use case
AI marketing that waits for your approval
Let AI do the drafting, read every word before it goes out, and keep the send button. In marketinque every publish, every email and every dollar of ad spend stops for your say-so. By default that is a yes on each item; per action, you can lend it a veto window or, once earned, let it run on its own. Spend always asks, and the things you would never approve, such as unconsented blasts, fake reviews and mass DMs, have no way to run at all.
Can you use AI for marketing without it posting for you?
Yes, by separating the drafting from the sending. Drafting, research and audits run on their own, because nothing leaves the system. The moment an action would reach the outside world, a post, an email, a charge, it stops at one gateway and waits for your say-so.
Every action has a risk class in a policy table: automatic, needs approval, or blocked. An action with no row does not run. The homepage shows three of them from the live table.
Will it read as AI slop?
It can, and when it does you are the one who sees it first. Drafts are written from a brand dossier built from your own site and the sources each idea researched, which keeps them specific rather than generic. No drafting guarantees against slop, though. What this design guarantees is that a draft that reads as obviously AI stops with you, because nothing goes out that you did not read.
Can it get my accounts banned?
The patterns that get accounts banned are blocked outright: mass DMs, vote manipulation, undisclosed automation and unconsented email blasts have no way to run, with or without your approval. Posts for a community are drafted with disclosure, and the free Reddit pre-flight check scores any draft against the removal patterns before you post, and the GummySearch migration guide covers posting to Reddit without an API or a ban. No tool can promise a platform will never flag you; this one will not do the things that get you flagged.
What happens between the draft and the post?
The draft lands in your queue with its sources and a score, and you approve, reject, snooze or edit it, in the console or from Claude Code. Once approved it goes out directly where a sanctioned write path exists, which today means Bluesky, dev.to, your own Discord and your consented email list; for LinkedIn, X and the rest it hands you the approved text and opens the composer. How it works walks the loop end to end, and it is the same queue whether you are a founder doing marketing alone or the only marketer on the team.
How do you know nothing went out without you?
Every action is appended to a write-once log in which each row carries a hash of the one before it, and the database re-verifies the whole chain on demand. A deleted or edited row breaks the chain visibly. The trust page runs that verification live and lists the banned actions straight from the policy table.
Which other AI marketing tools require approval before posting?
Some do, as an option. Read on each vendor’s own site on September 23, 2026: Blaze.ai publishes automatically by default and offers an approvals step on its $149 Growth plan; Buffer’s approval workflows are on its Team plan; HubSpot’s email and social approvals are on Enterprise; Regie.ai sets sending per workflow. Jasper and Copy.ai do not post on their own. The full comparison, the Blaze.ai alternatives page and the other alternatives pages have the detail.
In marketinque the approval is not a plan feature. It is the default for every action on every plan, and anything you let go without it is a per-action grant you can see in a daily email and take back with one tap.
the objection
Won’t an approval queue just become a bottleneck?
It can, and that is its one deliberate cost: nothing ships faster than you can read it. Two things keep it short. Each idea arrives with its sources and a score, so the weak ones are quick to reject, and each cycle drafts for at most three channels, skipping any that already has a draft from the last day. Once you trust a kind of action, give it a veto window: it goes out unless you cancel, and the daily email shows what is coming.
If you want everything to go out unread from day one, a tool that auto-publishes will serve you better.
Who is this not for?
- Anyone who wants true autopilot from day one. Autonomy here is lent per action and earned, and spend never runs without a yes; you would be right to pick a tool built the other way.
- Brands whose growth depends on posting volume, where reading every post first costs more than a bad post does.
Common questions
Is it safe to let AI run your marketing?
Safe enough when the AI drafts and a person publishes. The risk is in what leaves: a post, an email or a charge under your name that nobody read. Keep that step human, check the claims in each draft against their sources, and keep a log you can audit.
Can I turn the approval off for some actions?
Per action, yes, within limits. Any post or publish can get a veto window from day one, and can run on its own once it has earned five clean approvals and marketinque sends it itself. Email to your own list earns it too while its bounce and complaint rates stay low; cold outreach and spend always ask.
What can it never do, even with my approval?
Unconsented email blasts, mass DMs, fake reviews and vote manipulation are blocked in the policy table: they have no execution path, so there is nothing to approve.
Try it
$0 for now. The launch plan and the MCP server work today with no account; projects open by waitlist.