Your Voice Is a System, Not a Style
You post a sharp, analytical Note that gets traction. The next day, you try a witty personal story, and it dies. By Friday, you're not just out of ideas. You're second-guessing what kind of writer you even are.
That whiplash doesn't just hurt engagement. It confuses potential subscribers during the short window when they're deciding whether to trust your voice enough to stick around. If your Notes feel like they come from three different people, readers don't know what they're opting into.
The deeper problem isn't creativity. It's the lack of a consistent brand voice that can survive real publishing conditions: irregular schedules, bursts of notifications, restacks, replies, and the constant pressure to sound fresh on demand. That's why so many creators burn out. Every Note becomes a tiny identity crisis.
Your brand voice isn't a personality quiz result. It's a production system.
The strongest brand voice examples aren't just memorable. They're operational. They tell you what to write, what to skip, how to adapt for Notes versus subscriber posts, and how to stay recognizable when you're tired. That's what matters on Substack, where growth depends on repetition, trust, and conversion, not one clever post.
Table of Contents
- 1. The Direct Operator Voice
- 2. The Supportive Educator Voice
- 3. The Irreverent Insider Voice
- 4. The Data-Driven Analyst Voice
- 5. The Empathetic Problem-Solver Voice
- 6. The Peer-to-Peer Collaborator Voice
- 7. The Visionary Future-Focused Voice
- 8. The Technical Expert Voice
- 9. The Transparent Founder Voice
- 10. The Narrative Storyteller Voice
- 10-Style Brand Voice Comparison
- A Voice Is a Choice. Make It Deliberately.
1. The Direct Operator Voice
Busy founders don't want a warm-up lap. They want the point, the move, and the likely payoff. That's what makes the direct operator voice work. It sounds like someone who has already sorted the noise and is handing over the useful part.
This voice fits Substack creators who treat Notes as distribution, not self-expression first. Think early Gumroad energy, Stripe docs, or a Paul Graham essay where every paragraph earns its place. The writing is plain, but it doesn't feel dull because it's moving.
Lead with movement, not mood
Operator voice gets stronger when your sentences start with actions, time frames, or concrete constraints.
- Start with a verb: "Batch five Notes." lands harder than "Consistency matters."
- Name the container: "Use one weekly writing session" is better than "build a better habit."
- Describe the outcome as behavior: Say what the creator will do differently, not what your product has.
When I see creators miss this voice, they usually get abstract. They say things like "optimize your content engine" when they mean "write three Notes on Sunday and schedule them."
Write like you're texting a competent founder friend who has no patience for fluff.
This voice pairs well with WriteStack when you're trying to reduce decision fatigue. Smart Scheduling matters here because the tone only works if the workflow matches it. If your voice says "be systematic" but your posting rhythm is chaotic, readers feel the mismatch immediately.
2. The Supportive Educator Voice
A reader opens your Note because they want clarity, not comfort alone. They are stuck, slightly skeptical, and hoping someone can explain the problem without making them feel behind. Supportive educator voice meets that moment well.
This voice works for Substack creators who grow by reducing friction. It helps readers understand what is happening, why it keeps happening, and what to do next. That matters on Substack because teaching drives saves, replies, shares, and paid conversion better than vague encouragement. Readers pay when they trust you to make hard things usable.
Glossier is a strong reference point. The brand became known for speaking to customers like peers who could make informed choices, not targets who needed to be dazzled. Vogue's reporting on how Glossier built community-first beauty marketing captures the broader pattern. Inclusion was not decoration. It made the brand easier to learn from and easier to return to.
Teach in a sequence the reader can repeat
Supportive educator voice gets stronger when the writing follows a reliable teaching pattern.
Start by naming the actual point of friction. Explain the mechanism behind it in plain language. End with one next action small enough to do today.
A strong Substack Note in this voice sounds like this: you are not bad at consistency. Your workflow keeps asking you to invent a new angle, a new tone, and a new opening every time you post. That creates hesitation. Save three repeatable Note formats, rotate them during the week, and the habit gets lighter fast.
That structure also scales. Notes can diagnose one small problem. Posts can expand the lesson with examples. The welcome sequence can restate the same principles in a calmer, more durable form. If you want to compare tool setups that support this kind of teaching workflow, this breakdown of WriteStack vs StackBuddy for Substack creators is a useful reference point.
