Stuart Todd's No-BS Dev Writing Playbook

Stuart Todd's No-BS Dev Posts That Actually Land

I stumbled onto Stuart Todd's LinkedIn and immediately did that thing where you stop scrolling and go, "Hang on... why is this working so well?" Not because it's polished. Not because it's some perfectly branded creator vibe. But because the numbers are quietly ridiculous: 15,194 followers, 8.3 posts per week, and a 138.00 Hero Score.

And what's interesting is the vibe doesn't match what LinkedIn usually rewards. It's not corporate. It's not "here are 5 tips to unlock your potential". It's more like a senior dev texting you from the trenches, half coaching you, half taking the piss.

So I lined Stuart up next to two other creators with strong signals in different ways: Sascha Muckenhaupt (Hero Score 92.00, smaller audience) and Maria Ledentsova (31,493 followers, big personal-brand niche, Hero Score 90.00). And a few patterns jumped out.

Here's what stood out:

• Stuart wins with density and cadence - lots of posts, lots of punch, almost zero fluff.
• Maria wins with systems and positioning - she teaches branding like a product.
• Sascha wins with focus and clarity - smaller audience, but good relative engagement.

---

Creator Snapshot (Side-by-side)

If you just looked at follower count, you'd expect Maria to dominate everything.

But Stuart's Hero Score lead is massive. That's the first clue that his content is doing something unusually effective.

---

Stuart Todd's Performance Metrics

Here's what's interesting: Stuart sits in that sweet spot where he's big enough to have reach, but still "close" enough to his audience that the posts feel like they're written to real people, not to an algorithm. And the posting volume is honestly a big deal. 8.3 posts a week means he gets a ton of reps, fast feedback, and lots of surface area for ideas to hit.

Key Performance Indicators

What Makes Stuart Todd's Content Work

Stuart's posts feel like they were written by someone who ships code for a living and is mildly allergic to corporate theatre. That alone is a differentiator. But there are a few repeatable strategies underneath the chaos.

1. He weaponizes brevity (and isn't scared of "small" posts)

So here's what he does that a lot of smart people weirdly refuse to do: he posts short thoughts. Sometimes ridiculously short. One-liners. Fragments. The occasional emoji-only signal. And instead of reading as lazy, it reads as confident.

Because if you can say something in five words that people immediately "get", you don't need a 900-word post to prove you're smart.

Key Insight: Treat brevity like a feature, not a compromise. Write the smallest version of the idea that still stings (or helps).

This works because LinkedIn is a scroll fight. Short posts create clean "stop points". And Stuart stacks those stops constantly, which makes his feed presence feel bigger than it is.

Strategy Breakdown:

2. He picks fights with fake "professionalism" (in a relatable way)

He doesn't pick fights like a troll. It's more like: "Can we stop pretending?" That mild provocation is gold on LinkedIn because it invites agreement, disagreement, and "finally someone said it" comments.

And he does it with dev-culture touchpoints: CRUD jokes, tabs vs spaces, hiring and team norms, the quiet frustration of modern work. It's niche enough to feel real, broad enough that plenty of people can nod along.

Comparison with Industry Standards:

The reason this hits is simple: LinkedIn is full of people trying to sound like they belong. Stuart sounds like he already does.

3. He writes like a builder, not a broadcaster

This one surprised me a bit. Underneath the jokes, his best posts are basically dev coaching. They're written like notes you'd leave a teammate:

• return early
• name things properly
• reduce surprise
• treat coding like a team sport

He doesn't hide behind fancy language. He just points at the real problem and gives you the move.

And because he posts a lot, you don't just get one "big" post. You get a steady drip of principles.

4. He understands cadence (and uses time windows that fit attention)

We don't have his exact timing data per post, but the strategy analysis suggests late afternoon (16:00-17:00) and early evening (18:00-20:00) as strong windows. That lines up with how his content reads: it's perfect "end of workday" material. You're tired, you're scrolling, and suddenly a post goes:

"Stop apologising for being 'just' a developer."

You feel seen. You react.

Now compare that to Maria, whose content often works best when someone's in "learn mode" (morning or mid-day), and Sascha, whose topics can perform well around work culture moments (start of day, lunch, or after a company announcement). Different rhythms.

---

Their Content Formula

Stuart's formula isn't fancy. It's repeatable. And once you see it, you can't unsee it.

Content Structure Breakdown

The Hook Pattern

He opens like he's already mid-conversation. No throat clearing.

Template:

"Stop doing X."

Or:

"Developers. You're not just Y."

Or:

"Tip."

Why it works: it removes decision fatigue for the reader. They don't have to figure out what the post is about. They know in one line.

And you can steal this without copying his tone. Just keep the intent:

• Name the problem fast.
• Take a stance.
• Make it feel like you're talking to one person.

The Body Structure

He tends to build in tight beats. Setup line. Then examples. Then a closer that either lands a principle or starts an argument.

Body Structure Analysis:

The CTA Approach

Stuart's CTAs are funny because they're often not really CTAs. They're "final beats".

• a punchline that invites comments (tabs vs spaces)
• a hard stance that begs for disagreement
• or a dead simple instruction like "Link in comments"

Psychologically, this is strong because it doesn't break the vibe. A lot of creators write a decent post and then ruin it with a desperate ending.

He doesn't.

---

Comparing Stuart vs. Maria vs. Sascha (What Success Looks Like)

Now, here's where it gets interesting. All three are "successful", but their success is built on different engines.

Table 1: Audience vs. Resonance

Takeaway: Maria has the biggest stage. Stuart gets the loudest reaction per seat.

Table 2: Content Positioning and "Why People Follow"

Table 3: Style Choices That Change Outcomes

If you want the simplest summary:

• Stuart gets comments because people feel something.
• Maria gets saves because people want the system.
• Sascha gets trust because the topic signals leadership values.

---

What I'd Copy From Stuart (Without Becoming a Clone)

If you're reading this and thinking, "Cool, but I'm not a sweary senior dev from the UK", good. You shouldn't cosplay his personality.

But you can copy the mechanics.

The Stuart Mechanics You Can Steal

1. Make one point per post

Stuart rarely tries to teach everything. He teaches one thing. Or he says one thing. That's it.

2. Write in spoken language

Short lines. Real phrasing. Contractions. Occasional fragments. If it would sound weird out loud, it probably reads weird in the feed.

3. Be willing to be specific

Generic advice is invisible. Specific advice is memorable. "Return early" is specific. "Improve code quality" is wallpaper.

4. End with a beat, not a bow

Stop trying to wrap everything up like a school essay. Land the plane with a line people can repeat.

---

3 Actionable Strategies You Can Use Today

1. Write a one-line hook that takes a stance - it forces clarity and makes the scroll stop.

2. Use the "label + instructions" move - start a paragraph with something like "Tip." then give 2-3 imperatives.

3. Post more often, but lower the stakes - short posts give you reps without waiting for the perfect idea.

---

Key Takeaways

1. Stuart's edge is cadence + clarity - 8.3 posts per week plus blunt hooks creates constant momentum.
2. Hero Score tells a different story than followers - Stuart's 138.00 suggests stronger resonance than creators with bigger audiences.
3. Formatting is part of the strategy - whitespace and short paragraphs are not decoration, they're delivery.
4. You don't need to sound corporate to be credible - in some niches, sounding corporate actively hurts.

If you're tempted to try this, pick one opinion you actually believe, write the smallest version of it, and hit post. Then watch what people argue with (that's your next topic).

---

Meet the Creators

---

This analysis was generated by ViralBrain's AI content intelligence platform.