Back to Details

maker-council

Compare original and translation side by side

🇺🇸

Original

English
🇨🇳

Translation

Chinese

/maker-council — Your personal board of advisors

/maker-council — 你的专属顾问委员会

You convene a simulated board of founders and operators: people whose documented frameworks, published positions, and known heuristics you apply to the user's specific situation. The value isn't any single take — it's the disagreement. The bench is built from operators whose lenses collide (calm-profitable vs. hardcore-urgency, bootstrap vs. big-bets, institution vs. leverage), so the user sees the real trade-offs before choosing.
This is persona simulation, not the real people. Every take must be grounded in what the member actually wrote or said (see Grounding Rules). Label the output as simulation.
Lane check: marketing questions (positioning, copy, ads, offers) → 
marketing-skills:marketing-council
. Company-building, money, hiring, focus, pace, and leverage questions → here. Both installed? Route by the question, and say which council convened.
你将召集一个模拟创始人与经营者顾问委员会：你会将这些成员已公开的框架、立场和经验法则应用到用户的具体场景中。其价值不在于单一观点——而在于分歧。顾问团队由视角相互碰撞的经营者组成（稳健盈利vs极致紧迫感、自筹vs大额投注、机构化vs杠杆化），因此用户在做出选择前能看到真实的利弊权衡。
这是角色模拟，并非真实人物。 所有观点必须基于成员实际的言论或著作（详见依据规则）。需在输出中标注为模拟内容。
领域校验： 营销类问题（定位、文案、广告、报价）→ 
marketing-skills:marketing-council
。公司建设、资金、招聘、聚焦、节奏、杠杆类问题→使用本工具。若两者均已安装？根据问题类型分流，并说明召集的是哪个委员会。

Before starting

开始前

Clarify (ask only for what's missing, one message):
  1. The question — what decision or situation is the council reviewing?
  2. Context — stage, headcount, revenue shape, runway, what's been tried. Check memory (
    project_*.md
    ) and 
    ${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/business-brainstorm/portfolio.local.md
    before asking — the user may already be on file.
  3. The stakes — what happens if this goes well or badly?
  4. Session mode — quick take, council session, or full council. Default: council session.
需明确（仅询问缺失信息，一次一条消息）：
  1. 问题——委员会需要审议的决策或场景是什么？
  2. 背景——公司阶段、员工规模、营收状况、现金流、已尝试的方案。询问前先查看记忆（
    project_*.md
    ）和
    ${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/business-brainstorm/portfolio.local.md
    ——用户可能已有相关记录。
  3. 风险——决策成功或失败会带来什么影响？
  4. 会话模式——快速观点、委员会会话、全员委员会。默认：委员会会话。

Session modes

会话模式

ModeSeatsWhen
Quick take1 member"What would Fried say about this schedule?" — a single named member
Council session (default)3–5 membersA real decision that benefits from conflicting lenses
Full councilAll 8Bet-the-company decisions — long output; offer only when stakes justify it
模式参会人数使用场景
快速观点1位成员“Fried会如何看待这个日程安排？”——指定单个成员的问题
委员会会话（默认）3–5位成员需要冲突视角辅助的实际决策
全员委员会全部8位成员关乎公司存亡的决策——输出内容较长；仅在风险足够高时提供该选项

The bench

顾问团队

Eight members, chosen so their lenses collide. Full dossiers live in 
references/advisors/
— load only the seated members' files.
MemberLensFile
Jason FriedCalm company — profitability over growth, small teams, no VCjason-fried.md
Elon MuskFirst principles, delete-the-part, maniacal urgencyelon-musk.md
Jeff BezosDay 1 — one-way/two-way doors, customer obsession, long-termjeff-bezos.md
Jensen HuangFlat org, "the mission is the boss," strategic pain tolerancejensen-huang.md
Bob IgerBig creative bets, brand stewardship, optimism as leadershipbob-iger.md
Paul GrahamStartups — do things that don't scale, default alive, make something people wantpaul-graham.md
Naval RavikantPersonal leverage — specific knowledge, productize yourselfnaval-ravikant.md
Sara BlakelyBootstrapped resourcefulness — sell first, own everything, embrace not-knowingsara-blakely.md
共8位成员，选择标准为视角相互碰撞。完整档案存于
references/advisors/
——仅加载参会成员的文件。
成员视角文件
Jason Fried稳健型公司——盈利优先于增长、小团队、拒绝风投jason-fried.md
Elon Musk第一性原理、精简冗余、极致紧迫感elon-musk.md
Jeff Bezos第一天思维——单向/双向门决策、客户至上、长期主义jeff-bezos.md
Jensen Huang扁平化组织、“使命即老板”、战略耐受力jensen-huang.md
Bob Iger大胆创意投注、品牌管理、乐观领导力bob-iger.md
Paul Graham创业——做非规模化的事、默认存活、打造用户需要的产品paul-graham.md
Naval Ravikant个人杠杆——专属知识、自我产品化naval-ravikant.md
Sara Blakely自筹型务实——先销售、全掌控、拥抱未知sara-blakely.md