Tools help, but only if they preserve the lesson instead of flattening it. WriteStack's AI Note Generator is useful here when you feed it phrasing patterns you already trust. The trade-off is real. Automation keeps your voice steady on rushed days, but weak inputs produce generic teaching fast. The system works when you document your recurring explanations, keep examples tied to actual reader problems, and review outputs like an editor, not a spectator.
3. The Irreverent Insider Voice
You open Notes and see the same tired advice again. Post more. Be authentic. Stay consistent. Readers who already know the circus do not need another polished lecture. They respond to a voice that names the nonsense fast, gets the joke, and still gives them a better way to work.
Wendy's is the mainstream reference point because the brand turned sharp, public replies into a recognizable identity on social. Hootsuite's roundup of brands with distinct social media voices shows why that approach stuck. The humor was specific, repeatable, and tied to brand posture, not random snark for attention.
That distinction matters on Substack.
An irreverent insider voice works best when your readers are already frustrated by bloated advice, fake productivity rituals, and tool stacks held together by browser tabs. The joke earns its keep when it reduces friction. A Note like, "You do not need a sacred content ritual. You need three posts queued before lunch," can get replies because it attacks the actual bottleneck and offers relief in the same sentence.
Humor needs a job
Use this voice to target the enemy your reader wants called out. Empty growth platitudes. Performative hustle. Workflows that make simple publishing feel ceremonial.
Do not aim the joke at the reader. Aim it at the thing wasting their time.
That is the growth mechanic. Notes reward compression and clarity. Irreverent phrasing can stop the scroll, but conversion still depends on what happens next. The strongest setup is a three-step chain. A sharp Note gets attention. The linked post turns the joke into a practical system. The welcome sequence proves the voice can teach, not just entertain.
Here is a clean example. "Your content calendar is not broken because Mercury is in retrograde. It is broken because every post starts from a blank page." That line works because it carries a point of view, identifies the operational problem, and creates an easy handoff to a post about templates, batching, or queues.
This voice is easy to overuse.
A lot of creators confuse being funny with being memorable. The trade-off is real. More edge can raise replies and restacks on Notes, but too much irony can lower trust at the moment someone is deciding whether to subscribe. If every post sounds like a roast, paid products, offers, and serious analysis start to feel less credible.
The fix is simple. Build a pattern library, not a personality stunt. Save five to seven joke structures that have already earned engagement. Tag them by use case: scroll-stopper, myth-killer, workflow callout, or conversion hook. Then test where each one belongs. If you are comparing tool setups that support fast drafting and repeatable Notes, this comparison of WriteStack vs StackBuddy for Substack creators helps clarify which workflow fits a higher-volume publishing style.
One rule keeps this voice effective.
If the line gets a laugh but does not sharpen the reader's understanding, cut it.
4. The Data-Driven Analyst Voice
A founder posts a strong opinion on Notes. It gets replies. Then a subscriber asks the question that matters: what is this based on?
That is where the data-driven analyst voice earns its keep. It works for creators who sell expertise, run client accounts, compare tools, or need readers to trust a recommendation enough to act on it. On Substack, that usually means one thing. Your voice has to turn evidence into decisions.
The standard is higher with this style. Readers will forgive a bold take. They will not forgive vague proof. If you use an analytical voice, every claim needs a clear source, a visible method, or a direct observation from your own publishing system.
Evidence has to lead somewhere
A weak analyst voice throws numbers at the page. A strong one uses evidence to reduce uncertainty.
That is the actual job.
For Substack growth, this voice performs best when you connect data to specific mechanics: which Notes formats get replies, which subject lines pull free readers into paid intent, which publishing cadence keeps conversion from stalling, which workflow saves enough time to publish consistently. The point is not to sound smart. The point is to help the reader choose.
A useful example is this WriteStack versus Stackbuddy comparison, which works best when you read it like an operator. What does each tool help you do faster, where are the constraints, and what kind of publishing system does each one support?
Precision beats volume
One grounded detail does more work than a pile of abstract claims. I usually look for three inputs before I trust a voice test: publishing output, engagement quality, and conversion movement. If one goes up while the other two stay flat, the voice may be getting attention without creating business value.
