The Mission-Lock Pledge

The pledge that makes the rest credible.

Where user welfare conflicts with business returns, users win.

That isn't a promise. It's a structural commitment, written into the corporate form so it survives our intentions.

Why "no IPO" was the wrong commitment

The shorthand "we'll never go public" sounds protective, but it targets a symptom, not the cause. Public-benefit corporations list their stock on exchanges. Private equity firms abuse users far more aggressively than most public companies. Patagonia's perpetual purpose trust would have been compatible with a public listing if its founders had wanted one.

The thing that determines whether a company can be made to harm its users is who the corporate form legally answers to. If it answers to outside investors whose returns require ever-growing extraction, the company will extract — no matter who runs it. If it answers to users, employees, or a mission, the company is structurally restrained.

So the pledge isn't about IPOs. It's about ownership.

What we pledge

The Six

  1. Mission-locked ownership. Every ez2bg project incorporates under a structure that names users (and the mission) as the legal beneficiary, not outside shareholders. Available vehicles: public-benefit corporations, foundation ownership, perpetual purpose trusts, mission-locked nonprofits. We pick the one that fits the project — we never pick one that doesn't bind us.
  2. No surveillance business model. We don't run on behavioral advertising. We don't sell user data. We don't build features whose purpose is to maximize time-on-app.
  3. No extraction-model capital. We don't take money from sources whose return depends on growing user-hostile revenue lines. Patient capital, mission-aligned grants, and revenue from users — yes. Growth equity that needs a 10x in five years — no.
  4. Transparency over PR. Decisions are explained in public, including the bad ones. Audits of the mission-lock are published.
  5. Open standards over walled gardens. We commit to interoperability, even when it costs us lock-in revenue.
  6. User-first, always. Not "balanced with business needs." First. Where the two conflict, users win.

Mission-lock is not extraction-lock

A fair criticism of "we'll never IPO" is that it can read as walling the most valuable consumer companies off from ordinary people, leaving the upside with insiders and the already-wealthy.

That isn't what we're committing to. A mission-locked structure can still:

What's compatible with the pledge

What we refuse is the legal subordination of users to shareholders — not the participation of ordinary people in any upside. If a project ever becomes valuable, broad participation in that value is in scope; control by extraction-driven owners is not.

How this is enforced

The pledge is not a marketing line. It is the architecture.

First published 2026-06-07 · supersedes the earlier "No-IPO Pledge" — same intent, more precise mechanism · ez2bgood.com