Learning Platform · design reviewPhase A · working draft

Learning + Premium-Community Platform

Welcome back, Jeremy.

Everything the platform work has produced so far, granular and navigable. This is the review surface — the vision, the five load-bearing pillars, the tier model, the design method, the estate map, the nine-track roadmap, and the first fully-worked architecture decision (ADR-001), pressure-tested by an adversarial design panel. Click into anything.

Where to start: if you want the story, read the Vision → the Pillars → the Tiers. If you want the engineering meat, jump straight to ADR-001 and its design panel.

01The Foundation — what & why

A · MACRO
Vision & Interaction Model
What we're building in one paragraph, and the interaction stack: AI-curated home → boards → live events → DMs, with tier gating depth.
Open →
B · STRUCTURE
The 5 Load-Bearing Pillars
Identity spine · shell + design system · content/interaction model · AI as a first-class service · service topology on dedicated iron. The hard commitments everything depends on.
Open →
C · MEMBERS
Tiers & Member Walkthrough
Guest · Member · Inner Circle · Founding — and exactly what each of the four experiences from the first 15 minutes to the end of week one.
Open →

02The Method & the Map — how we decide

D · METHOD
Design Method
Frontier research sweep → adversarial thinker-canon design panel → estate-integration map → agentic where it earns it. How every track gets decided.
Open →
E · REUSE
Estate → Track Map
What we've already built across the GitHubs, honestly scoped against each track: deep reuse (AI, governance), gaps (identity, video, payments), and the agent-infra that doesn't fit.
Open →
F · ROADMAP
The 9-Track Roadmap
E1 iron · E2 learning core · E3 identity · E4 community · E5 realtime · E6 AI · E7 video · E8 premium/payments · E9 governance. Each maps to the pillars.
Open →

03The Engineering Meat — worked decisions (ADRs)

ALL 9 TRACKS · worked by the adversarial panel
Architecture Decision Records — the full set
Every track (E1–E9) worked all the way down by the same 5-lens design panel: options → a divergent panel → a convergent decision → tradeoff matrix → new invariants + required evals → preserved dissent. Nine blind panels converged on one doctrine: own the source-of-truth & the permission authority · rent the commodity · defer the sophistication behind a measured trigger. ADR-001 also drills into its 5-lens panel and a rendered diagram.
Open the ADR index →

04The Competitive Landscape — what to charge & how we win

G · LANDSCAPE · names real competitors + prices on purpose
Competitive Analysis & Deep Dive
Two markets, two questions. Set 1 — membership networks (Vistage, YPO, EO, TIGER 21, Hampton, Chief, Pavilion, Long Angle, R360): the "what you pay to belong" band, ≈ $4.4k → $60k/yr, that tells us what to charge. Set 2 — platform players (Skool, Circle, Mighty, Kajabi, Disco, Whop, Maven, Discourse, Teachable): the $9–$500/mo SaaS landscape that tells us how we stack up as a product. Strategic read: we sell belonging + certification + AI, not tooling — so we price like the networks and win on four axes the SaaS tools can't. Every number cited + verified 2026-07. This section deliberately names competitors — a clearly-scoped exception to the brand-free rule.
Open the Competitive Landscape →
Status. Foundation (vision, pillars, tiers, walkthrough) written. Estate scoped against all 9 tracks. All 9 tracks now worked into ADRs (ADR-001…008) by the adversarial 5-lens panel — 42 agents, converged on a coherent cross-track doctrine. Each ADR carries its own new invariants, required evals, and preserved dissent. No code yet; build later on Fable credits. Next: the three-way tracking skeleton (beads ↔ GitHub ↔ project tracker) turns these into epics + first issues.