I’ve been thinking—what is an awareness-first problem-solving process that I can really recommend? It should be one that integrates awareness as a starting factor, and then builds on top. It also needs to be a process that gives the awareness full credit for what it can do, while suggesting follow-on steps. Awareness may be key, but it’s also not everything.

I wasn’t really happy with existing paradigms (and I don’t have time to go researching every problem-solving paradigm out there, that’s for sure), so here’s my own shot at it.

These are the steps in what I’ll call the A2i Loop:

1. Awareness
2. Observation
3. Analysis
4. Execution
5. Integration (then back to the start)

Here are some of the major inputs at various stages of the loop:

1. Awareness <— Calls upon Passive-Energetic Inputs
2. Observation <— Calls upon Sensational Inputs
3. Analysis <— Calls upon Logical Inputs (Typically starting with organization of information)
4. Execution <— Calls upon Intuitive Inputs (Conceptualization)
5. Integration <— Calls upon Executive-Energetic Inputs (Concretization)

Integration is a step which is concerned with change-energy—you’ve executed and now there’s this brand new outcome / identity / form / format to integrate into your consciousness. It changes your very state of being. It often ushers in a reflective energy, along with a new form of prospective transcendence-energy in which your “self” or even team identity has changed. This in turn becomes part of, and affects, your new awareness…

Documenting the changes or new knowledge as part of the Integration step can greatly enhance results from using the A2i Loop. If you want to get the most out of the A2i Loop, you should be able to observe yourself capturing new knowledge and integrating it into new pursuits.

The Integration step will generally be more effective, the more the integrated knowledge or experience can be interpreted as flexibly as possible in terms of its scope. If you can play with new ideas and learning takeaways, and take a multiple-model approach, you are more likely to gain fast and effective results from the A2i Loop.

Personality Ramifications?

While this isn’t meant to “fit” any given personality type model, I’d guess that EJ personality types tend to be skilled in the final steps E & I. IP types would tend to be more skilled in the initial steps AOA (I’ll call the second A “A2”).

IJ types (like us INTJs) would then need to build gap-bridging competence through A, O, A2, and E. EP types would need to build gap-bridging competence from I through A2.

In general though, being of a type wouldn’t automatically make one more competent than someone else in any particular area. For example, quickly drawing on the intuition to execute on a problem doesn’t say much about the quality of the conceptualized solution; some qualitative work on the imaginative-iterative process is probably a good idea for most people.

Compared to OODA Loop

One concept of which I was aware going into this was the OODA Loop. OODA never caught on for me, I think in part because it’s mostly hard, and not as hard and soft as it could be. Here’s how I see the major differences:

• A2i directly integrates the “soft” concepts of feelings, energy, and the intuition. (These are relevant even in a military context!)
• A2i Begins with Awareness, which in my view is different (often much different) from Observation. Cultivating awareness is a specific activity which can even serve its own ends.
• A2i Ends with Integration, which yields a deeper and longer effect than “Action,” especially if integrated with recall. Capture of the Integration step is also a “soft process” which can yield results like the activation of a reward system, a celebration, etc.
• A2i is effective while being simpler than OODA. It also opens up a more elegant and realistic solutions-oriented process, if I do say so myself ;-)

A Basic Exercise

• Think of a problem of which you’ve recently become aware.
• Write down your observations of the problem, either as you can recall it, or as you actively observe it, or both.
• Bring some organization to the observations. Can they be organized by time, location, level of rest, people involved, etc.?
• What does your intuition or imagination tell you would make a good thing to try or test next, in order to help solve the problem?
• What happened when you tried it?
• You are now a changed being—and perhaps your problem set has changed as well. Start again with your new pool of experience and energy inputs. Of what are you now more aware than you were before? Or how has your awareness changed?

Update, 2020-09: The AOAEI Loop has been renamed as the A2i Loop.

Filed in: Intuition /62/ | Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Energy /120/ | Sensation /40/ | Publications /44/ | Te /36/ | Thinking /70/ | Productivity /119/ | Ti /30/ | Control /110/

Today’s journaling template update includes a couple of non-minor updates:

• Health metrics (if it’s healthy for you to track those)
• A timestamp prefix tip for tracking DaySCOR rating changes throughout one’s day
• …plus various minor updates to wording.

