How the Peter Thiel-Linked Dialog Club Secretly Ranks Its Members

## Inside Dialog’s Secret Scoring System

WIRED obtained a trove of internal documents that show Dialog—a private club co‑founded by Peter Thiel and data broker Auren Hoffman—assigns every attendee a hidden grade. The grades (A, B, or C) are based on wealth, fame, and perceived public recognition, and they drive decisions about who to meet, where to sit, and who may be excluded.

### The Leaked Dossiers

The files contain personal data for nearly 200 individuals slated for Dialog’s annual retreat this August, including home addresses, phone numbers, email accounts, birth dates, photos, emergency contacts, food allergies, and, when volunteered, political leanings. The leak is separate from a publicly posted, broader directory that listed non‑members such as Maryland Governor Wes Moore and former speakers.

### Dialog’s Structure

Founded in 2006, Dialog describes itself as an “invite‑only community” with two products: - Membership – Over 1,000 paying “dialogers” gain access to private dinners, global treks, concierge services, a private chat group, and more. - Retreats – Large, three‑ to‑four‑day gatherings of 200 + participants (members and guests) that focus on topics like AI, geopolitics, and modern warfare. This August’s retreat outside Dublin will feature discussions on NATO, battlefield technology, and the war in Iran.

(Disclosure: former WIRED editor‑in‑chief Nick Thompson, now CEO of The Atlantic, appears in both the public list and the unreleased files; he declined comment.)

## Grading Methodology

Of the 192 dossiers examined, 130 are marked as members and the remainder are prospects labeled “First Time Dialoger” or “Warm.” Every person receives a letter grade: - C – Reserved for the most famous and influential; roughly 1 in 7 received this grade. - B – The most common rating, assigned to 141 individuals. - A – Typically older, established members deemed less notable.

### Notable Examples

- Josh Brolin – Although he has never attended a Dialog retreat, staff classified him as a VIP “C” because of his role as Thanos and the $2.79 billion box‑office of Avengers: Endgame, plus an Instagram following of over 3.4 million. - Tyler Cowen – The economist was initially denied a “C” rating; an AI tool described him as “widely recognized within his field” but not a household name. Staff overruled the AI to grant him a lower grade.

## Scoring Details

Leaked staff notes for about 50 dossiers reveal the criteria used: - Wealth – Frequently cited; one investor was noted for overseeing $30 billion in assets, another received a two‑word verdict: “Small AUM.” - Fame – Measured by public recognition, often compared to a Fortune 500 company or top celebrity. Reihan Salam received a “B” because the Manhattan Institute “may not be as widely recognized by the average person as some larger organizations.” - Value‑Add Score – A 1‑to‑4 rating averaged from several staff assessments. Low scores can trigger disinvitation with reasons such as “Value Add Too Low,” “Poor Culture Fit,” or “Grade Fell Too Low.” - Moderation Tier – Identifies members trusted to facilitate discussions, run workshops, or host “Soapbox” sessions.

## Pricing and Gender Balance

Grades influence how much attendees pay, often tens of thousands of dollars. Bottom‑grade participants fall into the full‑price tier about 70 % of the time, while only about 25 % of “C”‑grade VIPs pay the highest price. Women make up roughly one‑third of the graded pool but hold just 18 % of top marks.

## Political Leanings

Members are encouraged to self‑report politics, yet staff also assign internal labels. In the August roster, 165 people disclosed politics; over half identified as left‑leaning, but right‑leaning individuals were more than twice as likely to receive a “C.” Eleven members received a label despite no disclosure, and fifteen self‑descriptions were overridden (e.g., a conservation leader who called himself left‑leaning was tagged as right‑leaning).

## Matchmaking Features

Dialog runs an algorithmic matchmaking system for networking and dating. About 10 % of respondents opted into a singles pool, and more than three‑quarters received algorithm‑suggested matches, refined manually by staff. Introductions include a photo and brief bio. The database also flags “do‑not‑pair” combinations—for spouses, existing professional partners, or staff members, and occasionally for unexplained reasons such as a tech founder and an author.

## Public Stance

A former participant’s statement, shared with WIRED, asserts: “We have no ideological agenda. Dialog is nonpartisan and nonpolitical. We want all participants to come away with a better understanding of the truth—but we don’t presume to know what the truth is. We simply believe that when we bring together open‑minded people who are at the top of their fields, with diverse backgrounds and perspectives, they will learn new things.”

Correction (6/18/2025, 8:02 pm EST): A mischaracterization of what Nick Thompson was asked has been corrected.