Frame it. Vote. Record. Move.

What it is

Triangle is a way to make consequential decisions in a small group, record how they were reached, and keep that record intact.

It is a structure for decisions that matter enough to be wrong about.

The unit is a triad — three people, one decision. The decision is written as one sentence. Each person votes on each condition the decision rests on. Two of three carries it. The dissent is recorded. The record stays with the decision.

The point

Frame it. Vote. Record. Move.

The process

Seven steps. Paper and pen. Three people. One decision at a time.

1. Surface the decision.Write it as one sentence. If it has "and" in it, split it into two decisions.
2. Choose a facilitator.The facilitator structures the agenda, frames the conditions, and closes with a review. They design the meeting. The facilitator is also a voter.
3. Form the triad.Ask the group: who are the best three people for this decision? Anyone who wants to be in it volunteers. Anyone willing to take part is eligible.
4. Frame the conditions.Before anyone votes, the facilitator names the conditions the decision rests on. Write each as a yes/no question. Keep it to two or three.
5. Vote — two of three.Each person votes on each condition: yes, no, or neutral. Two out of three yes votes on any resolved condition means it passes. Zero yes votes means it fails.
6. Leave the window open.The amendment window stays open after the meeting. Anyone who was in the triad can change their mind — with reasons.
7. Track it over time.After the decision, write down what actually happened. Did the expected outcome appear? Did it contradict?

Advanced options

Most decisions follow the simple path. Some need more. The full protocol — dependency graphs, revisit alerts, delegated triads, and the amendment window — is described in the advanced protocol.

Note: If a triad needs input from someone outside the three, they may summon an outsider to speak to a condition. The outsider gives input, not a vote. The summoning is recorded. The recommendation is to keep your decisions in the three.

Step 6 — Leave the window open

The amendment window stays open after the meeting.

Each member of the triad can change their mind on something they said during the meeting. They must say what they would change about their own position and why. A reasoned case. This is permitted but not standard practice — the expectation is that positions hold unless the outcome proves them wrong.

The closure period is determined by the Group. In many cases it may be a matter of minutes after the meeting. After that, the window closes and the decision stands — unless an outcome proves it wrong.

Step 7 — Track it over time

At the next meeting, check where you are with last week's outcomes.

Any triad member can mark an outcome as complete.

If there is disagreement, that can be recorded as in the normal procedure. Dissent requires a reason, and it is strongly recommended.

This is the competence signal. Over time, you see who has been right, on what, and how often. That tells you who to route decisions to next time.

The record

Every decision is written down. The actual record.

The record is preserved when a decision is revisited. The original stands, marked as revisited, with the reasoning and the correction. That is accountability — the presence of a path back.

For multiple decisions

This guide covers one decision with one triad.

When a meeting has several decisions, the agenda is a routing problem. Different decisions may need different triads. The facilitator decomposes the agenda, routes each decision to the right triad, and closes with a review of the whole.

Each decision is a node. Edges record dependency: premise, constraint, or delegation. The structure is a directed acyclic graph.

A triad ruling on a large question spawns the sub-decisions it does not own, each routed to its own triad, in parallel. A triad blocked for want of an input spawns the blocking question and routes it laterally to whoever owns it, rather than escalating to a less-informed authority.

Any decision spawning children should retain a closing decision reviewing the whole. This is specified and being implemented.

Why it works

Three people are better than one when each is more likely right than wrong.

Below that line, adding more people makes the decision worse. The triad captures most of the available gain before the assumptions underwriting it break down, at a fraction of the cost.

Two of three is the minimal structure that treats every voice the same and both sides of a question the same. A supermajority threshold privileges the status quo. Unanimity lets one person hold the whole group. Two of three prefers the outcome that moves, and records the dissent, to the outcome that moves because one person objected.

Recording per condition corrects a measurable bias: because concluding "yes" on a conjunctive decision requires being right about every condition, conclusion-level voting rejects sound multi-condition proposals at a higher rate than the evidence warrants.

The amendment window catches a decision going wrong before the outcome arrives. Revisit alerts flag descendants when a parent is re-decided, so the error is seen at its source and everywhere it landed.

The structure catches error. It keeps error from being permanent, invisible, or unnameable.

Advanced options

For when the simple path doesn't resolve. Most meetings won't need them.

Facilitator agreed

If the group settles on a facilitator by discussion:

1. Vote.Each person names one facilitator. You cannot vote for yourself.
2. The person with the most votes facilitates.
3. If there is a tie, draw lots.Write the tied names on paper, pull from a hat.

This is the same pattern as forming the triad: the community's knowledge of who is best suited is the signal. Voting surfaces it. Lots resolve what the community can.

Neutral votes — detail

A neutral vote means: I do not have a position on this condition.

It is not "maybe." It is not "I abstain." It is: this condition is not one I can judge on the information I have, or it is not relevant to my part in this decision.

• A neutral vote does not count toward the two-of-three.
• A condition needs at least two non-neutral votes to be resolved.
• If a condition has fewer than two non-neutral votes, it is unresolved. The decision cannot pass on it. The facilitator should ask whether the condition needs reframing, more information, or a different triad.

Why this exists: sometimes a condition genuinely does not apply to one member of the triad — they lack the knowledge, or it falls outside their part of the decision. Forcing a yes/no produces noise. Neutral produces a signal: this condition needs attention.

It creates a third outcome. The decision still passes or fails on each condition. Neutral just means the condition is yet settled.

Get started

Three people. Paper and pen. A decision to make.

That's it. You do not need software. You do not need a rollout. You need one decision that matters and three people who can decide it.