Reading the evidence

Kickstart01, Kickstart Romania  ·  Friday 27 November 2026  ·  2 hours, online

What your users did and said, what it means, and what you change next.

37 slides. Arrow keys move. O opens the overview, F goes full screen.

The Friday session of the same week, with the same founders and whatever came back from four days in the field. Nobody presents. We read what actually happened.

The spine is one distinction: what you saw and what you think it means belong in different columns. Most teams find the first column is nearly empty, which is the most useful thing they learn all week. Then the move that stops a room building the wrong thing confidently: one sentence a user typed will support three different explanations, and nothing in the sentence tells you which one you have.

It ends on two verdicts and a triage. The value verdict is one sentence and one of three words, and "promising" is not one of them. The usability verdict is three numbers per step, including the one nobody writes down, which is how many times you had to speak. Then now, next and not now, because a usability problem is a week of work and a value problem is a different conversation, and the most expensive mistake available is fixing buttons on something nobody wanted.