01/ 06What Deskrune isn't
The things the catalog does not do.
This is the part most brand pages skip. The point of putting it first is so the reader can leave before paying free if any of these matter to them. None of them are theoretical. Each is a thing the catalog declines, on purpose, every week.
-
Not an uncategorized productivity product.
Every kit names the failure mode it's built for on the cover. There is no "general productivity" PDF in the catalog and there will not be one. If a kit can't say which one of the ten AI Failure Modes it addresses, the kit doesn't ship.
-
Not a founder selling a personality.
Faceless brand. There is no headshot, no founder story page, no reel of the operator at a desk with sunlight. The team's job is to ship work that holds up; the work is the artifact, not whoever assembled it. If a kit only makes sense once you know the person who wrote it, the kit is broken.
-
Not a streak-based system.
No streak counters. No XP. No "you missed Tuesday — keep your chain alive" notifications. Streaks teach the brain that the work is the streak, and an ADHD adult who breaks a streak on day 7 quits the work. The catalog is built for the person who already broke the streak. Gamification is banned across the catalog on a hard rule.
-
Not a community, forum, or Discord.
The newsletter is one-way. There are no comments on kit pages. There is no "join the Deskrune community" pitch and there will not be one. If something we write lands, the suggested action is to forward it to one ADHD adult who needs it. That's the whole social loop.
-
Not an app.
Kits are PDFs. Printable, plain, no login, no account, no data sync. A kit you have to set up before you can use is a kit that fails on the day it's actually needed. The Re-Entry Card is four lines on paper because four lines on paper is the design.
-
Not therapy, medical advice, or coaching.
The kits describe patterns and protocols. They aren't a treatment plan, and decisions about diagnosis, medication, or care belong with a clinician. A worksheet for re-entry after nine days offline is useful — it isn't a therapist, a psychiatrist, or an ADHD coach, and it isn't pretending to be.
If a kit only makes sense once you know the person who wrote it, the kit is broken.
— The faceless rule
02/ 06Where AI is in the loop
Where AI is, and where it isn't.
The catalog is built with AI in three specific places: research synthesis, formatting, and the first draft of body copy. After that, a human with ADHD reads every page before it ships. The disclosure is on the last page of every kit; it isn't a footnote.
Fig. 1 — three places AI helps. Two places it doesn't.
Where AI is. Pulling candidate citations on a topic. Restructuring a long Markdown table. Generating a first draft when the cursor is the problem. The team uses Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini — whichever one is open. None of these are "the writer."
Where AI isn't. Clinical claims. Any sentence that says "ADHD adults experience X" or "this study found Y" gets traced back to the primary source by a human, and the PubMed ID lands in the citations block at /research/. AI synthesis of a study is a starting point for the human to verify, not the citation. If a citation can't be verified, the claim doesn't ship.
Why this disclosure is here, not buried. The brand voice canon is short on hedging and long on saying things plainly. AI use is one of those things. Pretending the catalog is hand-typed by a single tortured artist would be a lie, and the lie would erode the trust the catalog actually depends on.
03/ 06What we're wrong about
The things the team is still uncertain about.
This is the section that breaks the rest of the productivity industry's habit. The catalog is opinionated; that doesn't mean every claim is settled. Below is a list of what's well-evidenced versus what's still hypothesis. The line between them moves; the revision log tracks when it does.
Solid evidence. AFM-3 (Re-Entry Collapse) and AFM-5 (Time-Blindness Tax) sit on top of well-replicated working-memory and temporal-discounting research. The mechanism behind these failure modes is not in serious dispute among ADHD researchers. The kits that address them are the most confident in the catalog.
Mixed evidence. AFM-6 (RSD Feedback Loop) draws on emotional-dysregulation research that's well-evidenced — but "RSD" itself, as a clinical construct, is still being formalized. The kit copy says so. The mechanism is real; the label is provisional.
Working hypothesis. AFM-2 (Voice Laundering) and AFM-8 (Dependency Calcification) are pattern observations from the field, not yet anchored to peer-reviewed literature. They show up consistently in reader emails and the team's own work. They're labeled as observations, not science. If the literature catches up — or contradicts them — the kits change.
What this means in practice. A kit's confidence level is on its page. Re-Entry Collapse is in the high-confidence tier; Voice Laundering says, plainly, that it's a working hypothesis. Readers are not asked to trust the team's certainty — they're asked to read the certainty level and decide.
The mechanism is real. The label is provisional. If the literature contradicts us, the kit changes.
— The uncertainty rule
04/ 06Disclosures
The boring, true facts.
The disclosures that have to be on a commerce site, said plainly. Nothing here is theatrical and nothing is hidden in 8-point text at the bottom of a page. The full privacy policy says the same things in legal form.
- Tip supports Fourteen days from purchase, no questions. Email [email protected]; the money goes back. No exit-interview survey, no form gate, no "tell us why" prompt.
- AI use AI helps with research synthesis, formatting, and first drafts. A human with ADHD edits and approves every page before it ships. Clinical claims are checked against primary sources by a human; AI summaries are never a citation.
- Affiliate links If a kit links to a product on Amazon, it's an Amazon Associates link — Deskrune may earn a small commission. The team doesn't recommend products it wouldn't use, and the linked product isn't selected because of the commission.
- Payments Card payments are processed by Stripe (and on a few legacy product pages, Gumroad / Payhip / LemonSqueezy). The team never sees a card number. Stripe holds payment data per their own retention policy.
- Personal data No tracking pixels. No third-party advertising trackers. No Facebook or Google Analytics on this site. Email addresses given at checkout are used to deliver the kit and (if opted in) the newsletter — and for nothing else. Data is never sold or shared.
- Updates to readers Every revised version of a kit is delivered to the original reader, free, via the same Gumroad / Stripe download folder. No second purchase. No "upgrade tier."
05/ 06What we owe you
The brand promise as a flat list.
The list below is the contract a reader is paying free for. If any item on it stops being true, the reader has been mis-sold and is entitled to the tip support without question.
- Not by subtypeKits are sorted by failure mode, not by ADHD subtype, archetype, or personality.
- FacelessNo founder face on the cover. The work is the artifact.
- No streaksNo streak counters, XP bars, or shame-on-Tuesday badges. Ever.
- No appKits are PDFs. Printable, plain, no login, no setup.
- No communityNo Discord, no comments, no "join the tribe" pitch.
- Citations on every claimOr the claim is labeled as an observation, not science.
- Quarterly auditEvery kit is re-checked four times a year. Retracted citations get the kit pulled.
- Free updates foreverReaders get every revised version in the same downloads folder.
- 14-day tip supportNo form, no exit-interview survey, no "tell us why" gate.
- One human reads every email[email protected]. A reply lands within two working days.
06/ 06How to flag a violation
If something contradicts this page.
This page is canon. Every other page on Deskrune has to agree with it. If a reader finds a place where the catalog says one thing and this page says another — a kit page that promises a streak feature, a checkout page that adds an opt-out fee, a clinical claim without a citation — the page wins, and the team owes the reader a fix.
The single channel is [email protected]. A real human reads it. A reply lands within two working days. The fix lands in the public revision log within seven days of confirmation.
There is no "report a violation" form, because forms are friction and the catalog wants the friction at zero. A subject line of "honest page violation" is enough; a screenshot is helpful but not required.
The team is small and ships imperfectly. This page exists so that when the catalog drifts, the reader has a working pull-cord. Use it.