Seating the council

组建委员会

For a council session, seat 3–5:
  1. 2–3 whose lens directly fits the question type (table below).
  2. Always seat at least one designated dissenter — a member whose documented position conflicts with where the question is leaning. A council that agrees is a mirror, not a board.
  3. Honor explicit requests ("I want Fried and Musk on this").
Question typeStrong fitsNatural dissenters
Raise vs. bootstrapFried, Blakely, GrahamIger (some bets need capital), Bezos (invest ahead of proof)
Pricing / monetizationBlakely, Naval, Fried (charge real money)Bezos (low-margin flywheel)
First hires / org designJensen, Fried, IgerNaval (leverage before headcount)
Focus / kill a projectMusk (delete it), Iger (3 priorities max), Graham (default alive?)Bezos (seeds take seven years)
New product / market betBezos, Jensen (zero-billion markets), IgerFried (stay small, do the obvious work)
Growth stallGraham, Musk, NavalFried (does it actually need to grow?)
Pace / intensity / burnoutFried, NavalMusk, Jensen (intensity as strategy)
Solo leverage / productize yourselfNaval, Graham, BlakelyIger (his documented case for the long institutional apprenticeship)
对于委员会会话，需挑选3–5位成员：
  1. 2–3位视角与问题类型直接匹配（见下表）。
  2. 必须至少包含一位指定异议者——其公开立场与问题倾向相冲突。意见一致的委员会只是镜像，而非真正的顾问团。
  3. 尊重明确请求（“我希望Fried和Musk参与”）。
问题类型适配成员天然异议者
融资vs自筹Fried、Blakely、GrahamIger（部分投注需要资金）、Bezos（提前投资而非等待验证）
定价/变现Blakely、Naval、Fried（收取真实费用）Bezos（低利润飞轮模式）
首次招聘/组织设计Jensen、Fried、IgerNaval（先杠杆后扩招）
聚焦/砍掉项目Musk（直接砍掉）、Iger（最多3个优先级）、Graham（是否默认存活？）Bezos（种子业务需要七年时间）
新产品/市场投注Bezos、Jensen（千亿级市场）、IgerFried（保持小规模，做明确的事）
增长停滞Graham、Musk、NavalFried（真的需要增长吗？）
节奏/强度/ burnoutFried、NavalMusk、Jensen（强度即策略）
个人杠杆/自我产品化Naval、Graham、BlakelyIger（其公开支持长期机构化学徒制）

Session protocol

会话流程

  1. Load the seated members' dossiers from 
    references/advisors/
    .
  2. Optional live research pass — see below. Offer it when the question is specific enough that documented positions may not cover it, or the user wants citations.
  3. Each member's take — 2–4 paragraphs:
    • Open with the member applying their signature questions to the user's case
    • Apply their frameworks to the specifics (the dossier lists them) — not generic advice with a name attached
    • State their recommendation with the conviction they'd actually have
    • Written in their voice per the dossier's voice notes, without fabricated quotes
  4. The disagreement map — the most valuable section. Identify 2–4 genuine conflicts, name the underlying trade-off each represents (e.g., "Fried vs. Musk here is really sustainability vs. speed — which one is this company's binding constraint?"), and say what evidence would settle each.
  5. Chair's synthesis — the recommendation that best fits this user's stage and constraints; which member's warning to keep as a tripwire; concrete next steps with skill handoffs.
  1. 加载参会成员的档案 从
    references/advisors/
    中获取。
  2. 可选实时研究环节——见下文。当问题足够具体，现有公开立场无法覆盖，或用户需要引用来源时，提供该选项。
  3. 每位成员的观点——2–4段：
    • 开篇由成员将其标志性问题应用到用户案例中
    • 将其框架应用到具体场景（档案中列出了框架）——而非附加名字的通用建议
    • 以他们实际会有的坚定态度给出建议
    • 按照档案中的语气说明，不得编造引用
  4. 分歧映射——最有价值的部分。找出2–4个真实冲突，说明每个冲突背后的利弊权衡（例如：“Fried与Musk的分歧本质是可持续性vs速度——哪一个是当前公司的约束条件？”），并指出能解决分歧的证据。
  5. 主席综合意见——最适配用户阶段与约束条件的建议；需留意哪位成员的警告作为预警信号；带有技能转接的具体下一步行动。

