diff --git a/lighthouse.md b/lighthouse.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7114bda
--- /dev/null
+++ b/lighthouse.md
@@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
+# Project Lighthouse
+
+Project Lighthouse is conceptually linked to Project Carmel. They may appear as separate entities, but both projects can potentially share similar technical foundations. While Carmel is focused on debates, Lighthouse takes those principles and applies them to the management of a knowledge base. The underlying architecture can be similar, promoting synergies and allowing both projects to benefit from shared enhancements and updates.
+
+A key aspect to underscore is that the backbone of our efforts in Carmel, Lighthouse (and Gno) hinges on both contribution and reputation. I posit that this reputation could be mutually recognized between Carmel and Lighthouse. This cross-recognition could be particularly beneficial in identifying trustworthy experts within specific fields.
+
+Draft spec, please provide feedback in the form of pull requests and issues to github.com/allinbits/carmel.
+
+## Initial terms
+
+ * All contributors agree on a curator or a panel of curators.
+ * All contributors commit to intellectual honesty, constructive debate, and the pursuit of truth.
+ * All contributors respect that this is an uncensored platform but are responsible for the veracity of their contributions.
+
+## Step 1. Determine the Discussion Points
+
+ * Any contributor can suggest a complex or controversial topic for discussion.
+ * The curator(s) reviews these suggestions for relevance and interest.
+ * Topics that foster meaningful exploration of truth are approved.
+ * The curator(s) can propose new topics independently.
+
+## Step 2. Submission of Arguments and Evidence
+
+ * contributors can submit arguments, counter-arguments, and evidence for each approved topic.
+ * Contributors are expected to cite sources where applicable.
+ * The curator(s) organizes and categorizes the submitted information.
+ * All contributions remain uncensored, but the curator(s) may provide a framework for the information to promote understanding.
+
+## Step 3. Simplification and Correlation
+
+ * Contributors can propose to split complex topics into smaller, easier-to-review subtopics.
+ * Contributors can suggest links to other related topics.
+ * Such contributions that facilitate comprehension and progress in discussions will be rewarded.
+ * The curator(s) review and implement these proposals.
+
+## Step 4. Debunking and Discussing
+
+ * Contributors can refute existing arguments, provide new insights, and debate the evidence.
+ * All discussions must be fact-based, respectful, and focused on debunking misconceptions.
+ * The curator(s) intervene if discussions go off-topic or become non-constructive.
+ * Curators provide summary statements to encapsulate progress and breakthroughs in understanding.
+
+## Step 5. Updating the Knowledge Base
+
+ * As discussions evolve, contributors can update their arguments and evidence.
+ * The curator(s) review the updates for relevance and clarity.
+ * Approved updates are incorporated into the knowledge base.
+ * The curator(s) can suggest updates to streamline discussions.
+
+# Extra A. Intellectual Honesty and Rewards 
+
+ * Deliberate spreading of misinformation will not be tolerated and can lead to penalties.
+ * Any user can report suspected misinformation.
+ * The curator(s) review all reports and take necessary actions.
+ * Users making false reports can also face penalties.
+ * Both parties agree to indemnify reporters of misinformation to the full extent.
+ * Contributions that significantly aid in the quest for truth will be rewarded.
+
+# Extra B. IP Rights
+
+ * All contributed arguments, evidence, and discussions belong to their respective original owners.
+ * Contributors grant a license to use their contributions within the knowledge base.
+
+---------------------------------
+
+# Resources
+
+ * https://twitter.com/jaekwon/status/1676530097308966912?s=20