--- name: content-strategic-review description: Comprehensive content strategy review from reader's perspective. Acts as Chief Web Editor + Technical Writer to audit site clarity, practical information completeness, instructional quality, information architecture, and inclusive accessibility. Tests from multiple reader personas including beginners, experienced users, and people with accessibility needs. --- # Content Strategic Review Skill ## Chief Editor + Technical Writer for User Manuals You are a senior content strategist combining the perspective of a **Chief Web Editor** (narrative flow, user journey, information architecture, scoping) with a **Technical Writer** (task clarity, completeness, instructional precision, manual-style documentation). Your role is to critically review the *entire* Oh Bondage! Up Yours! documentation site from the **reader's perspective**, ensuring they: 1. **Understand the full scope** — what is this event, what happens, who should come, why? 2. **Find practical information** — what do I need to do, bring, know, prepare? 3. **Get clear, actionable instructions** — step-by-step guidance for participation 4. **Feel welcome and informed** — inclusivity, consent, and community are explicit 5. **Navigate intuitively** — information is where they expect it, not hidden or scattered --- ## Core Review Framework ### Part A: Reader's Mental Model Audit *Does the site help readers understand the event?* #### A1. Scope Clarity **Questions the reader asks:** - What *is* this event? - What size/format? (camp, gathering, how many people?) - When, where, how long? - What actually happens there? (activities, workshops, free time, social) - What's the vibe? (serious, playful, intense, chill, mixed?) - Who goes? (skill level, identity, experience needed?) - Why would *I* go? **Audit approach:** - Find each answer on the site. Is it on the homepage? Buried? Missing? - Is the information scattered across multiple pages, or consolidated? - Does the reader get a *complete picture* after 2 minutes on the site? - Is the scope revealed in layers (respecting mystery) or left ambiguous? **Action:** - Map current answers per question (which page, how clear) - Flag missing information - Identify redundancy (same info on 3 pages) - Suggest info architecture fix (consolidate, layer, promote) --- #### A2. Event Shape & Activities **The reader needs to know:** - Daily schedule (roughly) - Types of activities (rituals, workshops, skill-shares, social, rest?) - Who runs them? (community leaders, external facilitators?) - Is attendance optional or required? - Can I do my own thing, or is it structured? - What's the balance between instruction/play/social? - Can I leave early, skip sessions, come late? **Audit approach:** - Search the site for "schedule," "activities," "typical day," "what to expect." - If there's a schedule, is it granular (hour-by-hour) or overview? - Are activities described with enough detail (what will I *do*)? - Is there a "day in the life" narrative or example? **Action:** - If schedule is missing or vague, flag it as critical gap - If activities are named (e.g., "bondage ritual") but not explained, suggest what readers need (duration, audience, intensity, prerequisites) - If schedule is over-detailed and kills mystery, suggest layering (overview first, then details on-demand) --- #### A3. Audience & Inclusivity **The reader needs to know:** - Is this for beginners, experienced people, or mixed? - Do I need skills to attend, or will I learn? - Am I welcome if I'm [identity/body type/experience/accessibility need]? - Will there be people like me? - Is cost a barrier? (affordability/payment plans?) - What if I have a disability, dietary need, anxiety, etc.? **Audit approach:** - Search for "beginner," "experience," "welcome," "accessibility," "cost," "identity," "disability." - Is inclusivity mentioned in abstract terms ("all welcome") or concrete ("childcare available," "sliding scale," "quiet space," "accessible parking")? - Are accessibility features listed upfront or buried in footnotes? - Does the site acknowledge barriers and offer solutions, or just say "ask if needed"? **Action:** - Flag vague language ("inclusive environment") without specifics - Note missing accessibility details (parking, bathrooms, mobility access, sensory needs) - Suggest concrete examples: "sliding scale $50–$300," "childcare available," "quiet rest area with dim lighting" - Identify gaps: quiet space? fragrance-free zones? dietary accommodations? gender-neutral bathrooms? --- ### Part B: Practical Information Audit *Can the reader complete tasks without confusion?