MAG Vetting Process: Evaluating New Members

The Stakes of Vetting

Every person you admit to your MAG gains knowledge of:

• Your preparations, supplies, and capabilities
• Your physical locations (home, retreat)
• Your group's security protocols
• Other members' identities and situations

A person who leaves the group under bad terms, or who was never trustworthy, takes all of this with them. This is not paranoia — it's operational security. You vet contractors before giving them building access. You vet employees before giving them company data. You vet MAG members before giving them your group's complete picture.

The vetting process is not about distrust. It's about earning trust through a systematic process rather than assuming it.

The Three Dimensions of Vetting

1. Character Assessment

Character is the non-negotiable dimension. Skills can be learned. Resources can be acquired. Character is what remains under stress.

Honesty: Does this person tell the truth when it's uncomfortable? Do their stories check out over time? Have you ever caught them in a significant misrepresentation?

Follow-through: When they say they'll do something, do they do it? The person who consistently doesn't follow through on small commitments will not follow through on large ones.

Loyalty under pressure: Has this person ever been tested in a situation where betrayal was the easier path? How did they behave? People who gossip about others to you will gossip about you to others.

Conflict behavior: How do they handle disagreement and conflict? De-escalation, direct conversation, and resolution are the behaviors you want. Escalation, silent resentment, triangulation (involving third parties instead of addressing directly), and aggression are disqualifying patterns.

Self-awareness: Does this person understand their own limitations? Self-awareness correlates with the ability to learn and improve. Someone who cannot admit error will resist correction in exactly the situations where correction is most important.

2. Stability Assessment

Stability assessment is about the household's current life situation. An unstable household is a liability regardless of individual character.

Financial stability: Significant debt, financial chaos, or a history of making desperate decisions under financial pressure is a concern. Under stress, financial desperation motivates self-interested behavior.

Relationship stability: Unstable intimate relationships create drama, divided loyalties, and security concerns (ex-partners, departing spouses). This is a sensitive topic but relevant.

Personal health and physical capability: Relevant to what they can contribute. A significant health limitation is not disqualifying — it's planning information. Hidden health issues that affect the group's planning are a concern.

Social stability: Do they have a stable social network? Someone without other relationships is overly dependent on the group, which creates unhealthy dynamics. Are they in significant conflict with others in their life?

3. Contribution Assessment

What does this person bring to the group?

Skills: Specific technical skills (medical, mechanical, agricultural, communications) are the most valuable. General physical capability is valuable. Specialized knowledge is valuable.

Resources: Land, equipment, food storage, specific materials. The contribution doesn't have to be equivalent to every other member — different capabilities complement each other.

Labor capacity: The ability to work — physically and mentally — for extended periods. This correlates with health, age, and fitness but is not reducible to any one of them.

Network: Who else do they know? Access to professional networks (medical, legal, engineering) can be as valuable as physical supplies.

The Observation Period

The observation period is the core of vetting. It's not a formal interview — it's intentional relationship-building where you observe the candidate across different contexts.

Contexts to Observe

Low-stakes social situations: How do they treat service workers, strangers, and people who can't do anything for them? Character reveals itself in how people treat those with no power over them.

Mild adversity: How do they handle things going wrong — a plan that fails, unexpected difficulty, something that inconveniences them? This previews how they'll behave under real stress.

Collaborative work: Work on something together. A home improvement project, a community effort, anything that requires coordination and shared labor. How do they communicate? Do they carry their share? How do they handle disagreement about approach?

Conversations about values: Talk about things that matter — not as a values test, but as genuine conversation. You learn a lot about how someone thinks about fairness, reciprocity, responsibility, and community from sustained conversation.

Response to your vulnerability: Share something relatively personal or vulnerable with them. How do they handle it? Do they hold it in confidence? Do they use it against you later? Do they reciprocate appropriately?

Duration

Six months minimum to move from "potentially good candidate" to "trusted group member." Twelve months or more for full access to sensitive group information.

Observe across seasons if possible. Summer barbecues reveal a different person than January stress or summer heat.

The Group Introduction Process

When a candidate is ready to be introduced to the group, the process should be:

1. Sponsor introduction. The member who knows the candidate introduces them to the group one-on-one first — not as a group announcement. Individual introductions let members assess independently.

2. Social-only access first. The candidate interacts with group members socially without access to operational information. Group dinners, community work, general conversations.

3. Group assessment period. After individual members have interacted with the candidate, a group discussion (without the candidate) assesses readiness. Any member can raise concerns. A single well-reasoned objection should pause the process.

4. Graduated access. Full group membership proceeds in layers — general membership before retreat location knowledge, trust-based relationships before sensitive security information.

5. Explicit welcome and expectations. When the group decides to extend full membership, do it explicitly. Explain what membership means and what's expected. Get explicit agreement.

Vetting Red Flags Summary

| Red Flag | Why It Matters | |----------|---------------| | Loose with others' confidences | Will not keep your group's information | | Inconsistent stories | Character or memory issue — both are problems | | Multiple failed significant relationships | Pattern suggests interpersonal problems | | Extreme ideological statements | Inflexibility creates friction; also a OPSEC concern | | Aggressive or threatening behavior | Becomes a security problem under stress | | Consistently doesn't follow through | Group cannot rely on them | | Asks too many questions about your preparations early | Possible information-gathering | | Financial desperation | May compromise group for personal gain | | Rush to join — no patience for relationship-building | Likely has an agenda | | Can't handle any criticism | Creates fragile dynamics under pressure |

None of these individually is necessarily disqualifying — context matters. A pattern of multiple red flags is.