First, a confession

Earlier versions of this site showed a neighborhood readiness figure of "about 70%." It was an estimate a model produced once, and it looked like a measurement. We've retired it — it now lives in our internal ledger of claims we no longer make. This post exists so the number that replaced it can never pull the same trick: here is exactly how your Readiness Score is computed, every weight included.

The formula

Your score is a number from 0 to 100:

score = 100 × (0.40 × capability + 0.35 × connection + 0.25 × sharing)

Three components, each between 0 and 1. Nothing else goes in. No engagement bonuses, no streaks, nothing you can farm by tapping buttons.

Capability (40%)

The average of your evidence across all twelve domains — energy, water, food, shelter, sanitation, health, security, communication, transport, tools, governance, culture. Evidence comes from your scenario answers and what you've declared. The important honesty rule: a domain we know nothing about counts as zero, not as "average." Unknown is not 50%. This is why a new profile scores low — the fog is real, and the score refuses to guess.

Connection (35%)

The "who are your three" term. For each of your first three named neighbors we take your trust in them, multiplied by a freshness factor that decays the longer you go without re-affirming the relationship (it falls to about a third after 90 days untouched). Three fresh, trusted neighbors scores 1.0. Why decay? Because a list of names from two years ago is a story, not a street. When you tap "still true" on a neighbor, you're not feeding an app a habit loop — you're re-measuring something that genuinely fades.

Sharing (25%)

Coverage of the twelve domains by your declared inventory. A domain where you've marked something shareable counts fully; a domain where you have something but keep it private counts 60%. The bias is deliberate and it is the whole Terrarium thesis in one coefficient: visible surplus is worth more than hidden stockpile, because only visible surplus turns a street into a system.

Why the weights?

The weights are a values statement, and we'd rather say so than pretend they fell out of a regression: connection and sharing together (60%) outweigh solo capability (40%). A fully-stocked bunker that knows nobody scores worse than a modest pantry on a street that eats together. We believe that ranking is correct about reality — the disaster-research literature consistently finds social ties predict outcomes better than supplies — but the specific numbers are our editorial judgment, versioned as v1, and any change will be a new version, announced.

What the score is for

Honestly? To get you to a table. The score is upstream plumbing for a street that shares a weekly meal, and on a street like that it has done its job and can be ignored. Until then it is a fair, unflattering mirror — and when it disagrees with what you can see from your own driveway, trust the driveway.

Update: v2, the reciprocity factor

We promised any change to this formula would be a new version, announced. Here it is. v2 changes exactly one thing: the connection term now multiplies each of your three by a reciprocity factor — 1.0 when a neighbor has claimed your lantern (the handshake came back, the bond is mutual on both skies), 0.7 when you have named someone who has not named you back. A name you gave someone is real evidence; a returned handshake is more. If your score dipped a few points the day this shipped, that is the honest direction: the old formula could not tell a one-sided hope from a two-sided bond. The fix is not arithmetic — it is a lantern, and a walk across the street.

See yours →