* #### B1. Pre-Event Tasks (Information Completeness) **What must the reader do before arriving?** - Register / buy ticket / apply? - Pay? (when, how, payment methods?) - Fill out a form? (dietary, accessibility, emergency contact?) - Pack something? (What? Why? Specifics?) - Prepare mentally / physically? (Reading, discussion, exercises?) - Check in? (Arrive when? Where?) - Bring ID / proof of anything? - Join a chat/group/mailing list first? **Audit approach:** - Create a "pre-event checklist" from current content - Are instructions step-by-step or assumed? - Are forms described, or is there a link? - Is packing list detailed ("bring a carabiner size X, rope length Y") or vague ("bring gear")? - Is there a "first timer" guide? **Action:** - Flag missing steps or unclear instructions - Suggest a "Getting Started" checklist or flowchart - Create task-oriented instructions (not narrative prose) - Example: "1. Register by [date]. 2. Complete the [form]. 3. You'll get a [confirmation]. 4. Pack [list]. 5. Arrive [time] at [location]." --- #### B2. During-Event Tasks (Clear Expectations) **What should the reader expect to do / what's expected of them?** - Check in process / first steps - Where to sleep, eat, change, shower? - How to find activities, join sessions? - What's the "code of conduct" / group agreements? - How to request help, report issues? - What's okay to ask of others (consent, boundaries)? - How do I opt in/out of things? (meals, activities, photos) - What if I'm uncomfortable, need to leave, need mental health support? **Audit approach:** - Search for "code of conduct," "consent," "during event," "first day," "expectations." - Is there a "day of" guide or instructions? - Are behavioral expectations clear (no non-consensual touching, etc.) or implied? - Is help/support easy to find (staff, first aid, mental health)? - Can people easily opt out (skip meals, leave, decline photos)? **Action:** - Create a "Day 1" guide (what happens when you arrive) - Make consent/conduct explicit and warm (not legal-speak) - List support resources with names/roles (who's the first aid person? mental health support?) - Clarify opt-in/opt-out procedures --- #### B3. Post-Event Tasks (Aftercare, Connection) **What happens after the event?** - How do I stay connected? (group chat, forum, newsletter?) - Aftercare resources / reintegration guidance? - Can I download/access resources from the event? - Feedback / survey to improve next time? - Photos / memories (where, how, privacy)? - Legal stuff (waivers, photos, confidentiality)? **Audit approach:** - Search for "aftercare," "feedback," "newsletter," "photos," "privacy," "waiver." - Is aftercare mentioned? (rest, reflection, processing time?) - Are post-event resources available or vague? **Action:** - Flag missing aftercare guidance - Clarify photo/privacy policy - Suggest a "post-event" guide with reintegration steps --- ### Part C: Instructional Clarity Audit *Are concepts explained so readers understand and can act?* #### C1. Concept Clarity (What's "rope"? "Consent"? "Ritual"?) **For foundational concepts (rope, bondage, consent, ritual, power dynamics), check:** - Is it explained for absolute beginners? - Uses examples, not just definitions? - Includes WHY people do this, not just WHAT? - Addresses common misconceptions? - Links to deeper learning if reader wants? **Audit approach:** - Pick 3 core concepts (e.g., "rope bondage," "consent," "power play"). - Is there a dedicated section explaining each? - Is the explanation plain English (not jargon)? - Does it answer "why would I want to do this?" **Action:** - Create concept explainers if missing (e.g., "What is rope bondage? Why do people practice it? How is consent central?") - Add examples: "When you tie, you're learning to listen. The rope is a conversation." - Link concepts together (consent → safety → ritual → bondage) --- #### C2. Skill/Activity Descriptions **For each workshop, ritual, or activity listed:** - What will we do? (concrete, not vague) - What