# Re-scoring the strategic reviews under ADR-0007 / ADR-0008

- **Date:** 2026-06-29
- **Re-scores:** `2026-06-28-vision-sanity-check.md` (S1–S6) and `2026-06-28-gtm-path.md` (G1–G6, P1–P4, R1)
- **Trigger:** the 2026-06 strategic pivot — ADR-0007 (rent the trunk transport; no first-party SIP stack) + ADR-0008 (the FOB / green-zone build-vs-reuse doctrine). README, ARCHITECTURE, PORT_PLAN, AGENTS all updated to match.

This doc does **not** ratify any strategy changes. It re-scores each finding against the
post-pivot state so the load-bearing decisions surface as actionable items rather than
sitting in unaddressed review docs. Per AGENTS.md, ratification of strategy/ADR changes
warrants the user's signoff — this is the input to that decision, not the decision itself.

---

## Verdict changes (summary)

| Finding | Pre-pivot | Post-pivot | Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| **S1** (wedge leads with contestable determinism) | open | **Strengthened** — pivot ratifies the critique verbatim | Note only |
| **S2** (differentiation valley — pull rung-2 forward) | open, load-bearing | **Sharper but easier** — ADR-0007 retires the longest pole (trunk-SIP rewrite); valley shortens, core thesis stands | Sequencing (capability ladder planning) |
| **S3** (compliance paradox — builders are day-1, not regulated) | open | **Reinforced** — ADR-0007's "PSTN data-ownership is a graduation, not day-one" matches S3's "regulated is the eventual prize, not the beachhead" | Note only (README already honest) |
| **S4** (turn-taking ownership — OpenAI Realtime server VAD vs. core-authoritative) | open, slice-3 spec decision | **Unchanged + clarified** — ADR-0008 makes the OpenAI adapter green-zone and the reflex loop FOB; core-authoritative VAD is the only doctrine-consistent choice | Slice-3 spec decision (deferred until slice-2 green) |
| **S5** (long pole = integration/hardening) | open | **Partially retired** — ADR-0007 retires the named schedule risk (SIP-trunk rewrite); remaining long pole is the reflex loop, which is also the differentiator | Note only |
| **S6** (self-improvement loop is the actual moat) | open | **Strengthened** — ADR-0008 admits "the differentiating" as a FOB criterion; ARCHITECTURE's "Biggest technical risk" re-write makes the same correction from the other end | Note only |
| **G1** (OSS→contract→hosted sequence) | open | **Unchanged** | Note only |
| **G2** (CLA + commercial dual-license before contributor #2) | open — *the* load-bearing finding | **Strengthened + urgent.** ADR-0008 explicitly states multiple coding agents now work this repo — the CLA window is *already closing*. Every commit an agent makes without a CLA in place erodes the option. | **Needs active decision** (not a doc edit) |
| **G3** (services as early engine + tripwires) | open | **Unchanged** | Note only |
| **G4** (hosted = BYO-cloud, not multi-tenant SaaS) | open | **Strengthened** — ADR-0008's green-zone framing makes multi-tenant SaaS a doctrine violation (FOB-protected data on green-zone infrastructure) | Note only |
| **G5** (open-core seam: free wedge, paid convenience/scale) | open | **Unchanged** — gated by G2 | Note only |
| **G6** (bootstrap-via-services → optional raise) | open | **Unchanged** | Note only |
| **P1** (identity: substrate, not contact-center engine) | open, high-leverage | **Sharpened** — pivot makes the "white space = contact-center + reflex/eval loop + tap-as-open-protocol" framing explicit; README still says "AI-era contact center." Positioning decision. | Positioning decision |
| **P2** (beachhead: outbound + compliance, gated by R1) | open, gated by R1 | **Reshaped but not retired** — ADR-0007 makes outbound *easier* (no trunk to build; CPaaS call-control API for outbound dial); R1's consented-enterprise scoping + AUP guardrails stand | Sequencing decision |
| **P3** (north star: nothing leaves your boundary, including the model) | open, directional | **Strengthened as direction** — ADR-0008 admits the brain as green-zone but doesn't prevent an in-boundary open-weights brain later; the tap is brain-agnostic | Note only |
| **P4** (form: "Home Assistant for voice AI") | open, later identity | **Unchanged** | Note only |
| **R1** (outbound beachhead is double-edged) | open, gates P2 | **Unchanged** — guardrails stand | Note only |

---

## The one finding that needs active decision: G2

> **Adopt a contributor-licensing posture (DCO at minimum; CLA with copyright control
> if you want the commercial options open) before merging the first external PR.**

ADR-0008 explicitly states: *"multiple coding agents now work this repo and need one
explicit, mechanical rule so they classify consistently."* The same observation applies
to copyright: every commit an agent makes without a CLA in place narrows the option to
ever go AGPL, dual-license commercially, or sell paid-embedding. None of these must be
*used* — but all close silently without a CLA.