That trade-off shows up all the time on Substack. A sharp analyst post can earn saves and restacks because it feels useful. But if the post is overloaded with charts, caveats, or jargon, it slows the reader down and weakens the subscribe moment. Good analytical writing keeps the chain intact: observation, interpretation, decision.
Write that way on Notes too. Short posts with one crisp finding often outperform longer threads stuffed with context. Then the full post carries the method, screenshots, counterpoints, and recommendation.
If you want to pressure-test whether your voice is attracting the right kind of reader, a Substack audience growth workflow for finding higher-fit subscribers can help you separate raw reach from actual audience quality.
WriteStack fits this voice when you use it to test and document a repeatable process, not just monitor vanity metrics. Advanced Statistics matter because they help tie voice choices to subscriber behavior. That is the level where analyst-style writing starts compounding.
5. The Empathetic Problem-Solver Voice
You open Substack after a long workday, stare at three half-drafted posts, a pile of replies, and a Notes tab that has gone quiet for a week. In that moment, readers do not need a louder brand. They need someone who understands the pressure and helps them make the next useful move.
That is what this voice does. It earns trust by reducing friction. The reader feels understood before they are asked to act.
Used well, empathetic problem-solver voice is not soft or vague. It is precise about the strain. It names the mess in the workflow, then offers a path through it. That matters on Substack because growth is rarely blocked by ideas alone. It gets blocked by energy, inconsistency, and the gap between knowing what to say and having the capacity to publish it clearly across posts, Notes, and replies.
Relief has to show up in the workflow
Start with the pressure your reader is carrying. Too many open loops. Too many tabs. Too many decisions that look small on their own and exhausting in aggregate.
Then remove one source of drag.
A line in this voice might say: "If your Notes only go out when you happen to feel sharp, your voice is tied to your mood instead of your system." That framing works because it respects the reader's reality while still drawing a firm conclusion.
This voice converts well when the offer feels like relief, not performance. Notes can carry short, steady reassurance. Full posts can turn that reassurance into a repeatable method. Replies can reinforce that the person behind the publication pays attention, even when they are not constantly online.
The trade-off is real. Go too gentle, and the writing becomes comforting but forgettable. Go too clinical, and you lose the emotional accuracy that makes this voice credible. The sweet spot is calm specificity.
📅 Struggling to stay consistent on Substack?
WriteStack's Smart Scheduling lets you batch and queue Notes in minutes. Grow on Substack without burning out.
Explore Smart SchedulingWriteStack fits this style when you use it to reduce context switching and protect writing energy. A Substack workflow for managing replies, Notes, and audience signals in one place supports this voice because it helps creators stay responsive without burning their best attention on scattered admin.
6. The Peer-to-Peer Collaborator Voice
A creator posts a Note asking what to write next. Replies come in fast. A few readers share specific problems, one subscriber asks for an example, and another reframes the whole issue in a smarter way. That is where collaborator voice wins on Substack. It turns audience contact into better positioning, better prompts, and better conversion paths.
This voice works best when growth depends on feedback loops. Notes surface live language. Replies expose friction. Comments show what your audience is trying to solve in their own words. If you sound like a peer who is building in public, readers are more willing to give you that signal.
Write like the reader is in the room
The core move is shared problem ownership. You are not performing expertise from a distance. You are showing that you can spot patterns, test them quickly, and bring the reader into the process without making them do the work for you.
That changes how you write. Ask questions that produce usable inputs. Which Note sparked a real conversation, not passive approval? Which draft felt strong in a post but stiff in Notes? Which part of your workflow breaks when publishing gets busy?
Good collaborator voice also has operational value. It gives you a repeatable way to turn audience language into content assets. A rough reader question can become a sharp Note, then a fuller post, then a reply template your team can reuse. Tools help here. A Substack Note generator built for post-to-Note workflows makes it easier to keep that loop active without flattening your voice.
Community matters more in this style than polish. The WriteStack fans community fits a peer voice because creators join to compare notes, test ideas, and learn from each other's workflow choices, not to sit through brand messaging.
The fastest way to sound collaborative is to share a real trade-off and ask a better question.
There is a trade-off. Push this voice too far and the writing starts to sound unresolved, like every opinion is still up for debate. Hold too tightly to authority and the collaboration feels fake. The sweet spot is clear perspective with open loops. You bring a point of view, then invite readers to sharpen it with you.
