Ah, I understand what you're getting at more now, thank you for explaining!
what your thoughts are around the differences between putting your efforts into getting people to click as opposed to stick.
My thoughts are that they're like the 'arms' and 'legs' of content-creation/marketing/audience-building.
Both must be used correctly and fairly often.
You could have the 'stickiest' content ever, but if it's not clickable, all your work is for nothing, since everyone will scroll past.
You could have irresisitably 'clickable' content, but if people don't find enough value once they've clicked through, they aren't coming back, and you may even get a bad reputation.
So... both are absolutely essential for any form of sustainable growth in any social project.
I've taught classes, seminars, and personally advised major CEOs on their branding efforts, and I agree about consistency and compounding. Extremely powerful. That said I've had clients who were consistent AF, but their brand was unpolished and weakly executed, so their consistency didn't amount to much. As I said above, both approaches are essential to successful brand-building, neither can be ignored or neglected.
Here's the Ryze Brand Guidelines PDF, for example: https://www.dropbox.com/s/770xn00vszdevk6/Ryze_Brand_Guidelines_2021.pdf?dl=0
It ensures consistency yes, but it also ensures quality, appeal, impressiveness as well. To occupy mindshare in others generally requires first CAPTURING attention (step 1), and then HOLDING attention (step 2), then compounding both over time.
Sounds like you're on the right track, your fire analogy is great. Well said.
To summarize again, both click and stick are absolutely vital arms & legs of any social project.
Wishing you massive success with yours and helping however I'm able. 🙏