Built for 𝕏∙LinkedIn∙Bluesky∙Threads. Powered by AI
Write & schedule, effortlessly
Craft and publish engaging content in an app built for creators.
NEW
Publish anywhere
Publish on X, LinkedIn, Bluesky, Threads, & Mastodon at the same time.
Make it punchier 👊
Typefully
@typefully
We're launching a Command Bar today with great commands and features.
AI ideas and rewrites
Get suggestions, tweet ideas, and rewrites powered by AI.
Turn your tweets & threads into a social blog
Give your content new life with our beautiful, sharable pages. Make it go viral on other platforms too.
+14
Followers
Powerful analytics to grow faster
Easily track your engagement analytics to improve your content and grow faster.
Build in public
Share a recent learning with your followers.
Create engagement
Pose a thought-provoking question.
Never run out of ideas
Get prompts and ideas whenever you write - with examples of popular tweets.
@aaditsh
I think this thread hook could be improved.
@frankdilo
On it 🔥
Share drafts & leave comments
Write with your teammates and get feedback with comments.
NEW
Easlo
@heyeaslo
Reply with "Notion" to get early access to my new template.
Jaga
@kandros5591
Notion 🙏
DM Sent
Create giveaways with Auto-DMs
Send DMs automatically based on engagement with your tweets.
And much more:
Auto-Split Text in Posts
Thread Finisher
Tweet Numbering
Pin Drafts
Connect Multiple Accounts
Automatic Backups
Dark Mode
Keyboard Shortcuts
Creators love Typefully
180,000+ creators and teams chose Typefully to curate their Twitter presence.
Marc Köhlbrugge@marckohlbrugge
Tweeting more with @typefully these days.
🙈 Distraction-free
✍️ Write-only Twitter
🧵 Effortless threads
📈 Actionable metrics
I recommend giving it a shot.
Jurre Houtkamp@jurrehoutkamp
Typefully is fantastic and way too cheap for what you get.
We’ve tried many alternatives at @framer but nothing beats it. If you’re still tweeting from Twitter you’re wasting time.
DHH@dhh
This is my new go-to writing environment for Twitter threads.
They've built something wonderfully simple and distraction free with Typefully 😍
Santiago@svpino
For 24 months, I tried almost a dozen Twitter scheduling tools.
Then I found @typefully, and I've been using it for seven months straight.
When it comes down to the experience of scheduling and long-form content writing, Typefully is in a league of its own.
Luca Rossi ꩜@lucaronin
After trying literally all the major Twitter scheduling tools, I settled with @typefully.
Killer feature to me is the native image editor — unique and super useful 🙏
Visual Theory@visualtheory_
Really impressed by the way @typefully has simplified my Twitter writing + scheduling/publishing experience.
Beautiful user experience.
0 friction.
Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication.
Queue your content in seconds
Write, schedule and boost your tweets - with no need for extra apps.
Schedule with one click
Queue your post with a single click - or pick a time manually.
Pick the perfect time
Time each post to perfection with Typefully's performance analytics.
Boost your content
Retweet and plug your posts for automated engagement.
Start creating a content queue.
Write once, publish everywhere
We natively support multiple platforms, so that you can expand your reach easily.
Check the analytics that matter
Build your audience with insights that make sense.
Writing prompts & personalized post ideas
Break through writer's block with great ideas and suggestions.
Never run out of ideas
Enjoy daily prompts and ideas to inspire your writing.
Use AI for personalized suggestions
Get inspiration from ideas based on your own past tweets.
Flick through topics
Or skim through curated collections of trending tweets for each topic.
Write, edit, and track tweets together
Write and publish with your teammates and friends.
Share your drafts
Brainstorm and bounce ideas with your teammates.
NEW
@aaditsh
I think this thread hook could be improved.
@frankdilo
On it 🔥
Add comments
Get feedback from coworkers before you hit publish.
Read, Write, Publish
Read, WriteRead
Control user access
Decide who can view, edit, or publish your drafts.
In our brain, there are not one but two decision-makers:
The PLANNER (our cortex), which suggests what we *should* do
And the GATEKEEPER (our basal ganglia), which decides whether to do it
The interaction between the two determines most of human behavior
(short thread)
1/9
For example, frustration arises from liking an outcome but not the action that achieves it.
For example, our cortex (the Planner) might decide that we *should* hit the gym. But our basal ganglia (the Gatekeeper) might not like exercising. The result: we do not go to the gym.
This circuitry is what you would observe if you dissected a human brain – the basal ganglia can inhibit the pathway between the cortex and the areas sending orders to our motor areas.
Now, let's see how the Planner and the Gatekeeper work and how we can influence that.
The Planner (our cortex) can make plans but does not have direct access to our muscles. Hence, its plans are only suggestions.
Instead, the Gatekeeper (a brain part called the basal ganglia) cannot make plans but can block the planner's suggestions from reaching the muscles.
For action to happen, our cortex must suggest it and our basal ganglia must approve it.
Either missing means that we do not take that action.
Much of habit formation is about ensuring that both happen.
Most habit formation advice is about the cortex.
It's either about making better decisions (i.e., sending better suggestions to our Gatekeeper) or removing cues from our environment (so that no harmful suggestions are sent to our GK).
But most advice ignores the Gatekeeper.
So, what causes the Gatekeeper to open or close the gate?
It's simple: experiential memory. The gate opens when the suggested action is remembered to have brought positive emotions in the past.
Keyword: remembered. The Gatekeeper cannot imagine or plan, only remember.
The part of you that can imagine, plan, and consider indirect or long-term consequences is the Planner.
Knowledge, imagination, and planning can only generate good suggestions. But they do not guarantee execution, nor do they prevent bad suggestions (created by instincts).
Here is the key: the Gatekeeper can only see what actions the planner suggested, not why it suggested them.
It can see that the Planner suggested to go to the gym, but it cannot know that it's to lose weight.
It can only remember how we felt the last time we exercised.
And if the last time we exercised we felt cold, or sweaty, or tired, the Gatekeeper thinks, "I won't do something that causes me to feel bad." It will close the gate, the action suggested by the Planner (our cortex) won't reach our muscles, and we will not go to the gym.
The Gatekeeper cannot listen to the Planner's motivations for taking an action.
The only way to convince the Gatekeeper to open the gate is to create a new experience that associates a positive emotion to the suggested action.
Hence, habit formation must speak BOTH to the Planner and to the Gatekeeper.
To the Planner: better knowledge, more cues for positive actions, fewer for negative ones.
To the Gatekeeper: new experiences creating new emotional associations.
And much of habit formation is about realizing that our Planner (our thinking self) cannot just "convince" the Gatekeeper to change. It can only do so indirectly, by planning actions the GK is already willing to take, and having those actions create new emotional associations
This thread is a short summary of the behavioral model I describe in one of the chapters of my book "The Control Heuristic"
amzn.to/3KplMIm
It's interesting what happens when the Gatekeeper closes the gate and the planner doesn't know why. It will CONFABULATE the reason.
In the example below, we do not go to the gym, but the Planner doesn't know why. He doesn't know it's because the Gatekeeper has negative emotional associations with exercising.
Hence, the planner will have to guess why we didn't go to the gym. Perhaps because it's raining?
Frustration is what happens when the Planner wants to do something but the Gatekeeper disagrees.
Frustration is the result of desiring an outcome but not the action that will achieve it.