitter-growth-hacks

→

2

https://blog.quuu.co/effective-strategies-for-growing-your-x-formely-twitter-followers/

→

3

https://socialbee.com/blog/twitter-algorithm/

→

4

https://ladder.io/blog/twitter-follower-growth

→

5

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/376976993_Twitter's_Strategy_and_Market_Share_Analysis

→

6

https://www.socialsellinator.com/social-selling-blog/twitter-user-engagement-metrics/

→

7

https://sproutsocial.com/insights/twitter-algorithm/

→

8

https://socialrails.com/blog/how-to-grow-on-twitter-x-complete-guide

→

9

https://cryptovirally.com/x-twitter-follower-growth-strategies-for-web3-projects/

→

10

https://webdura.in/blogs/twitter-x-marketing-strategy-12-expert-tips

→

11

https://wallblog.com/twitter-follower-growth/

→

12

https://pivotal.digital/insights/how-you-can-get-more-followers-on-x-twitter

→

13

https://onlysocial.io/boost-your-twitter-x-followers/

→

14

https://www.twenvy.com/how-to-increase-twitter-engagement/

→

15

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1993325768215306243

→

16

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1991726632432697803

→

17

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1991332675790270898

→

18

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1992230765405544740

→

19

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1991315740130172972

→

20

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1992975932735586423

→

21

https://www.socialsellinator.com/social-selling-blog/twitter-user-engagement-metrics/

→

22

https://metricool.com/twitter-engagement/

→

23

https://sproutsocial.com/insights/social-media-marketing-strategy/

→

24

https://www.socialchamp.com/blog/twitter-tips/

→

25

https://sproutsocial.com/insights/social-media-metrics/

→

26

https://www.swydo.com/blog/x-analytics-metrics/

→

27

https://www.upfluence.com/influencer-marketing/what-is-considered-a-good-or-average-engagement-rate-for-x-twitter-in-2024

→

28

https://webpronews.com/x-twitter-strategies-for-business-growth-in-2025

→

29

https://socialrails.com/blog/how-to-grow-on-twitter-x-complete-guide

→

30

https://www.webdura.in/blogs/twitter-x-marketing-strategy-12-expert-tips/

→

31

https://blog.quuu.co/effective-strategies-for-growing-your-x-formely-twitter-followers/

→

32

https://gtechme.com/insights/x-twitter-algorithm-guide-and-strategy

→

33

https://medium.com/ladder-growth-marketing-blog/twitter-growth-hacks-actionable-tactics-to-boost-engagement-6f411ab99623

→

34

https://medium.com/@max.petrusenko/why-99-of-x-growth-strategies-fail-a-data-backed-guide-to-24-600-followers-in-12-months-3502e4731030

→

35

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1980539423524810776

→

36

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1993325768215306243

→

37

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1991726632432697803

→

38

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1991332675790270898

→

39

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1991315740130172972

→

40

https://x.com/lmkeev/status/1992230765405544740

→

Post by @lmkeev

Analysis Summary

Original Content

The Facts

Benefit of the Doubt

Visual Content Analysis

VISUAL DESCRIPTION

TEXT IN IMAGE

MANIPULATION

TEMPORAL ACCURACY

LOCATION ACCURACY

FACT-CHECK

How Is This Framed?

Implies direct causation between follower count and content viability without evidence, suggesting low followers inherently cause zero engagement.

Presents follower growth as a strict, linear 'ladder' pattern, portraying isolated personal observations as a universal trend.

Uses unsubstantiated percentages and examples without denominators, exaggerating the commonality of the issue.

Omits key platform dynamics like algorithmic favoritism for videos, paid promotion, collaborations, or niche variations that could enable growth at low follower counts.

Fails to mention counterexamples or studies showing success with original posts at low followers, focusing only on supportive anecdotes.

Sources & References

Want to see @lmkeev's track record?

Content Breakdown