From bd0e7854a404e4c0305be4948b6682b3ee7530b4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: porbot Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 17:02:45 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Thin BUSINESS_PLAN: keep scorecard essence, drop speculative packaging Scribe agreed direction only; open discussion stays out of POR. --- docs/strategy/BUSINESS_PLAN.md | 14 ++++---------- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/strategy/BUSINESS_PLAN.md b/docs/strategy/BUSINESS_PLAN.md index 32ccef3..bad148b 100644 --- a/docs/strategy/BUSINESS_PLAN.md +++ b/docs/strategy/BUSINESS_PLAN.md @@ -9,6 +9,7 @@ - Prefer revising this over spawning parallel strategy docs. - Mark unknowns as open questions. Do not invent market numbers here. - Nothing is locked until Ty says so. Checkpoint working directions; revise freely as the conversation matures. +- Scribe the **essence** of agreed direction. Do not promote open-discussion packaging/options into POR until they stick. --- @@ -88,14 +89,7 @@ POR work: an intuitive scorecard a business owner understands. Top-level outcome Keep to **three top-line outcomes**, each with plain “why not yet” underneath — not a 40-row SEO audit. Dual scoreboard still applies: hygiene work feeds rungs 1–2; recommendability is the differentiation line. -**Open — measuring “would recommend” (working packaging idea, not locked):** - -- **Owner input:** business owner describes the business in their own words — what they want to be “known for.” GeoLocal derives the query set from that + place + category; owner does not invent keywords. -- **Routine queries:** generate from that input, then freeze a small static set (roughly 5–10), re-run routinely — not a giant library. -- **Free tier (idea):** one real live ping (e.g. ChatGPT), capped (e.g. one run per business), plus a free heuristic so the scorecard isn’t blank if the ping fails. -- **Paid (idea):** same questions across a versioned panel of popular AI assistants (names will drift — treat panel as versioned, not sacred). - -Honesty / cost / abuse controls still TBD. +**Agreed essence so far:** scorecard is owner-plain (exist / know what you do / would recommend), not a long SEO audit. How we *measure* “would recommend” (heuristics vs live assistant checks, free vs paid depth) is still open discussion — do not treat packaging ideas as POR until Ty says they stick. ### Free path after checkup (working direction — not locked) @@ -147,14 +141,14 @@ If something here conflicts with `CANONICAL_STRATEGY.md`, resolve on purpose in | 2026-09-15 | Process: nothing locked yet — distill POR as we build; porbot scribes so key insights are not lost | | 2026-09-15 | Working nuance: 2017 hygiene usually first *fix* work; dual scoreboard from day one (hygiene + AI recommendability); skip forced hygiene phase if foundation already solid | | 2026-09-15 | Working direction: owner scorecard ladder — knows you exist / knows what you do / would recommend you (wording TBD); open whether v1 recommend = heuristic vs live assistant pings | -| 2026-09-15 | Working idea: owner “known for” → small frozen query set; free = capped single live ping + heuristic; paid = versioned multi-assistant panel | +| 2026-09-15 | Process note: scribe essence of agreed direction only — exploratory packaging stays out of POR until it sticks | --- ## Next conversation topics 1. Wordsmith the three scorecard rungs; define plain “why not yet” evidence under each -2. Decide free/paid assistant-ping packaging (caps, panel list, heuristic fallback) and cost/abuse controls +2. How to measure “would recommend” honestly (still open) 3. Primary reader for v1 of this plan (internal / investors / partners) 4. Offer / packaging detail (what free record includes vs what paid unlocks beyond fulfillment) — no invented numbers 5. 90-day proof: what “reputable enough that AI checks us” requires in coverage and quality