# Braindump synthesis

_Generated 2026-10-19 from sample.csv · 12 responses · 71 points · 2 themes · model `tinfoil/glm-5.3`_

Counts below are computed from the extracted points, not estimated by the model. Quotes are verbatim from the responses. The full responses are in the appendix.

## Priorities (pick up to 3)

_12 of 12 responses answered._

- ████████████ **4** · privacy
- ████████████ **4** · governance and participation
- █████████ **3** · pricing and fairness
- █████████ **3** · docs and onboarding
- █████████ **3** · API and developer tooling
- █████████ **3** · model choice
- █████████ **3** · community and chat
- ██████ **2** · owning our own infrastructure
- ██████ **2** · green energy

## Themes

| # | Theme | People | Points | For / Against |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Own the stack | 7 | 36 | 36 / 0 |
| 2 | Institutional access | 6 | 35 | 35 / 0 |

### 1. Own the stack

_7 of 12 people · 36 idea_

Self-hosting versus buying tokens.

Points raised:

- point about Q6 from r06
- point about Q1 from r07
- point about Q2 from r07
- point about Q3 from r07
- point about Q4 from r07
- point about Q5 from r07
- point about Q6 from r07
- point about Q1 from r08
- point about Q2 from r08
- point about Q3 from r08
- point about Q4 from r08
- point about Q5 from r08
- point about Q6 from r08
- point about Q7 from r08
- point about Q1 from r09
- point about Q2 from r09
- point about Q3 from r09
- point about Q4 from r09
- point about Q5 from r09
- point about Q1 from r10
- point about Q2 from r10
- point about Q3 from r10
- point about Q5 from r10
- point about Q6 from r10
- point about Q1 from r11
- point about Q2 from r11
- point about Q3 from r11
- point about Q4 from r11
- point about Q5 from r11
- point about Q6 from r11
- point about Q1 from r12
- point about Q2 from r12
- point about Q3 from r12
- point about Q4 from r12
- point about Q5 from r12
- point about Q7 from r12

> "I disagree with adding providers that" (r06, Q6)
> "I run a small nonprofit and" (r07, Q1)
> "Governance nerd. I barely use the" (r08, Q1)
> "Needed an API for a side" (r09, Q1)

### 2. Institutional access

_6 of 12 people · 35 idea_

Group and org accounts.

Points raised:

- point about Q1 from r01
- point about Q2 from r01
- point about Q3 from r01
- point about Q4 from r01
- point about Q5 from r01
- point about Q6 from r01
- point about Q1 from r02
- point about Q2 from r02
- point about Q3 from r02
- point about Q4 from r02
- point about Q5 from r02
- point about Q6 from r02
- point about Q7 from r02
- point about Q1 from r03
- point about Q2 from r03
- point about Q3 from r03
- point about Q4 from r03
- point about Q5 from r03
- point about Q6 from r03
- point about Q1 from r04
- point about Q2 from r04
- point about Q3 from r04
- point about Q5 from r04
- point about Q1 from r05
- point about Q2 from r05
- point about Q3 from r05
- point about Q4 from r05
- point about Q5 from r05
- point about Q6 from r05
- point about Q7 from r05
- point about Q1 from r06
- point about Q2 from r06
- point about Q3 from r06
- point about Q4 from r06
- point about Q5 from r06

> "Privacy. I wanted an AI I" (r01, Q1)
> "Green energy mostly. I teach and" (r02, Q1)
> "Curiosity about co-op governance. I use" (r03, Q1)
> "A friend invited me. I mostly" (r04, Q1)

## Standout ideas

_Raised by one person, specific enough to be worth a look._

- **point about Q1 from r01** (idea)  
  "Privacy. I wanted an AI I" (r01, Q1)

## Notable dissent

_Places where people pull in different directions. Worth time in the meeting._

- **Own the stack**: Cost doubts.
  > "Nice work on the dashboard." (r12, Q7)

## Open questions for the group

1. Institutional tier? _(from r01)_
2. Bare string question

## Appendix: all responses, verbatim

### What drew you to the co-op, and what do you use it for today?

- **r01:** Privacy. I wanted an AI I could use for client work without feeding a big vendor. Mostly chat, some API from scripts.
- **r02:** Green energy mostly. I teach and wanted something I could recommend to students with a straight face.
- **r03:** Curiosity about co-op governance. I use the API from a small writing tool I maintain.
- **r04:** A friend invited me. I mostly use the chat for drafting emails.
- **r05:** Wanted to support a cooperative alternative. I use it daily for coding help.
- **r06:** Privacy and the TEE story. Chat only.
- **r07:** I run a small nonprofit and we needed shared AI access we could justify ethically.
- **r08:** Governance nerd. I barely use the models; I joined for the experiment.
- **r09:** Needed an API for a side project and liked the values.
- **r10:** Climate reasons.
- **r11:** Wanted to try open-weight models without setting up my own box. Mostly chat and a bit of API.
- **r12:** Someone mentioned it at a Metagov call.

