aibook-fun/AiBook_Spec.md

title, type, status, owner, launch-target, last-updated, companions

title	type	status	owner	launch-target	last-updated	companions
AIBook.fun — Product Specification	spec	draft	Patrick (Product)	2026-09-26	2026-08-26	AiBook_PRD.md AiBook_Implementation_Plan.md

📚 AIBook.fun — Product Specification

Status: DRAFT. This spec is the thinking behind the product — the vision, the principles, the model. The PRD turns it into requirements; the Implementation Plan turns it into a schedule. Commercial figures and unconfirmed terms here are planning assumptions, not commitments, and must not be quoted externally until signed off (§8). See Appendix — What changed for how this revision differs from the prior draft.

---

TL;DR

AIBook.fun is a living, crowd-written field guide to using AI agents responsibly at work. Its unit of value is a workflow you can run — a documented, tested recipe for doing a real job with AI, including the guardrails. It launches as an annual subscription via Kickstarter on September 26, 2026.

The product does four jobs, in priority order:

1. Teach practitioners how to actually use AI — from tested workflows, not hype. (This is v1.)
2. Fund & assemble a founding community through the Kickstarter. (This is v1.)
3. Reward contribution so the book stays current — the "living" part. (Design it now, prove it just after launch.)
4. Connect readers into the wider WeOwnNet ecosystem. (Ongoing, low-effort.)

The hard truth this spec insists on: jobs 1–2 are the launch; jobs 3–4 are layers we build on top of a proven core. Trying to ship all four at once is how a small team ships none well.

One-sentence pitch (utility-first): "Steal 20 tested AI workflows you can run this week — from a living guide that practitioners keep current, and that you can help write."

---

1. Vision & the core loop

The prior draft's slogan was "turn the Book from an artifact into an engine." That's the right ambition — but an engine needs one cylinder firing before you add the rest. Here is the cylinder:

   READ a workflow  →  RUN the Try-it (~15 min)  →  SHARE the result  →  (come back)

Everything else the product wants to be — a contributor economy, a cohort program, an onboarding corpus for AI agents — is a layer built on top of this loop, and only worth building once the loop demonstrably works. We measure that with one number, Activation: did a reader run at least one workflow within 14 days? (Full metric set in PRD §8.)

The product in layers

Layer	What	When
Core (v1)	Subscription book of tested workflows + read→run→share loop	Launch
Contribution	Readers submit their own workflows (needs a real incentive — see §3)	Just after launch
Cohorts	"Book Circles," Workflow-of-the-Week showcase	After content proves demand
Agent-native	Same content, read by AI agents to onboard	Deliberate future use of the format
Ecosystem funnel	Backers flow into wider WeOwnNet programs	Ongoing

---

2. Principles (the hard boundaries)

These are gates, not preferences — a workflow or a claim either clears them or it doesn't ship.

1. Grounded in practice. Every workflow documents a real method: problem → constraints → steps → safeguards → evidence. No theory without a runnable shape. The steps show the actual tool output, because "it works" is something the reader verifies, not something we assert.
2. Responsible by design. The responsible-AI guardrails (data handling, human oversight, failure modes) are part of every workflow template — not an appendix, not an afterthought.
3. Open contribution, curated quality. Anyone can propose a workflow; curators and co-authors review before it's published. (The incentive that makes people actually contribute is still an open decision — see §3 and D-2.)
4. Ownership as a reason to stay, not the reason to buy. The buyer's job is utility ("help me do a thing this week"). Community and ownership are what turn a reader into a member — they're the retention layer, not the opening pitch.
5. The boundary is the product. No general-purpose-chatbot claims, no regulated advice on the book's own authority, and one honest set of claims (nothing draft presented as final).

---

3. Actors & the contributor question

Actor	Who	Their job	The boundary
Reader / subscriber	Practitioners (real estate, financial advisors, fractional execs, higher ed, communities, tech)	Get current, trustworthy AI workflows to apply this week	Pays for access (~$47/yr — draft)
Co-author	Confirmed: three founders across RE/FA, C-suite, and tech. Potential: two more for Higher Ed & Communities	Own a vertical; write and curate its workflows	Content follows the template; curated
Curator / editor	Co-authors + community editors	Keep the quality bar; run the editorial pipeline	Curating ≠ owning the platform
Affiliate	Community, podcast, press	Refer backers; earn commission	Commission rates below
Ecosystem prospect	Anyone not yet in WeOwnNet	Learn responsible AI; maybe get involved	Becomes a funnel lead
AI agent	Ecosystem agents (future layer)	Read the book as an onboarding corpus	Optimized-for-later, not a launch requirement

Who it's not for: people wanting AI theory with no practice behind it; anyone seeking regulated professional advice from the book itself; teams wanting private hosted infrastructure (out of scope).

