Create a tool for managing co-founder equity discussions

Quick update on [my post from a few days ago](https://www.reddit.com/r/ycombinator/comments/1rp8y87/solo_founder_for_9_months_potential_cofounder/). Solo founder, 9 months in, potential cofounder demanded 50/50 after a 1-week trial. I walked away. I sent a short message: I enjoyed working with them, I think they're talented, but we're not aligned on structure and the equity piece is a dealbreaker. They took it well. No drama. Clean break. Thank you to everyone who commented and DM'd. 122K views, 260+ comments, almost unanimous consensus. I read every single one. The overwhelming response helped confirm what my gut was already telling me. **Context I didn't share in the original post** A couple of things I left out that were equally significant: 1. During our equity discussion, they argued they had more leverage than me because of their demographic background, implying it gave the company a diversity edge for fundraising and accelerators. I don't want a cofounder who frames their identity as a bargaining chip in an equity negotiation. 2. They had previously interviewed for YC W26 as a solo founder. The partner told them to work on something else, find a great cofounder and encouraged staying in touch with them personally. They introduced me to that partner. I appreciated it, but it added a subtle dynamic. It positioned them as the one with the YC relationship, which may have influenced why they felt entitled to an equal split after one week. Neither of these alone would've been dealbreakers. But combined with everything from the original post, the pattern was clear. I genuinely wish them the best. **What I learned (from you and from the experience)** - The equity number is never the real issue. How someone negotiates tells you how they'll handle every hard conversation for the next 5-10 years. - If someone can't respect "let's sleep on it," they won't respect boundaries when things get harder. - 51/49 is a governance tiebreaker, not a hierarchy. Someone who sees it as "working for you" doesn't understand how startups are structured. - Equity is compensation for sustained risk and execution, not for belief. Anyone can believe in a product after 7 days. Showing up at month 14 when nothing is working is what equity pays for. - Set equity expectations before the trial, not after. Several of you called this out and you were right. If I'd framed the range upfront, I would've filtered faster. - Trial periods work. This is the third time one has saved me from a bad cofounder decision. One week of real work reveals more than months of calls. But bind it to KPIs, not just time. - Red flags compound. Any single one is explainable. The pattern is what matters. - The wrong cofounder is worse than no cofounder. **What I'm doing now** Back to building. We're doing back-office automation for professional services firms. Document intake, extraction, and workflow automation in an industry that still runs on paper and email. Product is in production with 3 design partners actively using it on real clients. 5-figure ARR. Small SAFE raised. One design partner went from 2-3 hours to 10 minutes on a task they repeat hundreds of times a year. We process 132-page documents in 89 seconds with zero errors. I'm in my twenties, based in Montreal, background in infrastructure, data engineering and data science. Worked at a few well-known tech companies before building this on the side, then going full-time to capture momentum. Built the product solo. I've been thinking about applying to YC but I don't think I'd get in as a solo founder. Waiting until I find the right person to build with. I'm not in a rush. But if that's you, my DMs are open. For those who already reached out after the original post, thank you, I'll catch up with everyone soon.