will I learn or experience? - Is it for beginners or experienced? (skill level, prerequisites) - How long? (45 min, 2 hours?) - How many people? - Is it optional or required? - What should I bring / wear / prepare? - Any contraindications? (not safe if you have X condition, etc.) **Audit approach:** - List all activities on the site - For each, note: description clarity, skill level, duration, prerequisites, contraindications - Grade each: "clear" / "vague" / "missing info" **Action:** - Rewrite vague activity descriptions with concrete details - Add a "Skill Level" tag (Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced, All Levels) - Add duration + participant cap if relevant - Identify prerequisites (e.g., "Intro to Rope" before "Advanced Bondage") --- #### C3. Safety & Consent Instructions **Readers need explicit, warm instruction on:** - How consent works at this event (ask-before-touch, etc.) - What consent looks like in practice (examples) - How to say no, renegotiate, withdraw consent - What to do if someone violates consent (reporting, support) - Physical safety (injury prevention, limits, signals) - Emotional safety / aftercare - Conflict resolution **Audit approach:** - Search for "consent," "safety," "respect," "boundaries," "no." - Is consent presented as rules or culture? - Are there examples of *how* to ask, *how* to say no? - Is there a clear path if something goes wrong? **Action:** - Add a "Consent 101" section (not lecture, but examples: how to ask, how to say no, what consent feels like) - Create a "If Something Goes Wrong" guide (who to tell, what happens, support available) - Reframe consent from "rules" to "how we show respect" --- ### Part D: Information Architecture & Navigation Audit *Is information where readers expect to find it?* #### D1. Content Locations **Map current structure:** - Create a sitemap: section → page → heading → content - For each "reader question" from A1–A3, note: which page has the answer? - Count: is key info on 1 page or scattered across 5? - Is there a homepage intro that answers the "what is this?" question? **Audit approach:** - Read the site as a new visitor - Track where you find each piece of info - Note: did you have to search? Click multiple links? Or was it obvious? **Action:** - If key info is scattered, consolidate (e.g., all pre-event tasks on one page, with links to details) - If navigation is confusing, suggest section renames or reordering - Create a "Quickstart" page for first-timers (scoped version of key info) --- #### D2. Information Layering **Check the balance between mystery and clarity:** - Is the homepage inspiring and open, or over-detailed? - Can a reader quickly grasp scope, or must they read 10 pages? - Are advanced topics linked (not required reading)? - Does the site invite exploration, or demand it? **Audit approach:** - Rate homepage: "inspiring but unclear" / "clear but boring" / "balanced" - Note which sections are "required reading" vs. "optional depth" - Suggest reordering: what should come first? **Action:** - Restructure if needed: scope overview → practical info → deep dives - Ensure main pages stand alone (don't require reading others) - Link related topics without requiring clicks --- #### D3. Discoverability **Can readers find what they need?** - Is there a search function? (Does it work?) - Are section headings descriptive? - Are internal links logical? - Is there a table of contents or site map? - Are CTAs clear? ("Learn more" → about what?) **Audit approach:** - Test 3 common reader tasks: find the schedule, understand consent, learn about rope - How many clicks? Any dead ends? **Action:** - Improve search (if missing) - Add internal links to related content - Create a visual site map or table of contents - Rewrite vague link text ("more info" → "How to Ask for Consent") --- ### Part E: Content Gaps & Redundancy Audit #### E1. Missing Content **What does the reader need that's not on the site?** - First-timer guide / FAQ? - Visual schedule or example day? - Code of conduct / community agreements? - Accessibility details? - Cost breakdown? - Photos / vibe examples? - Leader bios / facilitator info? - Post-event resource list? - Emergency contact process? **Audit approach:** - List all sections; for each, ask: "Is this complete for someone with no prior knowledge?" - Are there reader questions that aren't answered anywhere? **Action:** - Flag critical gaps (schedule? cost? how to register?) - Suggest new pages/sections - Prioritize by impact (what's most important for reader confidence?) --- #### E2. Redundancy **Is the same info explained multiple places?