For makers and artists navigating the opaque world of elite networking, the new reality is that your value is no longer just about your work; it is a quantified metric calculated by algorithms before you even arrive at the event. The Dialog Club, a private circle co-founded by Peter Thiel, has been revealed to operate a hidden hierarchy that ranks attendees by wealth and fame, using this data to dictate seating arrangements, networking opportunities, and even who gets disinvited.
The Algorithm of Exclusion
Internal documents obtained by WIRED expose a trove of personal data covering nearly 200 prominent figures scheduled for the group’s annual retreat this summer. This dossier includes home addresses, private phone numbers, email accounts, dates of birth, photographs, emergency contacts, food allergies, and volunteered political leanings. This data is distinct from a looser public directory left exposed on the organization’s website, which includes non-members such as Maryland governor Wes Moore and other guests who have merely passed through Dialog’s orbit in the past.
Established in 2006 by Thiel and data broker Auren Hoffman, Dialog convenes politicians, investors, entrepreneurs, military leaders, executives, academics, and journalists for invitation-only, off-the-record gatherings. According to a document shared by a past participant, the club has “over 1,000 paying members,” with more than 2,500 people having attended its retreats. The organization distinguishes between two products: membership for “dialogers” and retreats for larger groups of 200 or more.
This August, members and guests are scheduled to gather outside Dublin, Ireland, for discussions on artificial intelligence, geopolitics, and modern warfare, led by current and former lawmakers, diplomats, and national security officials. While the club claims to have no ideological agenda and aims to bring together open-minded people to learn new things, the leaked records suggest a rigid, data-driven approach to curation.
Grades, Seats, and Prices
Before anyone joins, Dialog assigns them a grade of A, B, or C. Of the 192 dossiers examined, 130 are tagged as members. The system is counter-intuitive: the “C” grade is reserved for the most famous and influential, awarded to only one in seven people. The majority-141 of 192-received a “B.” The “A” tier is primarily assigned to older, established members whom graders consider less notable.
Actor Josh Brolin-who has never attended a Dialog retreat-is categorized as a VIP largely based on the strength of his fame. One note cites his portrayal of Thanos in the Avengers series and his involvement in high-grossing films like Avengers: Endgame, which grossed over $2.79 billion, contributing to his prominence. Staff further cite his Instagram following of over 3.4 million.
In contrast, economist Tyler Cowen was initially denied a VIP “C” rating because an AI tool described him as “widely recognized within his field” but not a leader of an organization known to the average person. Dialog staff overruled the tool in this case, which was used to assemble dossiers on at least 26 people.
Staff notes attached to around 50 dossiers reveal that wealth is a primary justification for grading. One investor is summed up by the money he oversees-$30 billion in assets under management-while another is marked down with a two-word verdict: “Small AUM.” Fame is a close second. In one instance, a staffer assigned a member a grade “so she doesn’t get seated with grade Cs,” indicating a deliberate effort to avoid seating that member with VIP attendees.
The algorithm consistently fixates on whether the “average person” would recognize someone. For example, Reihan Salam, the president of the Manhattan Institute, was given a “B” rating because “the Manhattan Institute may not be as widely recognized by the average person as some larger organizations.”
Grades are revisited after every retreat in an internal process called a “post-retreat code review.” Alongside a letter grade, most people carry a separate “value-add” score of 1 to 4, averaged from ratings by several staff. Members can be disinvited from events with explanations ranging from “Value Add Too Low” to “Poor Culture Fit” to “Grade Fell Too Low.”
These grades directly influence what attendees are charged. Events can cost tens of thousands of dollars. Bottom-grade attendees are placed on the full-price tier roughly 70 percent of the time, compared with about a quarter of those considered VIPs. Staff set prices by hand; one balking at raising a best-selling author’s fee “just because her boyfriend has $$. Conversely, a quantum-computing startup founder was flagged to be cut after one gathering: “Doesn’t have significant following. [Value add] not high enough to keep.”
Matchmaking and Political Sorting
The records also define the demographic makeup of the group. Women account for roughly a third of those graded, but hold only 18 percent of top marks. The leak shows that Dialog tracks invitees’ apparent political leanings. Members are urged to disclose their own, but staff make separate internal assessments that do not always match. Eleven members were assigned labels despite disclosing nothing, and the self-descriptions of 15 others were overridden. The head of one of the world’s largest conservation groups described himself as left-leaning; Dialog’s staff placed him on the right.
In the data for August’s event, 165 people disclosed their politics: More than half identified with the left. Even so, those on the right were more than twice as likely to carry a “C.”
There is also a built-in matchmaking system that pairs members for networking and dating. Roughly 10 percent of respondents opted into a singles pool. More than three-quarters already have a list of algorithm-suggested matches, which staff appear to refine by hand. One note pairs two members because “you’re both in New York and work in government.”
Dialog maintains a list of “do-not-pair” combinations. Some are spouses, others already professional associates. A former ambassador is flagged against being matched with the head of his family’s organization. Others carry no reason at all: a prominent tech founder and an author are simply flagged against each other. The largest group, though, is members barred from being matched with Dialog’s own staff and organizers.
Key takeaways
- Dialog Club uses an algorithmic grading system (A, B, C) to rank members by fame and wealth, where the highest “C” grade is reserved for the most influential figures.
- The internal data reveals a political sorting mechanism where staff override member self-identifications, often assigning conservative labels to left-leaning individuals.
- Attendees’ grades directly dictate pricing tiers and event access, with lower-rated individuals facing significantly higher costs and potential disinvitation.
- The club employs a sophisticated matchmaking system that pairs members for networking and dating while strictly blocking certain combinations, including staff and specific professional associations.
