How to kill a community (before it even starts)

Supernuclear

SubscribeSign in

How to kill a community (before it even starts)<br>Know what game you are playing

Phil Levin<br>Jun 04, 2026

388

26<br>35

Share

Five groups set out to start an ambitious coliving community. Four of them fail. One succeeds.<br>What was the difference?<br>With no other information, here would be my guess: The group that succeeded had one or two people willing to decide on behalf of the group. The four that failed tried to reach consensus within the group.<br>That’s it. That’s the whole post. But let me explain why, because it took me years and a seeing a couple hundred groups to actually believe it.<br>The Great Defection

We’ve watched hundreds of groups try to form coliving or cohousing communities. And over the years we’ve gotten very good at predicting who’s going to make it and who’s going to evaporate.<br>Here’s the counterintuitive part: the larger groups — the ones who, in theory, are better placed to actually buy a property and fill it — are the ones who drop like flies.<br>The pattern goes like this:<br>Person A: Let’s do this.<br>Person B: Let’s do this.<br>Person C: Let’s do this.<br>Person D: I don’t like the kitchen layout

And just like that, it’s dead.<br>The unspoken assumption buried in Person D’s objection is that somewhere out there is an identical place — same price, same location, same everyone-already-agreed-on-it — except with better kitchen layout.<br>Sorry. There isn’t.<br>So the energy evaporates, the group thread goes quiet, and everyone ends up living alone in their own apartments. I call this the Great Defection , and it happens constantly.<br>Here’s what’s actually being traded away in that exchange. Person D thinks they’re weighing “this kitchen layout” against “better kitchen layout.” They’re not. They’re weighing “a community of people I love living nearby” against “no community at all.” The kitchen layout is a rounding error. They just can’t see it yet.<br>There is no Venn diagram

Let me say the thing plainly, because it’s the load-bearing idea of this entire post:<br>There is no Venn diagram of four-plus people’s individual preferences. That overlapping sweet spot in the middle? It doesn’t exist. Not for a house. Not for a neighborhood. Not for anything that has to satisfy walk-in closets, nearby parks, school districts, garage space, and somebody’s feelings about open-plan kitchens all at once.

Somebody is not getting their personal preference. That’s not a bug in your group. That’s just math. Which means there are only ever two real options: people get on board despite their preferences, or you eject them. There’s no third door where everyone’s wish list is quietly satisfied.<br>Let’s do the math

I’m serious about the “it’s just math” thing, so let me show my work.<br>Say you’ve got four decision-makers trying to reach consensus. And say that, for any given person, one in five homes on the market actually works for them. (Generous, honestly.)<br>For a home to work for all four people, you need the one-in-five to hit for each of them, independently:<br>⅕ × ⅕ × ⅕ × ⅕ = 1 in 625

So you’d need to look at roughly 625 properties to find a single one that satisfies all four people.<br>Now ask yourself: are there 625 properties on the market in your city that can even accommodate a multi-household living arrangement?<br>Absolutely not. You can count the spaces that work well for “multiplayer housing” in your city now on your two hands.<br>If you want a single-family home, go ahead and be picky — you’ve got a thousand options. If you want to build something with other people, you simply cannot be that picky. The numbers don’t allow it.<br>Don’t play someone else’s game

There are two completely different games you can play when you go looking for a place to live.<br>The default game: You scroll through a thousand single-family homes and apartments and pick the one that best fits your preferences. Spanish-style architecture — check. Walk-in closet — check. Good light, right neighborhood, second bathroom — check, check, check. This game works. There are a thousand options and you can afford to be picky.<br>The Supernuclear game: You find a space that works well for a collective. It might be short on the Spanish architecture and the walk-in closets. But it makes up for all of that with one giant amenity that none of the thousand picture-perfect single-family homes can offer: a community of people you love, living right there with you.

Here’s the trap. You cannot play both games at once.<br>If you bring default-game pickiness to the Supernuclear game, you will lose. You’ll torpedo the one option that has the giant amenity because it failed some checklist item that only matters in the other game.<br>So how does this actually happen?

If consensus is mathematically doomed, how does any coliving community ever get built?<br>Like this: one or two people find a place that works for them , commit to it, and trust that it’ll work for others once it actually exists.<br>I’ll tell on my own friend...