The contributor economy — say what it actually is

This is the most important honesty correction in the spec. The prior draft presented a "Reader → Owner → Contributor → Governance" ownership ladder and a table of contributor income. Read the mechanics closely and the income is affiliate commission for referring backers — not payment for writing workflows.

Role	What they actually earn today
Reader / backer	Access
Community affiliate	10% commission — for referring backers
Co-author	15% commission — for referring backers (plus a byline for writing)
Podcast / press	10% / 5% commission — for referring backers
Curator / editor	Nothing documented — royalty mechanic is unresolved

So today, writing a workflow earns a byline; referring a backer earns money. That's a referral program, not a contributor economy. For the "living book" thesis to be real, writing good content has to pay — and how it pays is decision D-2, which this spec argues is launch-blocking, not a later nicety. Until it's resolved, v1 is honestly an authored book (a founding set of co-authors), with open paid contribution as the very next thing built.

---

4. The product: a book built from workflows

4.1 The unit of content — a Workflow Recipe

One template, used for every entry. The template is the quality guarantee — the structural answer to "how do I know this isn't hallucinated AI advice?"

Field	What it captures
Problem (the job)	The real task the workflow solves
Actors	Who runs it — person, role, or AI agent
Method	Ordered, reproducible steps — showing real tool output, not describing it
Safeguards	Data handling, human oversight, failure modes, escalation
Evidence	The documented result — artifacts or metrics
Try-it	A ~15-minute do-it-yourself exercise
Costs	Model/tool costs where known — honesty about economics
Author & sources	Who, when, which vertical, with citations

Chapters are curated collections of these per vertical. Editions refresh annually — which is the honest justification for a subscription: AI moves fast enough that a static book goes stale, so the value is in staying current.

4.2 Seed the shelf before you sell tickets (the cold-start rule)

The value proposition is a rich library. The failure mode is a near-empty one. Crowd-sourced libraries reliably die at cold-start: nobody contributes to an empty library (no readers yet), and nobody pays for an empty one (no value yet), so both sides wait forever.

The rule: before we ask anyone to pay, the team and co-authors seed a Minimum Lovable Library — a floor of tested workflows (recommended 15–20 across ≥3 verticals, team to ratify) — themselves. This is a launch gate. Community contribution is what happens after the shelf is worth browsing. (This is the single biggest risk in the whole plan; see PRD §5.2.)

4.3 How people actually learn (the social layer — mostly post-launch)

These methods are what make the book feel alive. They are Layer 3 — designed now, switched on around and after launch, not gating it:

1. Read → Do → Share. Every workflow ends in a Try-it; readers post results back. Learning becomes applied, visible, and contagious.
2. Book Circles. Small cohorts read one workflow a week and review each other's Try-its — the online echo of the in-person retreats.
3. Practice-to-publish. A reader's Try-it result, once curated, can become a micro-contribution — the on-ramp from reader to contributor.
4. Workflow of the Week. A public showcase (site + community + email) — the "open classroom" that makes the book visible to non-subscribers.
5. The Kickstarter as lesson one. Every campaign update ships a mini-lesson — "funded isn't the finish line; here's Chapter 1" — so the campaign itself teaches.

4.4 Digital surface (current state)

Surface	What it is	Status
aibook.fun domain	Public home: pitch, sample workflows, affiliate signup, campaign link	Parked — expires 09-05, renew immediately
Landing page (built)	A staged proof-of-concept, ready to review and push live	Staged locally, not yet public
Subscription access	Digital key → PDF + web reader + annual updates	Not built yet (post-campaign)
Community	Team channel live; cohort spaces not built	Partial
Kickstarter page	Hero video, tiers, stretch goals, FAQ, risks	Not built — build in the weeks before launch

4.5 The Kickstarter package

• Launches 9/26/2026. (The source plan's earlier spring dates are superseded.)
• Goals: $5K min · $35K target · $54K stretch (≈706-backer projection).
• Pledge tiers: ☕ $10 Supporter · 📚 $47 The Book · 🎯 $88 Advisor Bundle · 🏆 $248 VIP · 🤝 $488 Cooperative Patron · 🏛️ $4,888 Founding Sponsor.
• Stretch goals: audiobook ($20K) · workbook ($30K) · video course ($40K) · community ($50K).
• Affiliate (via Kickbooster): co-author 15% · community 10% · podcast 10% · press 5% · 30-day cookie · ~$0 to join · ~10% platform fee on referred pledges.
• Hard constraint — no crypto/Web3/NFT language anywhere public. Kickstarter bans it; a single scrub gate reviews every asset before submission. (See PRD Appendix A.)

---

5. Where it fits in the ecosystem

Connected program	The connection
AgencyPRO	The book is the top of its funnel; sponsors get a bundle
BurnedOutAdvisor	Primary sales/distribution; retreat + media synergy
Webinar program	Backers → webinar → AgencyPRO follow-up
WeOwn.Events	Showcase + retreats scheduling
Email infrastructure	Pre-launch list + campaign sequences
WeOwn.FM	The public "open classroom" broadcast

Keep these as low-effort connections in v1 — the funnel is real value but shouldn't pull focus from the core loop.