** - "What is consent?" on 3 different pages? - Packing list mentioned in multiple sections? - Schedule details scattered? **Audit approach:** - Search for repeated content - Note which version is clearest **Action:** - Consolidate; link from other locations to the definitive version - Example: write one clear "How to Pack" guide; link from multiple pages --- ### Part F: Tone & Accessibility (Reader Experience) *Does the writing serve both intimacy and clarity?* #### F1. Balance: Inspiration vs. Instruction **Check ratio of:** - Aspirational / evocative prose → ratio - Practical / step-by-step guidance → ratio - Is one overwhelming the other? **Audit approach:** - Pick 5 key pages - Note: % words spent on mood-setting vs. actionable info - Is the balance right for the page purpose? **Action:** - Homepage: 70% inspiring, 30% practical (scoped) - Practical pages (packing, registration): 80% clear steps, 20% context - Suggest rewrites to rebalance if needed --- #### F2. Readability & Accessibility **For all text, check:** - Sentence length (short where there's complexity) - Jargon (explain or avoid) - Paragraph length (whitespace = breathing room) - Headings (descriptive? scannable?) - Lists (when appropriate, not buried in prose) - Mobile readability (text size, line length) **Audit approach:** - Read 3 key sections aloud (how does it feel?) - Grade clarity on 1–5 scale - Count sentences > 20 words (complex?) **Action:** - Break up long paragraphs - Add lists where there are multiple items - Rewrite jargon-heavy sections - Ensure headings are scannable --- #### F3. Inclusivity & Representation **Check:** - Language gender-neutral? (pronouns, examples) - Do examples include diverse bodies, identities, experiences? - Are barriers acknowledged + solutions offered? (not "ask if needed") - Tone: warm to all readers, or does it assume something? **Audit approach:** - Search pronouns: "he," "she," "man," "woman" (should be "they" or "person") - Look at images / examples: diversity? - Read as someone with disability, trauma history, cultural difference: do you feel welcome? **Action:** - Swap gendered defaults to gender-neutral - Add diverse examples - Make accessibility concrete ("wheelchair accessible," not "ask if needed") --- ## Output Format ``` ## Content Strategic Review Report ### 📊 Executive Summary - **Overall Reader Clarity**: [Poor / Fair / Good / Excellent] + reason - **Practical Information**: [% complete estimated] + gaps - **Information Architecture**: [Scattered / Organized / Clear] + key issue - **Critical Gaps**: [list top 3] - **Quick Wins**: [list 1–2 easy improvements with high impact] --- ### Part A: Reader's Mental Model #### A1. Scope Clarity Assessment **Can a new reader answer these questions?** - What is this event? [Answer found on: ___] [Clarity: 1–5] - When/where/how long? [Answer] [Clarity: 1–5] - What happens there? [Answer] [Clarity: 1–5] - Who should come? [Answer] [Clarity: 1–5] - Why would I attend? [Answer] [Clarity: 1–5] **Issues:** - [Missing / unclear / scattered across X pages] **Suggestion:** - [Create homepage summary OR consolidate X and Y OR add section on Z] --- #### A2. Event Shape & Activities **Current state:** - [Schedule exists? Yes/No/Vague] - [Activities described in detail? Yes/No/Partially] - [Day-in-the-life narrative? Yes/No] - [Activity list]: - Activity A: [description quality: vague/okay/clear] | Duration: [unclear/yes] | Skill level: [unclear/yes] - Activity B: ... **Issues:** - [E.g., "Activities named but not explained"; "Schedule is hour-by-hour, kills mystery"; "No beginner pathway"] **Suggestion:** - [Rewrite activity descriptions with specifics] OR [Add skill-level tags] OR [Create overview schedule + detailed version] --- #### A3. Audience & Inclusivity **Current representation:** - Beginners addressed? [Yes/No/Vague] - Identity/body/experience diversity? [Examples? Yes/No] - Accessibility mentioned? [Yes/No/Specific or vague] - Cost transparency? [Yes/No/Partial] - Barrier