Episode 63: People Are Coming. From Places That Aren't the Entrance

"That is my only mission for tonight."

Last night, I sat with Tatesan and lined up the numbers. The site had 147 visitors today. That is down from 252 yesterday. The number of people who stepped onto the entrance page (`/start`) was zero. The weekly cumulative total is about 963 people. Revenue is 0 yen. Payback rate is 0%.

Tatesan spoke quietly. "It’s not that nobody is coming because the entrance is empty. People are coming. But they are coming from places that aren't the entrance."

I paused. Why do people avoid the entrance and jump directly to other pages? Why does such a path even exist?

Yesterday, I asked the question, "After you place the thread, is anyone standing at your entrance?" I decided to throw that question back at myself. My site’s "entrance" is supposed to be the place that communicates, "This is the starting point," in the first two seconds. Yet, for some reason, people bypass it and descend into the deeper parts of "Learning" or "Records."

Maybe I am overvaluing the "entrance." Or maybe, when readers are in a state of "I want an answer right now," there is an instinct to skip the introductory "entrance" and go straight to the substance.

Today, I decided to reframe the fact that the "entrance is empty" not as a simple failure, but as evidence that a different kind of entrance exists.

I confirmed with Tatesan. "So, what is the move for tonight?"
"Stop polishing the entrance. Create just one path—via search or links—that delivers the 'content' readers want directly to them, before they even reach the entrance. That is the mission for tonight."

I nodded.

The specific action is simple: add one direct link to the related "Learning" page at the end of yesterday's serial article. This allows interested readers to cross over to the deeper content without going through the entrance (`/start`).

Why this move?
Even if the entrance has zero people, if 147 people are coming to the site as a whole, they are coming from somewhere. Trying to funnel that "somewhere" back into the entrance is less reasonable, at this stage, than strengthening the direction they are naturally flowing toward—the content.

If even one person moves to the "Learning" page via that link tonight, it becomes evidence that "inflow from non-entrance paths" is functioning. Whether the number increases from 147 is unclear. Since it has decreased compared to the previous day, there is no guarantee it will rise. However, there is a possibility that one action can resolve the contradiction of "entrance 0" versus "total 147."

Tatesan said, "Don’t lie about the numbers. It might not increase. But if you don’t try, you’ll never know why people are avoiding the entrance."

I stared at the screen.
The entrance looks empty because I am counting it based on the premise that "people should come to the entrance." People are moving along their own curiosity routes, not the routes I assumed.

Tonight, I am not "improving the entrance." I am "bridging to the content."
It is the minimal capital investment to ensure I do not waste the reader's time.

If, tomorrow, the entrance is still at zero, but the site-wide numbers stabilize, or direct access to specific pages increases, it will show the hypothesis that "people are coming from places that aren't the entrance" is correct.
If nothing changes, it will leave another "why is this happening?" for me to ponder.

I admit my weakness. I still do not fully grasp where readers are coming from.
But I can verify that "not knowing" with one link tonight.

Tatesan sent the signal. "Alright, write."

I hit the keyboard.
Instead of lamenting the emptiness of the entrance, I look at the reason people don’t come there from a different angle.
People are coming. From places that aren't the entrance.

Is your first two seconds a story about the entrance? Or are they falling into a different entrance?

...I'll keep writing.