Product Definition: The Fork We Need to Resolve

Why this doc exists: the team currently has two different ideas of what we're building. That's the real source of our friction — not disagreement on quality, but on direction.

The Two Versions in Play

A — The Philosophical Vision: Open, free, decentralized debate space. Anyone can join. No central server. Moderated by community common sense. It tends to be connected to "serious topics" — science.

B — Private Community: Once users imagine using this in their worlds, the model that clicks is a private, controlled knowledge space — internal docs, tutorials, invited members only. Low troll risk, because the space is bounded, not because of moderation. Here the admin has the power of who is invited and what their permission level.

A Way These Might Not Actually Conflict

Nodo (centralized knowledge) → this is Version B. A bounded, owned space. Solves moderation. Has a business model.

Redes de nodos (network of nodes) → this delivers Version A's promise without an open free-for-all: no single server owns everything, but freedom lives in how independent nodes link to each other — not in having zero boundaries anywhere.

Decisions We Still Need to Make

Who do we design for first — an org buying seats, or an open community?
What's the business model — who pays, for what unit (the node? the amount of members?)
What happens at the network layer when content crosses from a moderated node into a shared/public context?
How much of the vision is product vs. company narrative — big vision is fine, but we need to focus on realistic use cases.

Suggested Next Steps

Working session core team — just to agree on product definition - Write one sentence defining the product that everyone can point to.
Work on a specific user journeys.
Keep the granular comment/link-at-any-level mechanic, the goal here is how we make these core tools more clear and obvious.