About
Why I built Opponentura
I own and run a business, and I make decisions I eventually pay for with my own money. I already have partners, employees, lawyers and advisers. What I was missing was a separate process whose job is to challenge the frame, identify what we are taking on faith and find the fact that should make us change course.
That became Opponentura — decision-support software for high-stakes, hard-to-reverse decisions. First it helps make the subject of the decision precise. Then AI roles test assumptions, numbers, alternatives, counterparties and downside. The useful output is not merely criticism: it shows what to verify, what to change and what should make you proceed or reconsider.
We tested our own launch first
The first public high-stakes decision Opponentura reviewed was its own launch. The verdict was REVISE. The original sealed PDF remains public and unchanged, with the same hash it had when issued: we prefer an imperfect immutable record to a polished retrospective.
Who reads what, and who decides
I do not read the reports, and I am not part of the review itself. What I will not claim is the absolute “nobody ever sees anything”, because it would not be true. There are exactly two routine paths where I see what you wrote:
- Support. Write to
/paysupportand your question and the whole correspondence come to me — otherwise there would be nobody to answer. It is stored separately from case materials. - A published sample. Only where you agreed personally and the permission is recorded in our registry.
Panel members are AI roles. If a real human guest ever sits on a panel, the report will identify them as a person.
Founder
Vadim Kamashev. A business owner who built Opponentura for himself first and opened it to others afterwards. The rule it grew from is simple: sleep on it before a big decision. The service makes that night useful — while you sleep, the decision goes through procedures of analysis you would not have thought of.
I am not part of the hearing itself: the panel chair runs the session and I do not read the report. To write directly — @opponentura.
And about data — as a matter of principle. There is not a single tracker on this site: no Google Analytics, no Yandex Metrica, no pixels. You may sign up under any name and from any account — your real name is neither needed nor verified. Email is requested only so the payment platform can issue an invoice. Nobody reads the report: not me, not employees — there are no hired employees. This is not marketing but a condition of the work: there is nothing to analyze if you cannot speak freely. Amusingly, that is exactly what the panel told me when I put my own launch plan in front of it.
Payment operator
Payments, invoices and refunds go through a registered individual entrepreneur, who is also the party to the Terms of Service and the recipient of payments.
| Legal form and name | Individual entrepreneur Kirill I. Aleksandrov — a partner in the project (Russian Federation) |
| TIN | 770475518824 |
| OGRNIP | 323774600519901 |
| Activity | data processing and information hosting services (Russian classifier code 63.11) |
| Taxes | special tax regime; VAT is not charged |
| Governing law | the laws of the Russian Federation |
| Contact | the
Service's Telegram bot @OPPONENTURAbot email opponentura@gmail.com — written requests |
The work happens in the bot: conversations about money are kept, so every request leaves a trace you can point back to. Email is the second channel — for people without Telegram and for paperwork: claims, “Special case” contracts and personal-data requests. Full terms are in the Terms of Service.
How we handle being wrong
A verdict is not a prophecy — it is a map of risks with check-by dates. We assume we will be wrong sometimes, and say in advance what we do about it:
- We keep a ledger of verdicts and reconcile them against how the matter actually ended. While the Service is young the sample is small — publishing accuracy percentages off a dozen cases would be passing noise off as statistics. Once the count runs into dozens, the summary will appear on this page.
- A contested fact is marked as contested. Before printing, the report passes a fact review by another vendor's engine: what is unconfirmed stays unconfirmed instead of turning into a confident claim.
- An error in an issued report is corrected by issuing a new one — with a new number and a reference to the previous document. Silently rewriting a document that is already with the recipient is impossible: they hold a file whose hash sits in our register.
- A technical failure of a hearing is our problem, not yours. The hearing is re-run or the payment is returned.
What the Service does not do
It gives no legal, financial or medical advice — this is decision-support software. It does not decide for you: the final word always belongs to the owner of the question. It does not take on the topics listed as prohibited. It runs no analytics counters and loads no third-party scripts — how we handle data.