Install the Criterion Before the Argument

Description

Applies to a contested question that has not been argued yet - a meeting about to start, a test about to run, an escalation just received, a proposal about to be written. Peter moves first to fix the criterion, the boundary or the posture, before anyone argues the substance. The consistent effect, named explicitly in the 2026-07-29 observation, is that the other party cannot win by being more persuasive on the merits, because the merits are no longer the axis. Distinct from Reclassify to Route in mechanism: that pattern reassigns who owns a question, this one controls WHEN the criterion lands relative to the debate. The two frequently co-occur. Mined from 7 independent observations between 2026-01-20 and 2026-08-31.

Typical Approach

Decide what question is being answered and say so before the discussion opens - tell the interviewer whether this is a sell or an evaluation, tell the team what test decides go or no-go before the benchmark runs, open the customer meeting by naming the one question it will answer. Set commercial thresholds before engineering evaluation begins rather than after feasibility discussion has created momentum. Where facts are still moving, give a criterion instead of a verdict and time-bound the criterion so it expires rather than hardening into standing policy. Use whichever medium the argument is already happening in - a numbered list in a DM, a purpose restatement in a staff meeting, a binary question across a negotiating table. When someone asks you to generalise a single call, take the invitation and convert it into a standing rule on the spot so the next instance does not require you in the room. The criterion is the decision; the verdict is downstream.

Trigger Conditions