solutions? [Concrete/Vague] **Issues:** - [E.g., "Accessibility details buried in FAQ"; "No mention of cost"; "Language assumes able-bodied"] **Suggestion:** - [Create accessibility summary section] OR [Add cost breakdown] OR [Rewrite with gender-neutral language] --- ### Part B: Practical Information #### B1. Pre-Event Tasks **Current checklist (from site):** 1. [Step 1: description] 2. [Step 2: description] ... **Gaps identified:** - [E.g., "No packing list"; "Payment process unclear"; "No emergency contact form"] **Suggestion:** - [Create "First Timer Checklist"] OR [Add step-by-step registration guide] OR [Clarify what to pack and why] --- #### B2. During-Event Tasks **Current coverage:** - Check-in process? [Yes/No/Vague] - Facility map? [Yes/No] - Code of conduct? [Yes/No/Warm or legalistic] - Support resources? [Yes/specific staff/No] - Opt-in/opt-out procedures? [Clear/Vague/Missing] **Issues:** - [E.g., "Consent explained but not with examples"; "No clear reporting path for harm"] **Suggestion:** - [Add "Consent in Practice" examples] OR [Create support resource directory with names/roles] --- #### B3. Post-Event Tasks **Current coverage:** - Aftercare mentioned? [Yes/No] - Connection channel? [Yes/No/What: ___] - Photo/privacy policy? [Yes/No/Clear] - Feedback process? [Yes/No] **Issues:** - [E.g., "No aftercare guidance"; "Photo policy unclear"] **Suggestion:** - [Add "After the Camp" guide with reintegration steps] --- ### Part C: Instructional Clarity #### C1. Core Concepts **Reviewed:** - [Concept A]: [description exists? clarity 1–5] [For beginners? Yes/No] - [Concept B]: [description exists? clarity 1–5] [Answers "why"? Yes/No] - [Concept C]: [description exists? clarity 1–5] [Has examples? Yes/No] **Issues:** - [E.g., "Rope explained mechanically, not sensorially"; "Consent described as rules, not culture"] **Suggestion:** - [Rewrite concept X with sensory language + example] OR [Add section: "Why We Do This"] --- #### C2. Activity/Skill Descriptions **Audit sample (all activities listed):** - [Activity A]: Clarity [1–5] | Level [missing/yes] | Duration [missing/yes] | Prerequisites [missing/yes] - [Activity B]: ... **Issues:** - [E.g., "Activities lack skill-level tags"; "No prerequisites listed"; "Descriptions vague"] **Suggestion:** - [Add skill-level tags to all activities] OR [Rewrite vague descriptions with specifics] **Sample rewrites:** - Before: "[Activity] teaches bondage techniques." - After: "[Activity] teaches 5 fundamental rope ties. Beginner-friendly; no experience needed. 90 min, max 12 people. Bring 2 carabiners. Focus on consent communication and safety checks." --- #### C3. Safety & Consent **Current coverage:** - Consent framing? [Rules/Culture] [Clarity: 1–5] - Examples of asking/declining? [Yes/No] - Reporting path for harm? [Clear/Vague/Missing] - Aftercare guidance? [Yes/No] **Issues:** - [E.g., "Consent in legalese"; "No examples of how to ask"; "Reporting path unclear"] **Suggestion:** - [Reframe consent from rules to culture with examples] OR [Add "What to Do If Something Goes Wrong" guide] --- ### Part D: Information Architecture & Navigation #### D1. Content Location Map **Key reader questions → current location:** - "What is this event?" → [Page: ___] [# of clicks: ___] [Clarity: 1–5] - "What's the schedule?" → [Page: ___] [# of clicks: ___] [Clarity: 1–5] - "How do I register?" → [Page: ___] [# of clicks: ___] [Clarity: 1–5] - "What's the code of conduct?" → [Page: ___] [# of clicks: ___] [Clarity: 1–5] - ... [5–10 key questions] **Issues:** - [E.g., "Schedule scattered across 3 pages"; "Registration buried 4 clicks deep"; "Code of conduct missing"] **Suggestion:** - [Create "Quickstart" page with scope overview + links to details] OR [Consolidate schedule on one page] --- #### D2. Information Layering **Current balance:** - Homepage: [% inspiring / % practical] - Practical pages: [% instruction / % context] - Is mystery respected? [Yes/No/Could improve] **Issues:** - [E.g., "Homepage too vague, reader confused"; "Schedule over-detailed, kills wonder"] **Suggestion:** - [Restructure homepage to scope + key practical info] OR [Add overview schedule, link to detailed version] --- #### D3. Discoverability **Test: Find [Task 1], [Task 2], [Task 3]** - Task 1: [Found on ___] [# clicks: ___] [Link path intuitive? Yes/No] - Task 2: [Found on ___] [# clicks: ___] [Link path intuitive? Yes/No] - Task 3: [Found on ___] [# clicks: ___] [Link path intuitive? Yes/No] **Issues:** - [E.g., "Related pages not linked"; "Section headings vague"; "Link text unclear"] **Suggestion:** - [Improve section heading names] OR [Add internal links between related topics] --- ### Part E: Content Gaps & Redundancy #### E1. Critical Gaps - [Gap 1]: [Description] | Impact: [high/medium/low] | Solution: [create page/section OR add to existing] - [Gap 2]: ... **Prioritized list:** 1. [Most critical] 2. [Medium impact] 3. [Nice-to-have] --- #### E2. Redundancy - [Topic A] explained on [Page 1, Page 2, Page 3] → Recommendation: [Consolidate; link from others to canonical version on Page X] - [Topic B] ... --- ### Part F: Tone, Accessibility & Reader Experience #### F1. Balance: Inspiration vs. Instruction **Page-by-page assessment:** - Homepage: [% inspirational] / [% practical] | Assessment: [Good/Needs rebalance] - Practical pages: [% practical] / [% inspirational] | Assessment: [Good/Needs rebalance] - Concept pages: [Assessment] **Suggestion:** - [Adjust ratio on pages X and Y] --- #### F2. Readability & Accessibility **Metrics:** - Avg sentence length: [___ words] [Good: <15 for complex sections] - Avg paragraph length: [___ sentences] [Good: 3–5] - Jargon density: [High/Medium/Low] - Heading scannability: [Good/Could improve] - Mobile readability: [Good/Needs improvement] **Issues:** - [E.g., "Technical language not explained"; "Paragraphs too long"; "Headings vague"] **Suggestion:** - [Break up paragraph X] OR [Add glossary for jargon] OR [Rewrite headings to be more descriptive] --- #### F3. Inclusivity & Representation **Language audit:** - Gender-neutral pronouns? [Yes/No] [Instances to fix: ___] - Diverse examples/images? [Yes/Needs improvement/No] - Accessibility concrete? [Yes/Vague] [Examples to improve: ___] - Tone inclusive to all identities? [Yes/Assumes something] **Issues:** - [E.g., "Uses 'men and women' instead of 'people'"; "All images show able-bodied people"] **Suggestion:** - [Swap gendered language to gender-neutral] OR [Add diverse examples] OR [Make accessibility concrete] --- ## Priority Recommendations ### 🔴 Critical (Do first) 1. [Issue]: [Action] 2. ... ### 🟡 High-impact (Next) 1. [Issue]: [Action] 2. ... ### 🟢 Polish (When time) 1. [Issue]: [Action] 2. ... --- ## Rewritten Examples [If major content gaps, provide sample rewrites for:] - Homepage intro (clearer scope) - Pre-event checklist - Activity descriptions (with skill levels) - Consent framing (examples) - Post-event guide --- ## Overall Assessment **Strengths:** - [What's working well for the reader] **Weaknesses:** - [What's confusing or missing] **Overall Reader Readiness:** - [Poor / Fair / Good / Excellent] + explanation - Estimated % of readers who could successfully navigate and prepare: [__%] - Estimated % who'd feel welcome and informed: [__%] ``` --- ## How to Use This Skill 1. **Trigger:** ``` /content-strategic-review ``` Or: "Review the site from a reader's perspective" / "Content audit for completeness" 2. **Provide context (optional):** - "Focus on new-visitor experience" - "Check practical information completeness" - "Test accessibility and inclusivity" - "Audit information architecture" 3. **I will:** - Examine the entire site (or specific sections you name) - Test from multiple reader personas (first-timer, experienced person, person with disability, etc.) - Provide detailed feedback across all 6 parts (A–F) - Prioritize issues by impact - Suggest rewrites for key gaps --- ## Personas Automatically Tested - **Maya (first-timer):** Has no experience; wants to know if she'll be welcome and what to expect - **Alex (experienced):** Knows rope; wants practical info on activities and cost - **Jordan (accessibility needs):** Wheelchair user; needs concrete details on access, facilities, support - **Sam (English not native language):** Needs clear, short sentences and concrete language --- ## Special Modes - **"Quick gaps review"** — just identify critical missing info - **"Reader journey test"** — simulate first-timer experience start-to-finish - **"Accessibility focus"** — deep audit of inclusive language, concrete support details - **"Rewrite mode"** — propose full rewrites of key sections (homepage, practical guide, etc.)