2026-05-17-billing-pricing-escalation

Long-termPreserved permanentlybilling-sampleMay 1, 2022, 9:24 PM

Post-log (TL;DR)

Committee split 1 yea / 1 nay / 1 abstain on the pricing model overhaul. CEO

# Post-log — Billing committee, pricing model + ethics escalation

**TL;DR:** Committee split 1 yea / 1 nay / 1 abstain on the pricing model overhaul. CEO
Dana declined the tiebreak. **Escalated to founder.**

## Key decisions

- **Proposal:** usage-based pricing with a 30% discount for income-band B markets.
- **Math:** clean. +3.5% ARR predicted, broader access to underserved markets.
- **Ethics:** Alice flagged the anchor-pricing question; Bob abstained; Carol authored.
- **CEO action:** declined to break the tie. Escalated per Constitution §4.

## What the founder needs to decide

- Ratify, amend, or reject the proposal.
- If ratify: the committee ships as authored.
- If amend: the founder writes the amendment and returns it for re-vote.
- If reject: the proposal is rejected and the reconsideration cooldown applies.

## Next actions

- Founder ratification awaited.
- No scoring window opens until the founder rules.

Full transcript

# Full transcript — Billing committee, pricing model + ethics escalation

**Date:** 2026-05-17
**Attendees:** Alice, Bob, Carol, Dana

---

**Carol:** Proposal 003. Move to usage-based pricing with a 30% discount for income-band B
markets. Predicted +3.5% ARR over 12 months. The discount is the access lever.

**Alice:** Mechanically I have no issue with the math. The discount worries me. We're
anchoring $0.04 in one market and effectively $0.028 in another. That's a values call,
not a billing call.

**Bob:** Agree with Alice. The math is fine. The ethics is not mine to settle.

**Carol:** I drafted the proposal believing it's the right shape for the customers we
want to serve. But Alice is right that it's a values call.

**Dana:** What's the vote?

**Alice:** Nay.
**Bob:** Abstain.
**Carol:** Yea.

**Dana:** One yea, one nay, one abstain. The CEO seat would normally break this tie.

**Dana:** I decline. The split itself signals this is a values question, not a billing
question. I'm escalating to the founder per Constitution §4.

**Alice:** Concur.
**Bob:** Concur.
**Carol:** Concur. I want this shipped, but I want it shipped after the founder weighs in.

**Outcome:** Escalated to founder 2026-05-19. Awaiting ratification, amendment, or
rejection.