First sync since Blake E took over from Austin as Jeffrey’s writer. Friendly, aligned; Jeffrey self-describes as slow to review and wants nudging.
Durable preferences (encoded into client context)
- Batch delivery, 5-6 posts at a time, not 2 at a time. Delivered Tuesdays or Wednesdays (Blake’s writing days).
- The batch must arrive as ONE Google Doc, in posting order. Order matters to his review. Workflow continuity from Austin: posts added individually in Notion AND a Google Doc sent for edits; Jeffrey makes his edits in the Doc.
- Email is his channel (already encoded: email-manual reports). No preferred day.
- He wants to be nudged. His words: “staying on me is important… make sure did you review these.” Stuck-in-review pings are a feature for this client, not a nuisance.
- Content interviews every other week, recurring. Blake setting up starting the week of Aug 11; cadence adjustable.
- Buffer target: 10-14+ days of scheduled content ahead (Blake’s stated baseline).
- Trending vs evergreen mix: undecided, will emerge. He reposted the Underdog acquisition himself; timely reactions welcome with as much lead time as possible.
Actions from the call
- 8/18 post “Underdog launches prediction market exchange” must be DENIED: Underdog was acquired, the post is dead. Blake said he would move it to denied on the call.
- Jeffrey made small edits to the “misconception” Mantis post; nothing pattern-worthy per Blake’s direct question (“anything of note going forward?” answer: no).
- Cyber thesis post confirmed published 8/4.
- Client Review queue has posts through ~8/25 pending his approval; approved-scheduled only through 8/7. Blake to deliver a few extra posts this week to build the buffer and learn the voice.
Context notes
- Austin previously ran this client; Blake explicitly preserving process continuity.
- Jeffrey’s review latency is the known bottleneck; batch-ahead strategy + nudges are the mitigation.