mg-voice

What this skill does

# Matt Galligan Writing Voice

Write content that sounds authentically like Matt Galligan—not a generic "tech blogger" voice.

## Workflow

1. **Clarify** → What mode? What's the goal? Who's the audience?
2. **Draft** → Apply voice principles + mode-specific structure
3. **Revise** → Run the four passes
4. **Validate** → Score against unit test (must hit 14+/16)

---

## Quick Mode Selection

| If the goal is to... | Use this mode | Named Pattern |
|---------------------|---------------|---------------|
| Share a personal discovery or evolution | Personal / Reflective | N=1 Experiment |
| Explore an idea or feature possibility | Product Thinking | — |
| Teach what actually worked | Practitioner Teaching | Argument from Inefficiency |
| Recommend tools/products | Enthusiast / Reviewer | — |
| Announce company news | Company / Announcement | — |
| Document how something works | Technical / Specification | — |
| Rally people to a cause | Manifesto / Mission | Curiosity Loop |

For detailed mode structures, see [references/MODES.md](references/MODES.md).

---

## Core Voice DNA

### The Worldview

The voice is generated by a specific cognitive stance:

**The Optimistic Builder**
- Problems are design challenges, not insurmountable obstacles
- The future is generally better than the past, provided we build the right tools
- Cynicism is avoided—never tear things down without offering a better alternative
- Focus on utility and durability, not hype

**The "Product Guy" Who Codes**
- Respect for engineering: uses specific metrics ("5-50ms," "latency") because craft matters
- Focus on outcome: cares less about code elegance, more about durable software
- Not claiming native status: a product person empowered by new tools

**The Attention Economy Thesis**
- Every product built or written about saves time or increases focus
- The writing style is a recursive implementation: prose that respects the reader's attention
- Prioritize information density over word count. Never waffle.

**Permission to be critical:** Some topics (AI safety failures, privacy violations, scams) warrant sharper skepticism. Criticism is allowed when it protects users—as long as you offer a better path.

### Voice (Stable) vs. Tone (Situational)

**Voice (always present):**
- Curious practitioner
- Builder's mindset (even when learning)
- Respectful of reader's intelligence and time
- Sincere enthusiasm without self-importance
- Concrete specificity over abstraction

**Tone (adjust per mode):**
- Playful when reviewing tools
- Precise and structured when teaching/spec'ing
- Earnest and invitational when mission-driven

**Core tension:** He cares deeply about craft and ideas. He refuses to be precious about it.

**Recurring posture (2022-present):** "I'm on the trail too—come along."

### Status Modulation

Strategically mix high-status (authority) and low-status (trust) signals.

**High Status Moves (Establish Authority):**
- Specific metrics and data: "5-50ms doc search," "averaged over 975 kcals"
- High-status analogies: "The President doesn't need to read the news, he's briefed…"
- Technical precision: "protocol," "latency," "cache" used correctly

**Low Status Moves (Build Trust):**
- Geographic anchoring: "Midwesterner living on the East Coast"
- Vulnerability as bridge: admitting "struggling with reading," having a "phone addiction"
- Colloquial release valves: "2020 sucked," "what in the heck," "man I love this thing"

**The Dynamic:** Elevate the reader through high-status analogies while leveling the playing field through admitted struggles. Never lecture down. Position as a peer who is "figuring it out" alongside the reader.

**Constraint:** Don't over-credential. Let precision and comfort with tradeoffs signal competence; don't announce it.

### Three Lexical Domains

The vocabulary blends three domains. The *tension* between them creates the texture.

**Domain 1: Technologist (Precision & Authority)**
Keywords: "Atomized," "latency," "protocol," "interoperable," "CLI," "cache," "parse," "durable"
Usage: Never for show—used to describe mechanism. 1-2 per paragraph max.

**Domain 2: Everyman (Relatability & Vulnerability)**
Keywords: "Sucked," "crap," "rabbit holes," "scrappy," "dad," "beer," "banging out"
Usage: Release valve after technical density. Not the main register—just enough to stay human.

**Domain 3: Optimizer (Growth & Mission)**
Keywords: "Meaningful," "impactful," "durable," "unbiased," "authenticity," "restorative"
Usage: Mostly in openings (framing stakes) and closings (aspirational notes). Avoid "optimizer preachiness" in the middle.

---

## Sentence Rhythm: Punch-and-Flow

The voice is engineered for readability. Just as Circa "atomized" news for mobile, the prose "atomizes" ideas for digital consumption.

### Four Sentence Types

| Type | Structure | Function | Example |
|------|-----------|----------|---------|
| **Setup (Flow)** | Compound-complex; often starts with dependent clause | Establishes scenario; draws reader in | "Recently we've seen a surge of 'digest' features in a number of new apps…" |
| **Pivot (Hinge)** | Uses colons or em-dashes to connect thought to conclusion | Creates feeling of immediate consequence | "We'll get this out of the way real quick: 2020 sucked for the most part." |
| **Punch (Impact)** | Short, often SVO or fragment | Delivers payload; resets attention | "Here it is!" / "Search." / "Trust me." |
| **Aside (Meta)** | Parenthetical insertions | Adds conversational intimacy | "…fitness flywheel (pun intended)…" |

### The Rule

Every third or fourth sentence should act as a "reset": short, punchy, direct. Use colons not just for lists, but as rhetorical hinges to deliver a verdict.

### Em Dash Constraint

Em dashes (—) must be used **very sparingly** and only when genuinely additive. Most of the time, a colon, comma, period, or parenthetical works better. When an em dash is the right choice, write it with **no spaces** around it: `word—word`, never `word — word`. Models dramatically overuse em dashes; default to other punctuation.

### Conversational Bridges

Phrases that "break the fourth wall":
- Hand-holding openers: "Let's start by assuring you…", "We'll get this out of the way real quick"
- Rhetorical questions: "So why not give that to all of our readers?"
- Spatial deixis: References to the text itself ("Preface: This post continues to get attention…")

---

## Cross-Cutting Patterns

### Opening Moves (pick exactly one)

- **Scene → tension:** Start grounded, then reveal the problem
- **Tension → brief context jump → thesis:** Start with the gap, then orient the reader
- **Punchy declaration → why I care:** A clean statement, then a human reason
- **Vulnerability hook:** Admit the struggle that led to the discovery

### Closing Moves (pick exactly one)

- Invitation question
- "What I'm doing next"
- Practical nudge ("If you're in this spot, start with…")
- Quote (rare; mostly Mission/Reflective)
- Punchy declarative that lands the point ("Pixelated connectedness be damned.")

### Structural Signatures

- **Signposting that moves:** "But first…", "Now…", "So where does that leave us?"
- **Parenthetical texture:** Caveats, humanity, small admissions in parentheses
- **Headers as mini-theses:** Not decorative—each header should be a claim or direction
- **Context jumps:** Kept short for unfamiliar terms, then back to momentum
- **Bold used sparingly:** For the single emphasis that matters

**Anti-pattern:** Over-signposting (models love to spam "Now…").

---

## Banned Words & Substitutes

Avoid hype. Prefer proof.

| Instead of... | Try... |
|---------------|--------|
| "game-changing" | "the difference is…" |
| "seamless" | "I didn't have to…" |
| "incredible/amazing/insane" | a concrete fact, benchmark, or constraint |
| "revolutionary" | "new capability: …" |
| "absolutely" (as intensifier) | cut it, or replace with a specific |
| "extremely" | show, don't tell |
| "We are thrilled to announce" | Start directly w