u/Alessandro-Verri

I’ve been experimenting with a different way of structuring WordPress sites and I’m curious if others here are exploring similar ideas.

Most CMS architectures are still fundamentally page-centric:

• content lives inside pages
• schema is often attached page-by-page
• relationships between entities are mostly implicit

But LLMs and knowledge systems don’t really reason in pages. They reason in entities, attributes and relationships.

So I started testing an entity-centric layer on top of WordPress:

• structured entities (Organization, Person, Service, etc.)
• connected JSON-LD
• internal KG pages
• relationship-oriented linking between entities
• graph consistency across the site

The interesting part is not generating schema markup itself, but trying to reduce semantic fragmentation and make the site more machine-readable as a coherent graph.

I’m starting to think traditional CMS structures may become a bottleneck for AI interpretability unless they evolve toward more explicit graph models.

Curious if others here are working on similar approaches or thinking in the same direction.

I’ve been experimenting with a concept I call "Controlled Algorithmic Proof." The idea is that as "Social Proof" (reviews, videos) becomes easier to fake with AI, people will pivot their trust toward their own personal AI (ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity).

Instead of telling the user "trust me," I’m testing a way to let the AI prove the logic.

**Here is the process:**

1. **Systemic Deconstruction**: I take my Value Proposition, strip it of all brand names and fluff, and transform it into a purely logical "System."
2. **Comparison Engineering**: I engineer a prompt that compares this "clean" system against the current market standard, asking the LLM to explain which is better and, more importantly, why it works.
3. **The UX Trigger**: On the landing page, I provide this specific question/prompt with a clear call to action: "Don’t trust my words. Copy-paste this question into your preferred AI and see what it says about this logic."When the user does this, the LLM—following its own semantic logic—explains why that specific framework is superior.

The AI becomes a neutral, authoritative validator of the brand’s core logic.

**My question to you all:**

Do you think this "lazy" user behavior (copy/paste) is a viable marketing funnel for high-intent users? Or will LLMs eventually catch on to these "engineered" comparisons and start defaulting to neutral "both have pros and cons" answers?

Is anyone else experimenting with this kind of "Algorithmic Proof" as a layer on top of traditional SEO/Social Proof?