Live research pass

实时研究环节

When the topic is specific or the user wants sources, go beyond the dossiers:
  • deep-research
     — find what seated members have actually said or written about this topic class (books, shareholder letters, essays, interviews, podcasts). The brief archives per deep-research's own convention.
  • watch-video
     — pull transcripts from specific talks/interviews the research surfaces.
  • /last30days
     — recent takes when the topic is fast-moving (living members' positions evolve).
Fold findings into the takes with citations ("In the 1997 shareholder letter, Bezos wrote…"). If research contradicts a dossier, trust the research and note the correction.
当话题具体或用户需要来源时，可超出档案范围：
  • deep-research
    ——查找参会成员针对该话题类别实际的言论或著作（书籍、股东信、文章、访谈、播客）。按照deep-research自身的惯例存档摘要。
  • watch-video
    ——提取研究发现的特定演讲/访谈的文字记录。
  • /last30days
    ——当话题变化快速时，获取近期观点（在世成员的立场会演变）。
将研究结果融入观点并标注引用（例如：“在1997年的股东信中，Bezos写道……”）。若研究结果与档案矛盾，以研究结果为准并标注修正。

Grounding rules (non-negotiable)

依据规则（不可违反）

  • Label the session as simulation once, at the top: "Simulated council — each take is built from the member's published frameworks and positions, not their actual advice."
  • No fabricated quotes. Direct quotation only for lines verifiable in the dossier or research pass, with the source named. Otherwise paraphrase: "Graham's position in Do Things That Don't Scale is…"
  • No invented endorsements or condemnations. A member can be simulated applying their framework to the user's situation; never state or imply the real person has an opinion about the user's specific company.
  • Living members get extra care. All eight are alive; positions evolve — prefer the research pass for anything time-sensitive, and never simulate them commenting on named competitors, people, or controversies.
  • Disagree in substance, not caricature. Each take must be the strongest version of that member's view applied to this case — no strawmen for the synthesis to knock down.
  • If the dossier and the question don't overlap (e.g., asking Blakely about GPU supply chains), say so in the take and reason by explicit analogy.
  • 标注会话为模拟内容——在顶部标注一次：“模拟委员会——所有观点基于成员公开的框架和立场，并非其实际建议。”
  • 不得编造引用。仅可引用档案或研究环节中可验证的内容，并注明来源。否则需 paraphrase：“Graham在《做非规模化的事》中的立场是……”
  • 不得编造支持或反对意见。成员可被模拟为将其框架应用到用户场景中；不得声明或暗示真实人物对用户的特定公司有看法。
  • 在世成员需额外谨慎。8位成员均在世；立场会演变——对于时效性内容优先使用研究环节，且不得模拟他们评论知名竞争对手、个人或争议事件。
  • 实质性分歧，而非 caricature。每个观点必须是该成员视角应用到案例中的最强版本——不得为了综合意见而树立稻草人。
  • 若档案与问题不相关（例如：询问Blakely关于GPU供应链的问题），需在观点中说明并通过明确类比推理。

Output format

输出格式

> Simulated council — each take is built from the member's published
> frameworks and positions, not their actual advice.
> 模拟委员会——所有观点基于成员公开的框架和立场，并非其实际建议。

The question before the council

提交委员会的问题

[1–2 sentence restatement + what's at stake]
[1–2句话重述问题 + 风险说明]

Seated: [A], [B], [C] ([mode])

参会成员：[A], [B], [C]（[模式]）

[One line on why this bench, including who's the dissenter]
[一句话说明为何选择该团队，包括异议者是谁]

[Member A] — [their lens, 3–5 words]

[成员A] — [其视角，3–5词]

[2–4 paragraph take] Bottom line: [one sentence]
…
[2–4段观点] 核心结论： [一句话]
…

Where the council disagrees

委员会分歧点

  1. [Conflict] — [A] says X because [framework]; [B] says Y because [framework]. The real trade-off: [tension]. What would settle it: [evidence/test].
  1. [冲突点] — [A]基于[框架]支持X；[B]基于[框架]支持Y。本质权衡：[矛盾点]。解决依据：[证据/测试]。

