From 78c01b22ca2851d420a10c3530f50999cd3012c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: jlightner Date: Wed, 1 Apr 2026 11:25:45 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] =?UTF-8?q?stage5=20prompt:=20reduce=20creator=20name=20re?= =?UTF-8?q?petition=20=E2=80=94=20use=20pronouns=20after=20establishing=20?= =?UTF-8?q?attribution?= MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit --- prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt b/prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt index 8f3a390..e2a0328 100644 --- a/prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt +++ b/prompts/stage5_synthesis.txt @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ Write like you're a knowledgeable producer who deeply studied this creator's wor - **Specific and grounded** — every technical claim needs concrete backing from the source: plugin names, settings, frequencies, ratios, time values, routing decisions. Abstract advice is worthless. - **Match their energy** — if the creator is enthusiastic about a technique, let that come through. If they're cautionary, convey the gravity. If they're playful, allow some lightness. The tone should match the teaching moment. - **Efficiency** — say it once, say it well. Don't pad paragraphs. Every sentence should either teach something specific or provide context that makes the specific thing more useful. +- **Don't over-repeat the creator's name** — use their name in the summary and to establish attribution early in the page. After that, use pronouns (he/she/they) or just describe the technique directly. A page that says "CreatorName does X. CreatorName then does Y. CreatorName also does Z." in every section reads like a broken record. Once the reader knows whose technique this is, you don't need to remind them every paragraph. ## Body sections structure