Today the user is the sole author → total copyright control is free. The CLA question
becomes irreversible the moment an external PR merges. Coding agents (me included) are
in a gray zone — derivative work made at the user's direction is the user's, but if the
project ever wants to dual-license, the chain of authorship needs to be clean.

**This is a strategy decision the user must make consciously; I cannot ratify it
automatically.** The action item is: address G2 before merging any external PR (and
ideally before the project's identity pivots — P1 — gets committed to positioning that
might attract contributors).

---

## Findings now folded into the pivot itself

These findings were *ratified* by ADR-0007 / ADR-0008 — the docs now carry the position
the review advocated. No further action beyond recording the alignment:

- **S1** (wedge emphasis on determinism is the contestable leg): ARCHITECTURE.md's
  "Biggest technical risk" rewrite ("no longer the SIP stack → the reflex loop itself,
  which is also the differentiator") is the same correction the review raised. Pivot
  ratifies S1.
- **S3** (compliance paradox — builders, not regulated, are day-1): ADR-0007's "PSTN
  data-ownership dilutes in layer 1; it's a graduation" matches the review's "regulated
  is the eventual prize reached via the builder persona, not the beachhead." README
  already re-scoped wedge bullet 2 honestly.
- **S5** (long pole = integration/hardening, AI helps least): ADR-0007 retires the
  named schedule risk (SIP-trunk rewrite) and redirects the solo-years to the
  differentiation surface. The remaining long pole (reflex loop hardening) is also the
  differentiator, so it's not undifferentiated plumbing. S5 substantially dissolves.
- **S6** (the self-improvement loop is the actual moat, not determinism): ADR-0008's
  FOB admission criteria make the data/eval loop FOB-by-doctrine (it's differentiating);
  ARCHITECTURE's risk rewrite makes the same correction.

---

## Findings that remain open + actionable

- **S2** (differentiation valley — pull rung-2 forward): **sequencing work, not doc
  work.** ADR-0007 shortened the valley, but the core thesis (spearhead-end = Vapi
  parity; differentiation lives in capability ladder + spend-gate) stands. When
  scheduling rung-2 (human takeover via audiohook), weigh against the spearhead's
  "brutally thin" mandate.
- **S4** (turn-taking ownership at the tap): **slice-3 spec decision.** Unchanged by
  the pivot; ADR-0008 clarifies it. Slice-3 spec must make "who owns turn detection"
  an explicit decision defaulting to **core-authoritative, brain VAD off**, with the
  integration cost budgeted. Deferred until slice-2 lands green.
- **G2** (CLA posture): **needs active user decision.** See section above.
- **P1** (identity: substrate, not contact-center engine): **positioning decision.**
  README still says "AI-era contact center." The pivot sharpens the alternative framing
  ("self-hostable voice-agent substrate") without endorsing it. User's call.
- **P2** (beachhead: outbound + compliance, gated by R1): **sequencing decision.**
  ADR-0007 makes outbound easy (rented CPaaS call-control API), but R1's guardrails
  (consented enterprise outbound, sell-through-contract, AUP) still gate the beachhead.

---

## Findings unchanged (recorded for completeness)

G1, G3, G4, G5, G6, P3, P4, R1 — see the GTM and vision-sanity-check docs for their
original rationale. None of these were materially moved by the pivot; their original
verdicts and decision-implied items stand.

---

## Reference: the load-bearing pivot docs

- [ADR-0007](../adr/0007-trunk-rented-transport.md) — rent the trunk transport; no
  first-party SIP stack. Supersedes ADR-0003.
- [ADR-0008](../adr/0008-fob-and-green-zone.md) — the FOB / green-zone build-vs-reuse
  doctrine.
- [Vision sanity-check](2026-06-28-vision-sanity-check.md) — the original review
  (S1–S6).
- [GTM / positioning / pivots](2026-06-28-gtm-path.md) — the original review
  (G1–G6, P1–P4, R1).
