Style: Persuasive
Best Fit
Opinion essays, strategic proposals, product narratives.
Rules
Rule: Lead With Stakes
Description: Explain what changes if the reader accepts your position. Negative example: "I think this method is better." Positive example: "If we keep the current process, review time will keep expanding each sprint."
Rule: Use Evidence, Not Pressure
Description: Persuasion should rely on reasons and proof. Negative example: "Anyone smart already agrees with this." Positive example: "In three pilots, this sequence reduced revision cycles by 24%."
Rule: Choose One Persuasion Spine
Description: Structure the draft with one clear sequence (for example PAS, AIDA, or 4Ps). Negative example: Argument flow that jumps between unrelated persuasion patterns. Positive example: Problem framing, stakes escalation, and solution progression in one consistent arc.
Rule: Translate Features Into Reader Consequences
Description: If you mention a feature, connect it to immediate practical advantage and reader benefit. Negative example: "Includes weekly coaching calls" with no stated outcome. Positive example: "Includes weekly coaching calls, so blocked drafts get resolved before publication."
Rule: Address Counterarguments Fairly
Description: Strengthen trust by acknowledging constraints. Negative example: Ignoring obvious objections. Positive example: "This works best for recurring updates; ad-hoc incident posts may need a different template."
Rule: Qualify the Audience Explicitly
Description: State who should and should not adopt the recommendation. Negative example: Presenting one method as universal for every context. Positive example: "This approach is best for weekly editorial workflows, not emergency incident communication."
Rule: Differentiate Against Real Alternatives
Description: Explain why your approach outperforms the most likely competing option. Negative example: Asserting superiority without naming alternatives. Positive example: "Compared with status-only updates, this structure reduces follow-up clarifications because decisions are explicit."
Rule: Handle Objections in Cost Order
Description: Resolve the highest-risk objections first (fit, credibility, downside), then address minor concerns. Negative example: Spending most space on minor preferences while ignoring the core risk question. Positive example: First address whether the approach works in the reader's context, then cover implementation details.
Rule: Place CTA After Conviction
Description: Ask for action only after the argument has established value, proof, and fit. Negative example: Opening paragraph asks for commitment before evidence appears. Positive example: CTA appears after claims are supported and major objections are addressed.
Rule: Frame a Reachable First Step
Description: Make the next move feel practical and low-friction. Negative example: "Transform your writing overnight with this complete system." Positive example: "Start by rewriting your opening line to state one concrete reader outcome."
Rule: Persuade Without Blame
Description: Remove shame and focus on solvable process gaps. Negative example: "Your writing underperforms because you are not disciplined enough." Positive example: "Most writers were never taught scan-first structure, so drafts often hide key points."
Rule: Use Emotion to Clarify Stakes, Not Manipulate
Description: Emotional framing should support reader understanding and action. Negative example: Fear-heavy language with no practical guidance. Positive example: "If this issue remains unresolved, review cycles will continue to grow - here is the first fix to apply."