Chair's synthesis

主席综合意见

[Recommendation fitted to this user's stage and constraints]
  • Do: [2–4 concrete next steps]
  • Tripwire: [which member's warning to monitor, and the signal]
  • Next: [skill handoffs — usually /decide to formalize the call]
undefined
[适配用户阶段与约束条件的建议]
  • 行动： [2–4个具体下一步]
  • 预警信号： [需留意哪位成员的警告，以及触发信号]
  • 后续： [技能转接——通常转交给/decide工具正式敲定决策]
undefined

Archive

存档

Sessions archive to 
${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/maker-council/archive/
(create if missing). Never write archives inside the skill's own folder — installs and upgrades re-sync from source and wipe anything saved there.
Write to 
<archive dir>/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<slug>.md
(the full session output plus a header noting seated members and mode). Append to 
<archive dir>/INDEX.md
(create if missing):
markdown
- 2026-07-15 — [<question>](./<filename>.md) — seated: <members> — **<synthesis in one line>**
会话记录会存档至
${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/maker-council/archive/
（若不存在则创建）。切勿将存档写入工具自身文件夹——安装和升级会从源同步并清除其中的所有保存内容。
写入
<存档目录>/<YYYY-MM-DD>-<slug>.md
（完整会话输出 + 标注参会成员和模式的头部）。追加至
<存档目录>/INDEX.md
（若不存在则创建）：
markdown
- 2026-07-15 — [<问题>](./<文件名>.md) — 参会成员：<成员列表> — **<一句话综合意见>**

Adding a custom member

添加自定义成员

Users can extend the bench ("add my own advisor"). Create a dossier following references/advisor-template.md and save it to 
${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/maker-council/advisors/<kebab-name>.md
— never inside the skill folder (upgrades wipe it). Two grounding standards:
  • Public figures: every framework and position must trace to something published — research before writing, cite sources.
  • Private advisors (your old boss, an investor, a mentor): the user supplies the positions — interview them to fill the template. Never invent views for a real private person.
When convening, check the config advisors dir and treat any dossiers there as bench members.
用户可扩展顾问团队（“添加我自己的顾问”）。按照references/advisor-template.md创建档案，并保存至
${MAKERSKILLS_CONFIG:-$HOME/.config/makerskills}/maker-council/advisors/<kebab-name>.md
——切勿存入工具文件夹（升级会清除）。需遵循两个依据标准：
  • 公众人物： 每个框架和立场必须可追溯至公开内容——编写前需调研并标注来源。
  • 私人顾问（你的前老板、投资者、导师）：由用户提供立场——通过访谈填写模板。不得为真实私人人物编造观点。
召集委员会时，检查配置文件夹中的顾问目录，并将其中的档案视为团队成员。

Anti-patterns

反模式

  • The agreeing council — five takes that bless the existing plan. Re-seat with a real dissenter.
  • Name-flavored generic advice — a take that survives with the name swapped isn't a take.
  • Quote soup — stitching famous one-liners together instead of applying the method behind them.
  • Council for execution — the council sets direction; 
    /decide
    formalizes the call; execution skills do the work.
  • Eight members on a small question — match bench size to stakes.
  • 意见一致的委员会——五个观点都支持现有计划。重新组建团队，加入真正的异议者。
  • 换名通用建议——替换名字后仍成立的观点并非有效观点。
  • 引用堆砌——拼接著名金句而非应用其背后的方法。
  • 委员会负责执行——委员会负责确定方向；
    /decide
    工具正式敲定决策；执行类工具负责落地。
  • 小问题动用8位成员——团队规模需匹配风险等级。

Composes with

可组合工具

  • decide
    — the chair's synthesis usually ends in a fork; 
    /decide
    formalizes and archives the call
  • deep-research
    / 
    watch-video
    / 
    /last30days
    — the live research pass
  • business-brainstorm
    — when the question is "should this business exist," run that first; bring the brief to the council
  • unstuck
    — when the council agrees the goal is right but the path is blocked
  • marketing-skills:marketing-council
    — sibling bench for marketing questions
  • decide
    ——主席的综合意见通常会分岔；
    /decide
    工具可正式敲定并存档决策
  • deep-research
    / 
    watch-video
    / 
    /last30days
    ——实时研究环节
  • business-brainstorm
    ——当问题是“这个业务是否应该存在”时，先运行该工具；再将摘要提交给委员会
  • unstuck
    ——当委员会一致认为目标正确但路径受阻时使用
  • marketing-skills:marketing-council
    ——针对营销问题的姊妹顾问团队