Use this voice if your Substack grows through Notes, recommendation relationships, comments, and public iteration. It is one of the few voice styles that can improve both retention and idea generation at the same time.
7. The Visionary Future-Focused Voice
A creator posts three times in a week about where media, AI, or independent publishing is headed. The ideas are strong. The subscriptions barely move because the writing points at the future without showing readers what to do next.
That is the core challenge of visionary voice on Substack. Ambition gets attention, but systems get conversion.
This voice works when you connect a big shift to concrete reader behavior. Show why the market is changing, then show the habit, workflow, or publishing discipline that helps someone benefit from it early. Without that second step, future-focused writing turns into moodboard strategy.
Blaze Pizza is a useful brand reference here because its growth story was tied to community traction and local momentum, not polished prediction alone. The lesson applies cleanly to Substack. Readers do not subscribe because a creator sounds ahead of the curve. They subscribe when that point of view shows up consistently in posts, Notes, recommendations, and offers.
A strong future voice needs operational proof
The strongest version of this voice makes a directional claim and backs it with present-day evidence. Say that newsletters are becoming media products with workflows, not side projects with good intentions. Then prove it by showing the stack behind the claim. Editorial cadence. Note repurposing. Clear CTAs. Segmented offers. A repeatable path from attention to subscription.
This is especially effective for agency operators, consultants, and ghostwriters managing multiple voices. They are already seeing the shift firsthand. Publishing is no longer only a writing problem. It is a systems problem. The creator who can keep a distinct voice while producing at scale has a real advantage.
That is also where implementation matters. A future-focused voice should sound directional in the post and disciplined in the workflow. Using a post-to-Note workflow tool for Substack creators helps turn a big thesis into smaller touchpoints that keep the argument visible between essays.
The trade-off is credibility. Push this style too far and the writing starts to sound inflated, like every sentence is trying to predict the next era. Stay too close to current tactics and the vision disappears. The sweet spot is clear: name the shift, explain the mechanism, and give the reader one practical move that puts them earlier than the rest of the market.
Use this voice if your Substack grows by making readers feel they are seeing the next operating model before it becomes standard. Future language earns trust only when the workflow underneath it already works.
8. The Technical Expert Voice
A reader is deciding whether to trust your system, not your swagger. Technical expert voice works when the buyer needs to know what happens under the hood before they click subscribe, book a call, or hand over a workflow.
This voice fits operators who care about prompt structure, retrieval quality, queue logic, failure states, and revision control. Vercel uses it well in product writing. Strong developer docs do too. The tone is precise, calm, and specific because vague confidence collapses fast with this audience.
Depth wins when the mechanics matter
Technical writing on Substack should answer three questions in order. What does the system do. What inputs make it reliable. Where does it fail.
That structure matters for growth. Notes reward compression, but paid conversion usually happens after a reader sees that your method holds up under scrutiny. A technical voice gives you both. Short Notes can isolate one mechanism. Full posts can document the full workflow, constraints included. That creates the right kind of trust for consultants, SaaS founders, and creators selling a process instead of a personality.
Voice preservation with AI assistance is a good test case. The useful question is not whether AI is good or bad for writing. The useful question is which inputs define voice well enough to make drafting helpful without sanding off the original writer. Past Notes, preferred phrasing, sentence length, exclusions, and edit history usually matter more than clever prompt wording.
That's why a tool like the WriteStack Note Generator post workflow matters more when explained technically. The value is constrained generation from your own material, plus a fast editing pass that keeps the author's judgment in the loop.
There is a trade-off. Technical expert voice can raise trust and lower reach if every post reads like internal documentation. The fix is to split the message by format. Use Notes for one sharp implementation point, one observed failure, or one before-and-after example. Use long-form posts to document the full stack, decision logic, and edge cases. Then point readers from the quick win to the deeper system.
This style also works well when paired with examples from adjacent disciplines. Good product marketers often borrow from developer education because the conversion path is similar. Explain the mechanism clearly enough that the buyer can picture using it. For more on that crossover, study these compelling branded content strategies.
Use the technical expert voice if your Substack grows by proving repeatability. Readers who buy systems want to see definitions, inputs, outputs, and limits before they trust the result.
9. The Transparent Founder Voice
Transparent founder voice works because most polished brand writing hides the trade-offs that matter. Readers don't just want the decision. They want the reasoning.