### Ideas. What should the co-op build, try, or offer next?

- **r01:** A shared prompt library members can contribute to. Also a Matrix bot that answers questions about the docs.
- **r02:** Classroom or group accounts: one payment, several seats, shared budget.
- **r03:** An institutional or app-partner membership so projects like mine can buy inference for their users through the co-op instead of each user joining separately.
- **r04:** Voice mode on the phone app.
- **r05:** Self-host at least one open model on our own hardware so we are not just reselling other people's APIs.
- **r06:** Private web search inside the enclave instead of our own SearXNG.
- **r07:** Group accounts with a shared budget and an admin who can see spend per seat.
- **r08:** Publish a monthly financial and usage report and discuss it on Loomio.
- **r09:** An Anthropic-compatible /v1/messages endpoint that is actually documented and tested, so Claude-style clients just work.
- **r10:** Default every new member to the greenest model, not the fastest.
- **r11:** Image generation in the chat picker, not hidden behind an integration button.
- **r12:** A quarterly braindump like this one, and a public roadmap page built from it.

### Wants. What would make membership more valuable to you personally?

- **r01:** A cheaper tier for light users; I barely touch my allowance most months.
- **r02:** Being able to see the energy and emissions per conversation, not just tokens.
- **r03:** Stable model names. When tinfoil/glm-5-3-flash disappeared my app broke.
- **r04:** Honestly it is fine as is.
- **r05:** Higher allowance for people who pay more; the flat $15 cap makes paying extra feel pointless.
- **r06:** Nothing specific.
- **r07:** An invoice I can hand to our bookkeeper instead of an Open Collective receipt.
- **r08:** Real decision rights, not advisory votes.
- **r09:** Per-key spend limits so one script cannot burn my whole month.
- **r10:** A badge or summary of emissions avoided versus a mainstream provider.
- **r11:** Longer memory across chats.
- **r12:** Knowing what other members are working on; a members directory people opt into.

### Needs. What is missing, broken, or in your way right now?

- **r01:** The chat loses my place on mobile when I switch apps. Also the model picker names are confusing (dotted vs dashed slugs).
- **r02:** Onboarding email landed in spam for two of my students. The email-must-match rule tripped one of them.
- **r03:** No deprecation notice period for models. No status page.
- **r05:** Tool calling is flaky on some models and there is no doc saying which ones support it.
- **r06:** The chat is slow to start on voice sometimes.
- **r07:** The dashboard shows my usage but not my organization's.
- **r08:** The charter still says decisions are not binding.
- **r09:** Budget exceeded errors arrive mid-stream with no warning beforehand.
- **r11:** Image models in the picker caused 500 errors and then got removed with no explanation.
- **r12:** Matrix invites arrived before I knew what Matrix was. A one-page explainer would help.

### Goals. Where should the co-op be a year from now?

- **r01:** Fifty members, real elections, and at least one model we host ourselves.
- **r02:** A recognized option for universities and nonprofits, with an institutional tier.
- **r03:** A documented SLA-ish commitment, even an informal one, and a changelog members can subscribe to.
- **r04:** More members so it keeps existing.
- **r05:** Our own GPU box, even a small one, and a path to more.
- **r06:** Keep it small and trustworthy. Growth is not a goal for me.
- **r07:** An institutional tier with clear terms and pricing.
- **r08:** A functioning member-elected board and a budget members approve.
- **r09:** A developer-friendly gateway people choose on merit, not only on values.
- **r10:** Carbon accounting published per month.
- **r11:** More models, including vision, at the same price.
- **r12:** A community that knows itself, not just a service.

### Dissent. What worries you, what do you disagree with, or what are we getting wrong?

- **r01:** I worry we are spreading across too many providers. Three providers is already hard to explain to a new member.
- **r02:** Not dissent exactly, but the Loomio threads are long and I cannot keep up.
- **r03:** I think the terms forbidding any redistribution of access will block exactly the kind of mission-aligned projects we say we want.
- **r05:** Self-hosting will cost more than buying tokens and we should be honest about that before voting for it.
- **r06:** I disagree with adding providers that are only policy-private. It dilutes the one thing that made me join.
- **r07:** The pay-what-you-can model is lovely but I suspect it is not covering costs. Show us the numbers.
- **r08:** We keep adding features before we have governance. Build the decision process first.
- **r10:** Tinfoil is not green and we should say so more plainly on the models page.
- **r11:** I do not think self-hosting is worth it at our size.

### Anything else?

- **r02:** Thank you for doing this.
- **r05:** Happy to help with ops.
- **r08:** Could we do these braindumps every quarter?
- **r12:** Nice work on the dashboard.

## Processing notes

3 extracted point(s) were discarded because their quote could not be verified against the source text or they referenced an unknown response.