Superset audit found two real divergences:
- the illustrative all-in fee numbers (5-7%, ~3.6%, 13-16 pts) lived only
in the PR-FAQ; port them into the memo §2/§7 so the memo stays superset
- PR-FAQ said the checkout 'enforces' the FTC 30-Day Rule; the memo is
careful that the duty is the maker's and the platform only *eases* it
(§11) — align the PR-FAQ wording
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
- headline: fix the 'Wiggleverse...Wiggleverse' stutter and lead with
plain benefit (ownership + price) instead of coined jargon; the
commit-then-make positioning stays in the lede where it's defined
- subhead: drop 'stock-then-sell' jargon for 'not just ready-made
inventory'
- replace the already-happy founding-maker quote with a
skeptic-turned-believer (Shopify maker who almost didn't switch:
federation, drops/club, earned referrals, no money touched)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Surface from the strategy memo four answers a launch reviewer expects:
- privacy/consent: 'own the buyer' = usage-rights to a *consented*
relationship (consent at checkout -> maker's ESP), two consent domains,
cross-maker graph opt-in by design, build-to-strictest-law + GDPR (§7/§11)
- the buyer's day-one journey: invisible/maker-fronted at launch, opt-in
'your makers in one place' feed at Phase 2+, never a marketplace
destination (§13)
- explicit falsifiable hypothesis + kill-criteria: dozen-maker gate, the
behavioral demand test, North Star as live kill-signal (§9/§12)
- the non-cashable wallet's stored-value posture and the cashing-out
crossing gated to Phase 2 behind a rented transmitter (§11)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
- remove the duplicated '**How big is the opportunity (TAM)?**' header
- add the 2023 baseline to the Etsy active-seller decline (~9M (2023) → ~5.6M)
so the load-bearing stat carries its timeframe (sources in memo §12)
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
PR-FAQ (Tier-2 reviewer gaps):
- Shopify-copies-the-tool: first-class-not-hard framing + cuttle.xyz/LLM-tool
integration headroom; 'tool is the wedge, network is the moat'
- featured maker's (B-side) consent + economics
- ballpark F (~$75-150k/yr) and the 'F is not the cloud bill' reliability core
- operational drop-time reliability (blast radius + funded core)
Referral-model evolution (PR-FAQ + memo, source-of-truth reconciled):
- platform spread stays FIXED (~3-5%, $-capped) — the network's referral
revenue line, unchanged in §12
- Maker A's reward becomes NEGOTIABLE above the spread (flat/tiered/max-$ cap,
renegotiable), floored at the spread; maker<->maker only
- per-relationship approval: B must approve being curated by A
- ranking-neutrality as a STRUCTURAL guarantee: platform ranks for conversion
but never by referral economics, credible because its spread is constant
- non-maker taste-makers keep uniform, non-biddable rates (peer-respect
counterweight absent)
Memo ports: §2 (first-class/cuttle), §7 Curated-By guardrails + Referral
economics + catalog-presence + taste-maker tier, §7 partner comp, §12 spread
+ Goodhart guardrails.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Surface from the strategy memo into the PR-FAQ four answers a launch
reviewer would expect the doc to stand on its own for:
- per-item provenance mechanism (§7/§10/§11): classes, trust-surface
eligibility, misclassification = de-verification, FTC substantiation
- trust & safety: buyer pre-order/ghosting recourse (§10/§11) and the
anti-collusion / rooted-trust-graph architecture (§7/§10)
- the episodic-campaign incumbents — Kickstarter/Gamefound/BackerKit —
via the campaign-vs-cadence distinction (Appendix B)
- replace the "X%" pricing placeholder with worked illustrative all-in
numbers; fix the imprecise "~20% more of every sale" subhead
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Complete the rename across the PR-FAQ and apply the full-name-once
convention: establish 'Wiggleverse Maker Collective' in the headline,
then 'Maker Collective' thereafter. Rewrite the naming-rationale note
to record the real decision (chosen over both 'Wiggleverse Makers' and
'Wiggleverse Market' because *collective* carries demand-aggregation /
commit-then-make and is deliberately not a marketplace word). Leave
common-noun 'maker(s)' references untouched.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
PR-FAQ revisions (operator-authored): headline "Wiggleverse launches Wiggleverse
Makers"; the platform supports traditional stock-then-sell in addition to
commit-then-make ("many makers" run commit-then-make); the maker keeps their own
storefront/checkout/customers; storefront software optional / bring-your-own;
Curated-By also in email marketing; Seattle dateline; public URL
makers.wiggleverse.org; wording polish.
Strategy memo (§2): propagate the positioning — "many" makers run commit-then-make,
and the platform also handles ordinary stock-then-sell (it is a full storefront)
with commit-then-make as the differentiator ("not just stock-then-sell"); beachhead
community label aligned to "miniatures". PR-FAQ header-note URL also → makers.wiggleverse.org.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
ben.stull