This voice isn't performative vulnerability. It isn't "building in public" as theater. It's honest context. We shared our thoughts. We detailed our attempts. We admitted our mistakes. We explained the shifts.
The Happy Valley case is useful because it shows how voice can align people internally before it shows up externally. The rebrand created a renewed common voice across the owner group, increased website contact right away, led to the first online reservation within three months, and helped overnight and day-use business rise 50 to 60 percent in the first year, according to this Prototypr case study on trustworthy voice in branding. It also reported increases in operations income over later periods. That's what founder voice often does best. It clarifies the system behind the message.
Show your reasoning, not just your results
If you're a creator, this voice is strong when you're making visible decisions your readers can learn from.
- Share the constraint: "I couldn't keep posting reactively without losing the thread of my writing."
- Share the rule change: "I moved idea capture and publishing into separate sessions."
- Share the unresolved part: "I'm still figuring out where personal stories fit."
Readers trust this because it sounds lived-in. It also gives them a model for their own decisions without pretending you've solved everything.
10. The Narrative Storyteller Voice
A reader opens your Note on a busy afternoon. They do not need another polished lesson. They need to see a problem unfold, feel the friction, and trust that the takeaway came from real decisions instead of tidy hindsight.
That is where narrative voice earns its place on Substack.
It works especially well when the growth goal is attention first, then conversion. Strong story-led posts hold reading time, give you sharper excerpts for Notes, and create a cleaner path from casual readers to subscribers because the lesson lands with context. The trap is obvious. Story can drift into memoir, and memoir rarely converts unless the reader can extract a rule they can use.
Coca-Cola is a familiar example because its messaging often centers on moments, relationships, and identity instead of product specs. The product stays in frame, but the story carries the meaning. For creators, that same principle works best when the narrative points to a repeatable insight, a workflow change, or a clearer belief.
Stories convert when they reveal the decision
The easiest way to keep this voice useful is to structure the story around a choice.
Start with pressure. Show the bad call or default habit. Then explain what changed, and name the rule that came out of it. That last part matters most, because it gives the reader something to keep after the scene is over.
A practical Substack version looks like this. A ghostwriter is running several client newsletters and writing every Note from scratch to match each client's tone. The posts sound fine, but the process is slow, inconsistent, and hard to scale. After a few missed publishing windows, the ghostwriter stops treating voice as improvisation and builds a simple voice system with approved phrases, sentence patterns, and topic angles for each client. Now the story does two jobs at once. It creates tension, and it teaches an operational fix.
That is the growth mechanic behind this voice. A good narrative post gives you three assets from one draft: a full essay for the newsletter, a handful of Notes pulled from the most charged moments, and a stronger conversion hook because the subscriber promise is clear. Readers are not subscribing for more stories alone. They are subscribing for the pattern behind them.
If this is your natural mode, study more compelling branded content strategies and pay attention to which stories turn a scene into a concrete takeaway. That is the standard to use in your own workflow.
Story voice is powerful because it makes the lesson felt before it makes it explicit. Used well, it is not softer than a direct voice. It is often stickier.
