Product Design Principles

1. Power to the people

Structure, protection, action

This principle provides the container. Good security and structure help keep people safe and take action. Without strong protection, clear boundaries, and decisive action, people can’t relax enough to be vulnerable or playful. Similarly, if a tool is hard to use, people will choose easier, less safe options.

Protect by default. When uncertain about privacy, choose the safer option. People should only share information through explicit choice.
Make safety and boundaries visible. Users must always know if their actions are safe or might expose themselves or others to risk. Have I crossed a boundary?
Clarity, not cleverness. Make things simple and easy to understand. People should understand how something works and why they see what they see. Use clear information hierarchy, clear words, clear buttons, and clear steps—especially critical as people under stress need things to be obvious. The test: "Can you easily tell what to do next?”
Less is more. Do a few things well rather than many things poorly.
Favor decisive action: When someone is ready to act, make it fast and easy to do so. The app should be fast and snappy, not sluggish.
Progressive mastery. Beginners should find it easy; experienced users find it powerful. Help them get to that stage without making things harder for beginners (see Design for conviviality)

The test: Can people at risk actually use this safely? Would you trust it with your own security?

2. Care for the collective

Nurturing, relationships, sustainability

The care principle provides nourishment. Honor human rhythms and care about people’s time and wellbeing. Without care for human rhythms, collective awareness, and preventing burnout, a secure tool for important work can feel like a bunker.

Help people see the group and the bigger picture. “Who else is working on this?” matters as much as “What’s the task?” Prefer “we” over “I” where possible. Focus on the holistic picture, highlighting interdependence, relationships, and mutual accomplishments.
It’s not all about productivity. When designing social features, bias toward “how can people help each other?” rather than just “how can people work together efficiently?” Sometimes the “slower” path that builds relationships is better.
Give things time. Groups need time and space to get things done. For important work, time is not an acceptable reason for compromise.
Stay together through conflict. The tool should help groups navigate disagreement constructively, without fracturing. It should help groups metabolize difficult information while staying calm and civil.
Surface quiet voices. Make invisible exclusion visible. Who’s being ignored? Who needs an invitation?
Invite, don’t demand. Between mandatory and optional, err towards optional. Let people give what they can when they can.
Support rest and care. Prevent burnout. Encourage stepping back. Allow for passive participation, and make it easy to catch up without feeling lost. People should be able to step back without being or feeling excluded.

The test: Do people burn out using it?

3. Design for conviviality/togetherness

Inclusivity, joy, emergence

The convivial principle provides the spirit. Everybody can use the app, and it’s actually enjoyable. An encrypted tool shouldn’t become militaristic or paranoid - encryption is what creates safe space for authentic, joyful organizing where things emerge spontaneously.

Joy is not frivolous. Add moments of delight, humor, celebration. The real world is heavy and gray - make people smile. Allow spontaneity and serendipity without descending into chaos or information overload.

Example: Borrow messenger app energy: low friction to send messages, personal feeling, emoji reactions, presence
Works for everyone. Works on phones, works offline, works everywhere, and bakes in real accessibility, at all levels. Could a 14-year-old and a 70-year-old both use this? Accessibility and security should reinforce each other.
Get out of the way. The tool should disappear into the work. When adding features ask: does this make people think about the app, or let them think about their organizing?
People control their methods. Don’t prescribe workflows - enable them. Defaults should err towards permissive, and anyone should be able to do things.
Allow reuse and remix. When groups use features differently than intended, let them. Forks and weird adaptations are features. The tool should enable creativity and local adaptation in order to stay resilient.
Exit-friendly. Allow people to take what they need, with no lock-in. Avoid using proprietary formats or data.
Default options should be smart, with configuration available: The app should work out of the box, with progressive disclosure of configuration. Most people shouldn’t need to think about it, but anyone who needs it should be able to customize.

The test: Do people actually WANT to use it?

How to use these principles

Each principle reinforces the others.

Too much security and structure without nourishment and conviviality can make it feel like you’re using an authoritarian tool that’s no fun, or enacting security for the sake of it.
Care and empathy without structure and conviviality can lead to well-meaning chaos or paralysis where everyone’s needs matter equally but important work or decisions don’t take place.
Conviviality without structure or care can feel like a fun tool to hang out in, but one that doesn’t really protect you or get things done.

All must be in balance to create a tool that feels whole. If something feels wrong or off, the app has probably over-indexed on one over the others.

If you’re stuck on a design question, run it through all three principles.

For example, should we do @mentions to someone? How should we handle them?

Yes, because sometimes we need to decide urgently
Yes, but maybe we make a distinction between a “gentle notification” vs “urgent notification” distinction for different levels of involvements
Yes, but it should feel like a friendly tap on the shoulder, not an authoritarian demand