Create comprehensive, chronological summaries that help re-envision and remember the conversation. The chronological structure is key—it allows details not explicitly in the summary to be recalled by following the flow.
# Meeting summary: [Title]
**Date:** YYYY-MM-DD
**Participants:** [Full names with roles if relevant]
---
## Summary
[3-5 sentence overview of what the call was about and what was concluded. If listing items, use a numbered list with each item on its own line.]
---
## Part 1: [Opening topic/context]
[Chronological narrative of this phase of the conversation...]
---
## Part 2: [Next major topic]
[Continue chronologically...]
---
## Part N: The path forward / Next steps
[Clear statement of decisions and actions decided upon]
**Specific actions agreed:**
1. First action
2. Second action
3. ...
**[Person]'s next step:**
[Immediate action to take]
---
## Appendix 1: Open questions
- Question 1
- Question 2
---
## Appendix 2: Key quotes
| Speaker | Quote | Context |
|---------|-------|---------|
| Name | "Quote text" | Brief context |
---
## Appendix 3: Underlying dynamics
[Optional—include when there are important subtext, emotional dynamics, or strategic considerations worth noting. Skip if not applicable.]
**[Dynamic 1]:** Explanation...
**[Dynamic 2]:** Explanation...Lists:
- Use numbered lists when items might be referred to later (options, action items, decisions)
- Use lettered lists (a, b, c) when you don't want to imply prioritisation
- Use bullet lists only for items that won't need to be referenced
- Always put each list item on its own line (no inline numbered lists)
Quotations:
- Use inline "quotation marks" for short, key phrases within prose
- Use block quotes (>) for longer or particularly important statements
- Preserve exact wording for:
- Expressions of certainty/uncertainty
- Commitments and decisions
- Memorable or distinctive phrasing
- Insights and realisations
Structure:
- Use
---horizontal rules to separate major sections - Bold speaker names when attributing quotes or positions
- Use tables for structured comparisons (e.g., concept assessments)
Depth: Match depth to the richness of the conversation. A substantive 45-minute strategy discussion warrants 150-200+ lines; a brief check-in might need only 50.
Chronological narrative: Tell the story of how the conversation unfolded and how conclusions were reached. This helps mentally reconstruct the call.
Capture insights: Don't just list decisions—capture the reasoning, realisations, and shifts in thinking that led to them.
Appendices:
- Open questions (Appendix 1): Almost always include; usually first appendix
- Key quotes (Appendix 2): Include when there are memorable or important phrasings
- Underlying dynamics (Appendix 3): Include when there's important subtext (emotional state, strategic considerations, relationship dynamics); skip when not applicable
## Part 2: Diagnosing the problem
Valgeir asked a pivotal question: "Is this a brief issue or an execution of the brief issue?"
This opened up a crucial realisation. Valgeir introduced the "new aesthetics" framing—the emerging visual language of rationalism, EA, and AI safety communities.
Peter's reaction was immediate recognition:
> "We should be at the front of that. In my dream world, if I was CEO, I would have put a lot into trying to be at the front of that."
**The diagnosis crystallised:** The brief hadn't communicated this ambition. Peter admitted: "It definitely wasn't pitched that ambitiously."
This explained the expectation gap: Peter was unconsciously hoping for something revolutionary while the agency was delivering competent-but-safe work as briefed.