LCOS PRD Sharpening Pass
Problem Statement
How might we make the LCOS PRD specific enough that a developer or designer can build from it without asking clarifying questions?
Recommended Direction
Apply 13 targeted fixes to the PRD — no new features, no scope changes. Each fix either resolves a developer blocker, eliminates an internal contradiction, or replaces a vague statement with a concrete one.
Fixes to Apply to the PRD
Developer Blockers
- Awareness quorum — Define “viewed” as: Decision detail page loaded + ≥20s on page or scrolled past first section
- Anonymous member posting — Clarify they can post Needs and claim Offers; cannot post credit-rated Offers
- Commons Fund + anonymous members — Stewards can submit Perspectives on behalf of anonymous members in Fund allocation Decisions
- “How to respond” field — Structured choice: in-platform contact notification OR optional external info; anonymous members default to in-platform only
- Fuzzy boundary format — Phase 1: text description only. Map polygon drawing deferred to Phase 2
- Printable summary scope — Top 10 most recent Registry items + all urgent Needs + remaining Needs by deadline, truncated to one page. Stewards can pin items
- Steward succession “most active” — Defined as: highest logged actions in past 90 days from contribution ledger
- Fractional time credits — Support 0.5 credit (30 min) increments in Phase 1
Internal Contradictions
- “No hard gates” vs. anonymous scoped access — Clarify: no gates based on trust score; membership tier gates are separate and explicitly described
- Free tier excludes Governance — Reconsider: either include Governance on free tier (limit Credits/advanced features only), or make free tier time-limited (90 days full access) rather than feature-limited
- Emergency Mode Phase 2 reference — Add placeholder noting Phase 1 urgent flag UI should not consume full alert color palette, to avoid conflicting with future Emergency Mode
Vague Requirements
- Commons Charter format — Define as structured document with named sections, free-text, version history; closed Decisions optionally append a summary to a relevant section
- Postal mail verification — Remove from Phase 1. Phase 1 verification = organizer invitation or peer vouching only
Not Doing
- Adding new features — this pass is purely tightening
- Changing the architecture or layer structure
- Re-opening decisions made in the brainstorming session
Open Questions Before Build
- Free tier scope: feature-limited vs. time-limited? (affects pilot strategy significantly)
- Legal review engagement: who, when, what scope? (blocks time credit launch)
- Pilot neighborhood selection: criteria for the 3-5 Phase 1 pilots?