Three to six voices, one decision.

Family runs on the same mechanism as Solo and Couple. Each evening, at a time the household sets together at composition, every participant receives one private prompt on the same question. Each person taps one answer; each person may write a note if a thought has landed. No participant sees any other participant's vote or note before the verdict day. Skipped evenings are not penalised; the verdict still runs on whatever did seal.

The seal is enforced at the database, not at the application. Postgres row-level security policies prevent cross-participant reads for the full duration. The same architecture that keeps two partners' votes sealed keeps four or five household members' votes sealed, by the same mechanism. The deeper engineering reference lives at engineering · the privacy mechanism.

The Family verdict reads the household as well as the question. The five-layer analysis you receive on the final day still names the agreement rate, the conviction trajectory for each participant, the themes from the notes, and one specific question for the conversation that follows. The synthesis paragraph (600 to 1200 words, written by Claude) adds one thing that Couple cannot: it names where each generation in the household sits on the question, and where the largest gap is.

So a household of two parents and two teenagers running a decision about whether to move cities will see, on the final day, not just a 70% agreement rate but a synthesis that names the specific split: the parents converged on Yes in the second fortnight; the teenagers diverged from each other but both held a soft No throughout; the themes the parents wrote about (career, mortgage, ageing parents) did not appear in the teenagers' notes at all; the themes the teenagers wrote about (school, friend group, the dog) appeared in only one of the parents' notes. The synthesis paragraph names this in plain English. The conversation prompt at the end names the one question that bridges the gap.

The decisions Family runs well on are not new; they are the ones a household has always made. The mechanism is what is new. In practice, the four categories cover most of what we see:

The common thread: a decision that affects every member of the household, that has been on the table for weeks or months, and that the dinner-table conversation is not resolving. If the question can be settled in one evening, Family is not the right tool. If it has been circling for a season, it is.

In a household, privacy is doing more work than it does between two partners. A teenager who knows their answer will be read at the dinner table will give the answer the dinner table wants. A grandparent who senses the household is leaning one way will lean with it. A quieter participant in any family conversation will defer to the louder one. The Family verdict is built so that the loudest voice and the quietest voice arrive on the page at the same size, on the same day, in the same font.

What every participant can see during the period: the question, the format, the duration, the day count, and whether each other participant has voted today. What no participant can see during the period: any other participant's direction, value, or notes. The seal is total and the same row-level-security policy that protects Couple decisions protects Family decisions, with one row per participant per day.

Family is priced on the same logic as the rest of the product: you pay for the verdict, not the days. Per-decision suits a household running one or two large decisions a year. The single Consumer Annual covers Family alongside Solo and Couple for households whose year stacks several decisions (estate, schooling, place, all at once).

Pricing is in US dollars, charged worldwide. Local taxes are added at checkout based on your billing address. Full pricing detail lives on the pricing page. Refund policy: a seven-day window from purchase, full detail on refunds.