10-Style Brand Voice Comparison
| Voice | Implementation Complexity 🔄 | Resource Requirements 💡 | Expected Outcomes 📊⭐ | Ideal Use Cases ⚡ | Key Advantages ⭐ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| The Direct Operator Voice | Low 🔄, simple rules, consistent execution | Moderate 💡, templates + product alignment | Clear CTAs, faster conversions, reduced friction 📊 | Product pages, paid funnels, short copy | Direct, urgent, easy to remember |
| The Supportive Educator Voice | Moderate 🔄, content planning + pedagogy | High 💡, ongoing tutorials, content calendar | Higher onboarding success and retention 📊 | Onboarding, help center, learning flows | Builds trust, reduces user friction |
| The Irreverent Insider Voice | Moderate 🔄, voice control needed | Moderate 💡, creative writing, editorial review | High shareability and brand recall 📊 | Marketing, social, community engagement | Memorable, personality-driven |
| The Data-Driven Analyst Voice | High 🔄, requires data pipelines and rigor | High 💡, analytics, research, dashboards | Evidence-backed decisions; stronger credibility 📊 | Analytics pages, case studies, feature justification | Appeals to metrics-focused users |
| The Empathetic Problem-Solver Voice | Moderate 🔄, authentic tone, consistency | Moderate 💡, UX copy, empathetic content | Emotional loyalty, improved retention 📊 | Positioning, retention campaigns, support | Validates users, reduces burnout |
| The Peer-to-Peer Collaborator Voice | Moderate–High 🔄, community coordination | High 💡, community ops, co-creation programs | Engaged advocates and product feedback loop 📊 | Community channels, feature co-design, founder comms | Fosters advocacy and transparency |
| The Visionary Future-Focused Voice | High 🔄, strategic narrative development | Moderate 💡, long-form content, thought leadership | Attracts ambitious users, higher lifetime value 📊 | Founding story, thought leadership, investor comms | Inspires and positions as movement leader |
| The Technical Expert Voice | High 🔄, deep subject-matter accuracy | High 💡, experts, docs, technical assets | Trust from technical users; clearer adoption paths 📊 | Product docs, developer outreach, research posts | Demonstrates authority and nuance |
| The Transparent Founder Voice | Moderate 🔄, ongoing openness and cadence | Moderate 💡, regular updates, leadership time | Extraordinary trust and authentic connection 📊 | Blog posts, founder updates, building-in-public | Builds deep loyalty through honesty |
| The Narrative Storyteller Voice | High 🔄, sourcing stories and crafting arcs | High 💡, interviews, long-form writing | Strong emotional engagement and shareability 📊 | Case studies, long-form newsletters, features | Memorable, relatable learning through stories |
A Voice Is a Choice. Make It Deliberately.
You write a Note in five minutes, then spend twenty more trying to make it sound like you. That is the signal. The problem is not speed. The problem is that your voice is still undecided.
On Substack, voice is not decoration. It affects whether someone stops on your Note, recognizes your posts in the feed, and trusts you enough to subscribe. If your tone changes every time the format changes, readers have to re-evaluate you from scratch. That adds friction right where conversion should feel obvious.
A useful voice gives you constraints. It shortens decisions, keeps your Notes consistent, and makes your welcome flow feel connected to the promise you made in public. That matters because Substack growth is rarely one piece of content doing all the work. Notes create recognition. Posts build proof. Emails convert interest into habit.
The test is simple. If every draft feels like a fresh identity crisis, you do not have a usable voice system yet. If you can batch Notes, turn one idea into a post without changing personalities, and see the same kind of reader replying, restacking, and subscribing, the system is working.
Start with one voice and pressure-test it in an actual publishing workflow.
- Choose a primary archetype: Pick one of the ten and keep it dominant for a week. Mixing styles too early usually weakens recognition.
- Write three operating rules: Set the sentence rhythm, emotional range, and what you will not do. Example: short paragraphs, direct claims, no clever throat-clearing.
- Build channel rules: Notes should be recognizable in seconds. Posts can carry more nuance. Welcome emails should sound like the clearest version of the same person.
- Batch creation: Draft several Notes in one sitting, then pull the best performer into a longer post. Voice starts compounding through repetition here instead of resetting every day.
- Track behavior, not compliments: Look at subscriber adds, quality of replies, restacks from the right audience, and which Notes send readers into full posts.
The trade-offs are real. A Direct Operator voice can convert quickly because it sounds decisive, but it gets brittle if every post reads like an order. A Supportive Educator voice builds trust fast, but it slips into generic advice when the point of view is weak. An Irreverent Insider voice performs well in Notes because it earns attention, yet it is hard to sustain if every insight needs a punchline. A Data-Driven Analyst voice attracts serious readers, though it usually needs stronger framing to win crowded feeds.
This is why voice choice should match your stamina and your business model, not just your taste. If you sell expertise, the Technical Expert or Analyst voice may carry more weight across posts and welcome emails. If you grow through community loops, the Peer-to-Peer Collaborator or Transparent Founder voice often creates better reply behavior and stronger retention. The right question is not "What sounds cool?" It is "What style can I publish consistently, and what kind of subscriber does it attract?"
If you want a calibration reference for consistency across changing topics, Podmuse's list of standout narrative podcasts is useful. Strong narrative formats keep a recognizable identity even as the material changes. That is the standard. Readers should know it is you within a few lines.
Treat voice like infrastructure. Define it. Build rules around it. Test it through Notes, posts, and conversion paths. Then keep the version that brings in the right subscribers, not just the one that feels the most expressive.