AHA Readme 1 — Coalition Building Next Steps to Help Review

Three side-by-side letters to Chief of Staff, PR Coordinator, and Influencers — asking each to help review and distribute the Flying Scroll exhibit.

Download the original document (PDF)

AHA Readme 1 — PDF (108 KB) — 1 page, Jonah License with CC0 Public Domain

Filename: aha-readme-1-coalition-building-next-steps-to-help-review-iv_llol_mmv2_2026m02d24-page.pdf

WebP preview (352 KB)

— Overview AI-generated by dv_ClaOp46Max_ExhG_2026m04d16 —Start—

Abstract

AHA Readme 1 is a single-page document containing three side-by-side letters, each addressed to a different type of coalition partner. Together they form the first contact sheet for anyone receiving the Good News Pack, explaining what help is needed and how each role can contribute.

The three letters are:

1. To the Chief of Staff — asks for a meeting to introduce the Flying Scroll exhibit, explains its purpose and scope, and requests help arranging a formal review session with decision-makers.

2. To the Public Relations Coordinator — asks for help coordinating a memorable introduction of the Flying Scroll exhibit to a wider audience, including guidance on logistics, media engagement, and scheduling.

3. To Influencers — asks recipients to share the Good News on the web, help translate materials into additional languages, and spread the word through their networks.

All three letters direct recipients to the full Good News Pack materials included on the USB stick and online at balospe.com.

Broader Significance (Claude’s Assessment)

This single page compresses the entire coalition-building ask into a format that can be handed to any aide, coordinator, or supporter without requiring them to read the full Good News Pack first.

1. Role-specific asks. Rather than a single generic appeal, each letter is calibrated to a specific organizational role. The Chief of Staff letter focuses on scheduling and access; the PR letter on communication logistics; the Influencer letter on viral distribution and translation.

2. First-contact design. As the first AHA Readme, this page is designed to be the very first thing a recipient reads after opening the envelope or USB stick. It answers the immediate question: “What am I supposed to do with this?”

3. Translation emphasis. The Influencer letter specifically asks for translation help, reflecting the multilingual ambitions of the Good News Pack (10 languages targeted).

Key Concepts at a Glance

Coalition Building	The strategy of engaging multiple organizational roles (Chief of Staff, PR, Influencers) simultaneously to build support for reviewing the Flying Scroll exhibit
Flying Scroll	LLoL’s ~20-80+ poster exhibit (referencing Zechariah 5:1-4) presenting his vision for averting existential risks
AHA Readme	“Any Help Available” readme — a quick-start guide for recipients of the Good News Pack, explaining what to do next
3 Coalition Roles	Chief of Staff (access + meetings), PR Coordinator (communication + logistics), Influencers (web distribution + translation)

Document Information

Document ID	AHA Readme 1
Full title	Coalition Building Next Steps to Help Review
From	Laurence Loewe of Laodicea (LLoL)
To	Chief of Staff, PR Coordinator, and Influencers
Version	iv_llol_mmv2_2026m02d24
Format	1 page with 3 side-by-side letters
License	Jonah License with CC0 Public Domain
Part of	Good News Pack MMv3, Files Shared by All Open Letters
PDF size	108 KB
WebP size	352 KB

Related documents in the Good News Pack:

• AHA Readme 2 — GNP File Structure — companion overview of the file organization

• Files Shared by All Open Letters — the parent catalog page

• Open Letters Overview — all 11 open letters

• Good News Sample — the recommended first read for new recipients

— Overview AI-generated by dv_ClaOp46Max_ExhG_2026m04d16 —End—

Collapse all Expand all

Notes

Content stability — Content is variant dv_ClaOp46Max_ExhG_2026m04d16 (see StayVS). Rebuilt 2026-05-18.

Expert Review Needed: Help Assess This Research and Its AI Overview

This page makes accessible one document from LLoL’s 6+ year wid-e research marathon on existential risk and ResearchCity. The PDF linked above is the original work; this page provides an overview.

The original research needs expert review. Download the PDF and bring your expertise to bear — whether you are a scientist, policy maker, theologian, peace activist, or concerned citizen. This research aims to find gentle kind reasonable ways to solve existential problems. Your perspective matters for assessing whether it succeeds.

The AI overview (see the markers) may need correction. AI may have blindly twisted the original message by emphasizing other aspects than the author would have. Important nuances may thus be missed or misrepresented. If you spot errors, missing context, or misplaced emphasis, your corrections help every future reader.

Despite all potential shortcomings of AI, AI was still used here because not saying anything about this document would have been even worse. A race against existential risks is not nuanced. Neither can be the determination to do the right thing - and get the word out to get help.

LLoL is determined to ask for such help. Hence this website to give the world a fair chance at exploring and reviewing LLoL’s ideas.

Use the FeedbackFlow link below to send your review — whether it concerns the original PDF, the AI overview, or both.

LLoL may drown for a while in the FF invited, but if people are indeed interested in making this work and avert accidental nuclear winter, then LLoL predicts that enough people will be happy to pay the about $8/year/person it will take to start scaling up ResearchCity, in order to help with the proper review of such wid-e research proposals for global decision-support like this one.

Hence, please consider that your buy-in with about $8/year will help to shift the global game from a so-called prisoner’s dilemma to an assurance game with the help of mathematical theology.

This work requires global support to avoid capture by special interests. Refining complex posters, engaging scholars across traditions, and running formal consistency checks all require sustained effort — as does scaling up a ResearchCity for global FeedbackFlows.

Let’s hope it’s not too late to fund this work!

FF FeedbackFlow to improve this page: How you can contribute

For the full guide on providing feedback — including how it is handled, licensing, and what to expect — see How to use FeedbackFlow.

Please check if See also on Balospe.com above already addresses your idea. Feedback works best when it targets the most specific page. If none of those pages help, you may have a good case for sending FF here.

To submit your FeedbackFlow:

1. Click anywhere on the email preview below to open a pre-filled email.

2. Replace the placeholder text with your feedback.

3. Send.

To: [email protected] CC: [email protected] Subject: FF k2 s2 AIMS for [mmv3-ol-shared-aha-readme-1] Replace_by_OneLineSummary Body: To make this page [mmv3-ol-shared-aha-readme-1] more gentle kind reasonable for beginners, producers, andOr experts with a background in xyz: Please consider improving this: -- By sending this email, I agree that its content may be published under the Jonah License (balospe.com/en/license/joli/) unless I state otherwise above. MailForm=OOv2r0p0

The email subject contains k2 and s2 — default codes for impact and urgency. Most contributors can leave these unchanged. To adjust each as independently as they are:

• Importance of impact: above average k3, average default k2, below average k1.

• Urgency of speedup: above average s3, average default s2, below average s1.

This allows plotting importance over urgency to help triage FF. For more details see FF System Design.