GitHub issue template chooser with blank issues disabled
Disable blank issues for contributors so the GitHub issue chooser forces the public queue through the templates you are actually ready to process.
Why this can grow a startup
An issue queue stops being useful when half the submissions arrive outside the shapes your team knows how to triage. GitHub lets maintainers set `blank_issues_enabled` to `false`, which hides the blank issue path from ordinary contributors while still leaving a Maintainers only escape hatch for people with write access and above. That small setting is really a quality filter. It makes the public queue more structured, keeps the chooser honest, and protects the maintainers from spending every morning turning free-form complaints into actionable tickets.
Source-backed example
GitHub Docs says `blank_issues_enabled: false` removes the blank issue option for Read and Triage users while keeping a Maintainers only blank issue path for Write, Maintain, and Admin roles.
Source-reported evidence
Source: GitHub Docs: Configuring issue templates for your repository
When `blank_issues_enabled` is `false`, GitHub still shows Blank issue as Maintainers only for Write, Maintain, and Admin users.
Attributed to the cited source; GrowthDex has not independently verified it. Use this as context, not as a forecast, benchmark, or recommended target.
Evidence scope: claims and metrics are attributed to the linked source; GrowthDex has not independently replicated the reported result. Check the original context and validate fit before applying it. Read the evidence methodology.
When to use it
Use this when GitHub, Support, Community is relevant to issue hygiene, community intake, triage quality and you can run a bounded test with a free budget.
When not to use it
Do not use it as a substitute for customer evidence, a clear owner, or a measurable stop condition. Local platform rules and market behavior still need checking.
How to do it
- Choose one target segment and define the exact next action this tactic should prompt.
- Adapt the tactic to GitHub and Support, using evidence from GitHub Docs: Configuring issue templates for your repository as context—not as a promised result.
- Record a baseline for: Users who resolve the issue and complete the next useful action. Set a guardrail that would make you pause the test.
- Run a narrow pilot and choose a test window that fits the normal decision or use cycle; do not scale before you have observed the full cycle.
- Compare the signal with its baseline. Scale only if the intended action improves without crossing the guardrail; otherwise revise one variable or stop and record what you learned.
Compare a stack for your situation
Compare source-backed tactics against your product, stage, budget and channel strengths, then choose one experiment to test.
Explore the context
Did you launch this experiment?
Report a launch to help us understand which growth ideas founders put into practice.
Apply this with an operator
Build creator and community systems around real incentives, trust, and repeat participation.