---

6. Commercial model (one honest table)

Item	Value	Status
Anchor subscription	$47/yr digital + hardcopy upcharge	Draft — needs commercial re-sign for the 9/26 relaunch
Lifetime access	Proposed; ~$97–147 one-time (figures illustrative — do not quote)	Open decision (D-1)
Contributor royalties	None documented today; current mechanic is affiliate referral only	Open decision (D-2)
Projected revenue	~$53,600 at 706 backers	Draft planning figure
Pre-revenue budget	~$6,000 (ads + KS fees + affiliate fee)	Draft planning figure
"eBookNFT platform"	A future idea; this book is the first product	Not in scope

The rule: no row in this table may be quoted externally until it's signed. Never present a draft or open figure as final. (This is one of the two governance gates worth keeping — see §7.)

The subscription-vs-lifetime tension (worth reasoning through, not deferring)

A ~$97–147 lifetime tier breaks even against $47/yr in about 2–3 years. That directly undercuts the recurring-revenue thesis: either the content genuinely stays valuable (and you're actively selling a money-loser) or it doesn't (and the annual-renewal logic is false). Recommendation: keep $47/yr as the anchor; if you want a lifetime option, bound it as an early-bird instrument to capitalize the community fund (capped quantity), and say so plainly — don't ship recurring and lifetime as equals on vibes.

---

7. Trust & governance (kept proportionate)

The prior draft carried heavy governance machinery for a pre-revenue, unvalidated launch. Two gates prevent real harm and stay sharp; the rest scales up later, with the product.

Keep sharp (active gates):

• No-crypto scrub. Kickstarter will reject crypto/Web3/NFT language. Every public asset is scrubbed against a translation table before submission. This is existential.
• Truth in claims. No draft/unconfirmed figure appears on any external surface. A short claims register tracks each commercial claim and whether it's signed.

Proportionate (plain rules, not ceremony):

• Confidential material never appears in public workflows; examples are non-confidential.
• Instrument events, not content — record that a workflow was used/submitted, never the private content itself.
• Describe data-handling honestly ("your documents stay on your instance") — never claim a security property we haven't verified is on.

One integrity question to resolve (D-6): if the "ownership" story was originally token/NFT mechanics, and all of that is stripped for Kickstarter, does "you own a stake" still describe something real — governance rights? revenue share? credited authorship? — or is it now marketing over an ordinary subscription? Define it concretely or drop the word.

Domain continuity: aibook.fun expires 09-05, three weeks before launch. This isn't a strategic decision — it's a chore. Renew it now. (See Implementation Plan, "Do this week.")

---

8. Open decisions

The genuinely-open strategic calls (the domain "decision" is gone — it's a same-day chore). Each carries a recommendation as a starting point, not a settled answer.

#	Decision	Recommendation
D-1	Lifetime tier — offer it, at what price/position?	Keep $47/yr as the anchor; a lifetime option only as a bounded early-bird capitalization play, not the default.
D-2	Contributor payment — how do people earn for writing workflows, not just referring?	Resolve before launch — it's the engine of the "living book." Royalty pool, per-workflow bounty, or an explicit "v1 authored, paid contribution in Q1."
D-3	Confirm the two unconfirmed co-authors (Higher Ed, Communities)	Confirm this week, or cut those verticals from v1 and add post-launch.
D-4	Refresh the source-of-truth plan to the 9/26 dates & re-signed terms	Do after D-1/D-2 land.
D-5	Human-first or agent-first for v1?	Human-first. Build the format so agents can read it later; optimize v1 for human learners.
D-6	Does "you own a stake" survive as a true claim without token mechanics?	Define ownership concretely, or stop saying it publicly. Add to the claims register.

---

Appendix — What changed in this revision

A plain-language rewrite with a product review folded in. The substance that moved:

1. Core loop + layered model (§1) — v1 is the read→run→share loop; the contributor economy, cohorts, agent-onboarding, and funnel are explicit later layers, not co-equal launch goals.
2. Told the truth about the contributor economy (§3) — it's currently a referral scheme; writing workflows earns a byline, not money. Paid contribution (D-2) is now launch-blocking.
3. Added the cold-start / Minimum Lovable Library rule (§4.2) as the #1 risk and a launch gate.
4. Forced the subscription-vs-lifetime tension into a reasoned recommendation (§6, D-1).
5. Reframed principle 4 — ownership is a reason to stay, not the opening pitch (utility sells; ownership retains).
6. Cut governance to proportionate (§7) — kept the no-crypto scrub and truth-in-claims; dropped the ceremony. Added the "does ownership survive the scrub" integrity question (D-6).
7. Domain demoted from a gated decision to a same-day chore.
8. Translated the jargon out — internal codes, seat/role labels, and merge-history removed from the body. Old cross-references can be mapped back on request.