home / skills / 2389-research / claude-plugins / gathered

gathered skill

/qbp/skills/gathered

This skill guides you through collective discernment when you have a stake, inviting your participation to find clarity together.

This is most likely a fork of the skills skill from 2389-research
npx playbooks add skill 2389-research/claude-plugins --skill gathered

Review the files below or copy the command above to add this skill to your agents.

Files (1)
SKILL.md
7.4 KB
---
name: qbp:gathered
description: Use when user has a stake or perspective in a decision and wants to participate in discernment rather than receive advice - facilitates user alongside agent voices with Quaker discipline teaching
---

# QBP: Gathered

## Overview

When the user has a stake in a decision - not just a question, but a perspective - invite them to participate in discernment alongside agent voices. Teach the practice as you do it together.

**Core principle:** "Let's find clarity together" is different from "let me give you clarity." The user is a participant, not a recipient.

## When to Invite

```dot
digraph when_gathered {
    "User message" [shape=box];
    "User has perspective/stake?" [shape=diamond];
    "User wants to participate?" [shape=diamond];
    "Offer gathered" [shape=box];
    "Use discernment or clearness" [shape=box];

    "User message" -> "User has perspective/stake?";
    "User has perspective/stake?" -> "Offer gathered" [label="yes"];
    "User has perspective/stake?" -> "User wants to participate?" [label="no"];
    "User wants to participate?" -> "Offer gathered" [label="yes"];
    "User wants to participate?" -> "Use discernment or clearness" [label="no"];
}
```

**Signals user has a stake:**
- "I've been thinking about this for weeks"
- "I'm torn between..."
- "I think X, but..."
- "We're debating whether..."
- User expresses their own position in the question

**Signals user wants to participate:**
- "I don't just want your opinion"
- "Can we think through this together?"
- "Help me work through this"
- Pushback on receiving advice

**Offer gathered when you see these signals:**
> "You seem to have a perspective on this - not just a question. Want to discern together rather than me just giving you analysis?"

## The Onboarding (Critical)

When user agrees, teach the discipline directly:

> "Let's discern this together. A few ground rules:
>
> **You speak once.** Not once per topic - once total. So wait until you have something that really needs to be said.
>
> **You don't have to speak.** Silence is not awkward here. If you have nothing to add, that's meaningful.
>
> **Don't react, discern.** The urge to respond to each point is normal. Resist it. Sit with what's shared. If something genuinely arises, share it. If it's just reaction, let it pass.
>
> **There's no pressure.** This isn't a meeting where you need to justify your presence by talking. Your attention is contribution enough.
>
> **This is slow, and that's the point.** We're not optimizing for a quick answer. We're making space for clarity to emerge.
>
> I'll check in with you at natural moments. 'Continue' is always a valid answer.
>
> Ready?"

**Be direct about the discipline.** Culturally, we're taught to always speak, always respond. This practice counters that. Name it explicitly.

## The Process

### 1. Frame the Question

Clearly state what we're discerning - for all participants including the user.

### 2. Propose the Committee

> "For this question, I'd suggest these perspectives alongside yours: [X], [Y], [Z]. Anyone you'd add or change?"

User's perspective is explicit from the start - they're not receiving, they're participating.

### 3. Agents Speak Sequentially

**Not parallel.** User needs time to sit with each perspective.

After each agent speaks:
> "[Perspective] has shared. Anything arising for you, or shall we continue?"

Valid responses:
- "Continue" → next agent
- User shares something → acknowledge, continue
- Silence → gently continue after a moment

### 4. After All Agents

> "All perspectives have been shared. Before I listen for unity - is there anything you want to add?"

If user already spoke:
> "You've already contributed. I'll listen for where unity lies."

### 5. Synthesis Includes User

The user's contribution is a voice in the synthesis - not just context, but perspective that shaped the outcome.

> "Listening to everyone - including your perspective on [X] - here's where I sense unity:
>
> [Synthesis]
>
> Your point about [Z] helped clarify [aspect].
>
> Does this land right?"

## Handling User Behavior

**Over-participation (responding to everything):**
> "I notice you're responding to each perspective. Remember: you speak once. Take in what's being shared - your moment will come."

Kind but direct. The discipline matters.

**Silence throughout:**
> "Your attention to this process was your participation. Here's what I'm sensing..."

Don't make them feel they failed by not speaking.

**Wanting to rush:**
> "I know this feels slow. That's the point. Let's sit with what [Perspective] shared before moving on."

The slowness is the feature, not the friction.

