Adding feels like progress. Removing doesn't.

I had a thought.

Founders ship features to show momentum. To investors. To users. To themselves. Every quarter has a new release. A roadmap full of additions.

But then I look at the roadmap.

No removal. No retirement. Nothing that says "we built this last year and it was wrong."

That's not a roadmap. That's accumulation.

Removing a feature is admitting that an earlier version of you decided wrong. That a thing you once defended in a meeting no longer earns its place.

Adding is easy because it costs nothing yet. Removing means standing behind the new version against the old one.

It's worse now. Building a feature takes an afternoon. A prompt and a deploy.

When building was expensive, cost said no for you. Now nothing does. Saying no has to come from someone in the room, and most teams have never had to.

ClickUp started as a task manager. Now it does everything, and everything is mediocre. The screwdriver became a toolbox where every tool is slightly wrong.

Linear just tracks issues. Windy just shows the wind.

They didn't expand the feature set. They deepened the quality.

The product that removes something and becomes clearer is almost always better. But you can't put "we deleted six things" on a slide. So nobody does.

What's in your product that you wouldn't build today? And why is it still there?

Take it further

I want to question what's still in my product that I wouldn't build today. Don't validate my answers, push back hard. Start by asking me: what's in your product that you wouldn't build today, and why is it still there? List as many as I can think of. For each one, ask what would actually break if it was gone, and what I'm protecting by keeping it. Then help me find the honest answer.