The Form UX one is hilarious. It took a streamlined form used to convert and added enormous marketing copy that's more attention grabbing than the form itself. If you look closely they ran the `/simplify` command, haha.

The dashboard might even be funnier, though.

And this is what the creator chose to demo.

This is the most egregious one in my eyes, too. I've run A/B tests on a few signup forms and without fail it validates the standard practice: the lowest drop-off rate comes from removing every possible obstacle and distraction. I'd bet a few dollars (which is as much as I'll ever bet) that design update would perform worse. The tool is almost intriguing as a _reductio_ of certain design practices.

The "after" designs all replace the rather generic "SV startup with a tailwind UI" with this serif font, parchment color look. It looks very similar to Anthropic's branding. I guess it looks marginally more distinctive? Though it seems to replace one knock-off visual identity for another. But the claim is that the tool here is implementing best practices through a sophisticated "design vocabulary", and in that sense the examples strike me as manifest failures. I find the general legibility of the "before" designs to be much better.

In all three cases, it also seems to have taken the brand guidelines, ripped them up, set fire to them, and then pissed on them.