On the question of

Should we raise prices in the second quarter to fund hiring, or hold and protect retention?

I · Thesis

Raise. The arithmetic at current lifetime value says we are under-priced; competitors moved roughly eighteen percent in the first quarter and lost no measurable share. Cohorts retained at ninety-four percent through prior changes, and the hiring plan is the load-bearing input on the next two quarters of revenue.

II · Antithesis

Hold. Pricing power on the enterprise tier is unproven; the renewal cluster in March is the figure that actually matters, and a raise priced into that window inverts the math. Hiring runway exists for two more quarters at present burn — speed is not the constraint, conviction is.

III · Synthesis

A measured raise on new logos only, with grandfathering through year-end, funded against a hiring plan that prioritises the support roles renewal risk depends on.

Convene your first council Three deliberations free. No card required. Cancel any time.

Specimen Verdict — A Reader

What a synthesis looks like, in full.

Redacted from a deliberation rendered to a founder, March 2026. The figures are real; the company is not.

Case № 0312·α Convened — XII · III · MMXXVI Disposition — Verdict Rendered

Q.Hire a second senior engineer, or first invest in an internal-tools platform?

Hire the engineer. The internal-tools platform is a six-month detour at best; an additional senior compresses the roadmap by approximately seven weeks within their first quarter^a, and removes the on-call failure mode that has cost two engineering weekends in the past sixty days^b.

The platform investment becomes correct only after a third hire. The diminishing-returns curve on raw engineering capacity does not bend until coordination overhead exceeds throughput, and that point is not yet here. Until it is, every additional engineer is worth more than every additional tool^c.

Move on the hire this quarter. Reserve the platform for the quarter after the third engineer signs.

Rendered by The Bench, sitting as five.
The Synthesizer holds the pen.

The ResearcherSeven weeks is the median across the historical onboarding curve. The Synthesizer holds that the variance is wide enough that the precise figure should not be relied upon — directionally correct, not actuarial.

The VerifierConfirmed against the on-call ledger. The two weekends are not estimates; they are precise.

The Contrarian, dissentingPlatform-first is correct under one specific condition: if the next hire is junior, not senior. The panel rejected the dissent on the framing of the question.

The Bench

Five seats. One question at a time.

Each role is a discipline, not a personality. Each speaks once in opening, once in cross-examination, then yields to the verdict.

The Researcher

Mandate · Assemble what is known.

Cites, qualifies, sources every figure. Speaks the first opening.

The Verifier

Mandate · Contest unsupported claims.

Trusts no figure twice-removed. Strikes what cannot be substantiated.

III

The Contrarian

Mandate · Take the strongest opposite.

Prosecutes the consensus. Holds that the obvious answer is the dangerous one.

The Creative

Mandate · Enlarge the option space.

Proposes what no other seat would have proposed. Cannot vote on the verdict.

The Synthesizer

Mandate · Render the verdict.

Listens through both rounds, decides, and owns the deciding.

In Three Movements

From question to verdict, in sixty to ninety seconds.

Every answer streams as it's produced. You watch the disagreement, then watch it resolve.

Compose

Drop the full context — constraints, options, what success looks like. Optionally chat with a thinking partner first to sharpen the question before it goes to the council.

Deliberate

Four roles answer independently, then critique each other in pairs. Every answer and every pushback is visible — no hidden reasoning.

III

Synthesize

The fifth role reconciles the disagreements into one decisive answer with a confidence score and any unresolved tensions called out.

Subscriptions & Boosters

Three tiers. One unit: a debate.

Calendar-month plans. Hit a cap, drop a $9 booster pack for 25 more debates — no commitment, no wallet UX.

Free

to evaluate the method

3 debates / month
Refine chat: 10 / day
Full deliberation included

Start free

Plus

$19/ month

≈ 19¢ per debate

100 debates / month
Refine chat: 50 / day
Full deliberation included
Booster packs available

Choose Plus

Pro

$49/ month

≈ 16¢ per debate

300 debates / month
Refine chat: 200 / day
Full deliberation included

Choose Pro

Questions & Answers

Questions you'd be right to ask.

How is this different from a regular AI chat tool? ＋

Single-model answers reflect single biases. Dialektik runs your question through five AI roles that answer independently and then critique each other before producing a verdict. You see how the views converged — and where they didn't. The result is an answer that has already survived real intellectual friction, not just an opinion.

How long does a debate take? ＋

Typically 60–90 seconds end to end. Each role's answer streams in as it's produced, then the critiques, then the synthesis arrives token by token. You don't wait for everything to finish before anything appears.

What if I run out of debates mid-month? ＋

Booster packs add 25 debates for $9 — one click, no subscription. Or upgrade to a higher tier and keep the booster headroom for the next time.

Can I cancel anytime? ＋

Yes. Self-serve from the Stripe portal — one click, no questions. Your active period stays valid until the end of the cycle.

What about my data? ＋

Your questions and the answers Dialektik produces are stored on your account so you can revisit threads. We do not use them to train models, we do not sell data, and we do not run advertising. See the privacy policy for the full scope.

The next question awaits.

Three deliberations free. No card required. Cancel any time.

Begin