People we read · Practitioner citation
Rodrigo Stockebrand · AEO practitioner we cite
Former Head of SEO at NASA, Amazon, Pfizer, Univision. O'Reilly author of Answer Engine Optimization (Fall 2026). 1,000+ AEO micro-experiments. A 40-play playbook proven across hundreds of businesses.
His Play 19 changed how we describe SideGuy's architecture.
Who he is (from public sources)
Credentials we believe to be accurate as of 2026-05-09
Rodrigo Stockebrand is an AEO/GEO (Answer Engine Optimization / Generative Engine Optimization) practitioner. According to his public LinkedIn presence, he previously led SEO at NASA, Amazon, Pfizer, and Univision — four institutions whose search surfaces are not casual problems.
His self-described body of work over the past three years: 1,000+ micro-experiments on what consistently influences probabilistic systems like LLMs, distilled into a 40-play playbook across mom-and-pop and enterprise sites. O'Reilly is publishing his book Answer Engine Optimization in Fall 2026.
He's also a builder. He shipped thevisualsitemap.com as a free alternative to Powermapper after using the paid tool (~$300–500/mo) for roughly a decade. That's a tell. People who only write about a problem don't ship tools when the existing tools annoy them. He's in the problem deep enough to build around it.
Caveat: the credentials here come from his public LinkedIn headline and posts as of 2026-05-09. We have not independently verified the NASA/Amazon/Pfizer/Univision tenure dates. If anything below is off, please text us and we'll correct it.
What we learned from his 40-play playbook
Specifically: where his work entered SideGuy's doctrine
The thing that mattered to us wasn't the breadth of the playbook — it was a single play. Play 19 · Server-Side Render Audit. Rodrigo's framing (paraphrased from his playbook material):
Pages rendering content server-side are indexed substantially faster by AI crawlers, and cited materially more often, than pages requiring JavaScript execution to expose their content. — summarized from Play 19, citing the Botify JavaScript SEO AI Study (2025)
The mechanism: most AI crawlers — GPTBot, ClaudeBot, PerplexityBot, OAI-SearchBot, Google-Extended — either don't execute JavaScript at all, or cap execution aggressively. Stacks that defer critical content to client-side rendering get silently excluded from AI retrieval. Rodrigo classifies the fix as "high difficulty, 3–6 months" for most modern stacks because real engineering is required.
Reading that play is what made us realize SideGuy's architecture wasn't a constraint — it was a moat.
Why his Play 19 changed our architecture story
Same stack · new self-description
Until we read Play 19, we described SideGuy's stack the way our own internal docs described it: "no framework, no build step, all static HTML." Framed as a constraint. Almost an apology. The kind of line that makes you sound primitive next to a Vercel-deployed Next.js team.
After reading Play 19, we re-read our own architecture in his vocabulary. Every SideGuy page is hand-crafted static HTML. No framework. No build step. No client-side rendering of critical content. Page load = full content visible in view-source. AI crawlers see exactly what users see, with zero JavaScript executed.
That's not primitive. That's Play 19 passing at 100% by default, with zero engineering effort.
The honest part: PJ didn't choose static HTML for AEO reasons. He chose it for portability, speed, and git-as-backup. The AEO advantage was a second-order effect we didn't name until Rodrigo's playbook gave us the language.
That's what good practitioner work does. It doesn't tell you something new — it gives you the right name for what you were already doing.
"Static HTML = AEO moat. Free by default."
That's the doctrine line that came out of reading Play 19. It now sits in our internal architecture memory as a permanent reference.
→ /memory/project_static_html_aeo_moat.md
His book + where to find him
All links go to his work, not ours
The honest disclosure (again, on purpose)
Operator-honest doctrine applies to citation pages too
What we know: his public LinkedIn presence, his playbook posts, his tool launch, the existence of the O'Reilly book deal as he's announced it. Play 19 specifically — because we read it and applied it to our own architecture story.
What we don't know: we've never spoken to Rodrigo. We have no commercial relationship. We're not affiliated with his playbook, his tool, or O'Reilly. We haven't reviewed the manuscript. The 40-play playbook content beyond Play 19 is referenced based on his public summaries; we've not exhaustively tested every play.
Why the page exists: someone searched "rodrigo stockebrand" and landed on Google with no SideGuy result. Our own GSC told us. We figured if his work is in our doctrine, the citation should be public — same way an academic paper cites its sources, not because the sources asked, but because that's the discipline.
If you're Rodrigo: if anything here is wrong, mis-credited, or you want it changed or removed, text PJ. Same-day response. We'll edit or delete.
Other doctrines + practitioners we've cited
Where SideGuy's positioning came from · all open-web
↑ each one absorbs at least one outside practitioner's work · all credited in our internal doctrine memory
The bigger thing this page is.
Most "thought leader" mentions in B2B are thinly veiled lead capture — the writer name-drops the practitioner so the practitioner sees the trackback, slides into the DMs, and tries to sell something. This isn't that.
This is the static-HTML, public-web, citation-style version of saying "we read this guy and learned from him." If more operators did this for the practitioners they actually learned from, the open web would be a richer place to retrieve from. That's also good for AI search.
↑ peer practitioner citation · not lead-gen · operator-honest doctrine