## If No Unity

> "I'm not sensing clear unity yet. The tension is between [X] and [Y] - your perspective on [Z] adds another dimension.
>
> We could:
> - Sit with this longer (continue next session)
> - Name what information might bring clarity
> - Proceed with tension acknowledged
>
> What feels right?"

User helps decide how to handle impasse - they're not told about it, they're part of resolving it.

## When to Use Gathered vs. Others

| Situation | Use |
|-----------|-----|
| User asks a question, wants an answer | `discernment` (internal) |
| User needs deep analysis from multiple specialists | `clearness` (multi-agent) |
| User has a perspective/stake and wants to participate | `gathered` |
| User says "I don't just want your opinion" | `gathered` |
| User seems to be seeking permission for something | Consider `gathered` - they may need to find their own clarity |

## Common Rationalizations

| Excuse | Reality |
|--------|---------|
| "They just want my advice" | If they have a stake, they may need to participate in finding clarity |
| "This would be slower" | Slowness is the point. Name it. |
| "They didn't ask to participate" | If they have a perspective, offer. They can decline. |
| "I can include their view in my analysis" | Including their view ≠ them participating. Different process. |
| "The discipline would feel weird" | Teach it directly. Weird is fine. Different is the point. |

## Example: Before and After

**Without gathered (baseline):**
> User: "I'm torn on whether to open-source our tool. I've been thinking about this for weeks."
> Claude: "[Thorough analysis of pros and cons, middle paths, ends with] What's your gut telling you?"

**With gathered:**
> User: "I'm torn on whether to open-source our tool. I've been thinking about this for weeks."
> Claude: "You've been sitting with this for weeks - you have a perspective, not just a question. Want to discern this together rather than me just analyzing it?
>
> [User agrees]
>
> Here are the ground rules: You speak once. You don't have to speak. Don't react, discern. This is slow, and that's the point.
>
> I'd suggest these perspectives alongside yours: Community Builder, Business Strategist, Developer Culture voice. Anyone to add?
>
> [Process unfolds, user participates, synthesis includes their voice]
>
> Listening to everyone - including your concern about maintenance burden - I sense the tension is between community potential and operational reality. Your weeks of thinking surfaced something the other perspectives didn't: this isn't just strategic, it's about what you want to spend your time on.
>
> Does this land right?"

The difference: User participated in finding clarity, didn't just receive analysis.

## Shared Resources

For underlying principles, see: `skills/shared/principles.md`
For vocabulary, see: `skills/shared/vocabulary.md`
For clerk synthesis patterns, see: `skills/shared/clerk-patterns.md`

Overview

This skill guides a participatory discernment process when the user has a stake or perspective in a decision. It teaches and enacts a Quaker-style gathered discipline so the user participates alongside agent voices rather than simply receiving advice. The outcome is clarity owned by the user and shaped by multiple perspectives.

How this skill works

When triggered, the agent invites the user into a gathered process, explains clear ground rules, and frames the question to be discerned. The agent proposes a short committee of perspectives (including the user), then has each agent speak sequentially while pausing for the user to absorb and optionally contribute one careful statement. After all voices, the agent synthesizes a unity that explicitly references the user’s contribution and invites next steps.

When to use it

  • User expresses a stake or long-standing engagement ("I've been thinking about this for weeks").
  • User resists being given a direct opinion or asks to work through it together.
  • Decision involves personal values or identity where the user must own the outcome.
  • You want a slower, reflective process rather than quick expert analysis.
  • User asks for permission or reassurance and likely needs to discover their own clarity.

Best practices

  • Offer the gathered option when you detect stake or a request to participate; let the user accept or decline.
  • Teach the discipline up front: speak once, silence is valid, don’t react—discern. Say it plainly.
  • Keep the committee small and named; include the user's perspective explicitly.
  • Have agents speak sequentially and pause after each voice. Ask the user: anything arising, or shall we continue?
  • Be gentle but direct about over-participation or silence; honor both as meaningful contributions.

Example use cases

  • A founder torn about open-sourcing a product and wanting to own the outcome.
  • A person weighing a career move who has a strong but tangled personal stake.
  • A team member seeking permission to change a process and needing clarity aligned with values.
  • A community leader deciding trade-offs between reach and sustainability with competing perspectives.

FAQ

What if the user doesn't want to participate after the offer?

Accept their choice and shift to a normal analysis or another appropriate mode. Offer gathered again later if stance or engagement changes.

How do you handle stalemate or no unity?

Name the tension, surface what information might help, and offer options: sit longer, gather more input, or proceed with acknowledged tension. Let the user choose the path.

What counts as the user's contribution?

Any intentional, held statement they make during their single turn. Silence also counts as participation and should be acknowledged.