As always:

I continue to use this template myself, and find that it has become one of my most useful tools for near-instant stress relief. Over time, this habit also tends to build a pool of documentation which can be used for knowledge capture.

Filed in: Technology /41/ | Energy /120/ | Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Fi /35/ | Thinking /70/ | Coaching /27/ | Feeling /64/ | Te /36/

This framework (I’ll call it FE2M) is meant to assist in bringing questions of competence to your conscious awareness. It can add more decisiveness or direction to your practice of, or experience with, a thing.

The “thing” in question could be a hobby, a type of food, a form of physical self-care, or many other things. This can also help firm up individual goals or new year’s resolutions.

Experience Level

Pick a level to use as a prefix.

• x0 = I haven’t tried it yet. I may be enjoying thinking about trying it.
• x1 = I gave it a basic look-over, or a basic read, and a try.
• x2 = I attempted to do some real work / real X while applying it. I have spent somewhere over 20 hours or have had something like 50+ sessions with this thing. I may have made big progress.
• m0 = I am maintaining a practice of this which keeps me sharp. I made some notes or otherwise organized what I have learned, and what I need to learn about it, or try, next. I have at least a medium-term goal of where to get to with this, in my mind’s eye and on paper.
• m1 = I have done it / used it enough to know it inside and out. I know not only its common problems; I also know many workarounds. I could easily teach it to others, up to the intermediate level, without further study. I am very flexible in its use / application / integration.
• m2 = I have done it / used it enough to build my own methods or ideas onto it and adapt it or change it when needed. Such methods are also useful to others. I could teach it at the advanced level without further study. I can teach multiple philosophies or theories of the thing. This can be plainly seen from my public practice or demonstration of my skill. According to existing, objective measures agreed upon by people neutral to or unknown to myself, I am at this level.
• m3 = I have taken the practice of the thing well beyond what others would. I have integrated it into other practices to a degree rarely seen. I am an elite expert at it—there are perhaps less than one thousand people at this level in the world. This fact has been recognized by multiple objective third parties (people who don’t know me or have a stake in my practice, and who are also experts).

Quite intentionally, m2 and m3 levels get into starkly objective conditions. For example, you may not be able to be an m3 artist without having won multiple, extremely exclusive art awards, and having been interviewed by those outside the field like journalists who live on the other side of the planet and otherwise wouldn’t know you, except that your art is appearing on everyone’s T-shirts in their country (just as an example).

This also gets at the importance of specificity and the niche—how many thousands of great “artists” are there, vs. the number of blind tattoo artists? And yet, with the objectivity factor also taken into account, things cannot be ridiculously specific, can they? Otherwise there may be no one who cares enough to rate your expertise. So this may point at the need to do more thinking about one’s practice or specialty (if desired).

Not everything needs to go to an m3, and the point of the framework is only to assist in establishing balance or momentum where desired, rather than encourage you to literally level up on everything. This is why the Energy Resource Rating is included…

Energy Resource Rating

In order to capture the emotive / soft side of the practice, one of the following suffixes is added to the overall level.

• _0. Thinking about this completely de-energizes me. I’m burnt out and really hate this.
• _1. I don’t like it at all. When others discuss it, I’d rather talk about other things.
• _2. I’m not happy about it, or my practice of it.
• _3. I’m not interested in it at all.
• _4. I’m pretty ‘meh’ about it. Generally disinterested.
• _5. I’m looking forward to more time with it.
• _6. I’d rather spend more time with it than many other good things right now.
• _7. I’m excited to see what I can learn next.
• _8. It makes me exceedingly happy to think about doing this again.
• _9. I cannot contain my excitement to get to the next level with this thing.

(If in doubt, always round down. For example, a 4.5 would be a 4.)

For ratings under 5, also specify…

• a. I am not sure why I am at this level. I may need to think or write about my thoughts, if I’m to find a balance point with this thing.
• b. I don’t see a reason to progress with it. I may need to apply more nuance in how I experience or think about it.
• c. I don’t see a way to progress with it. I may need to do more experimentation, find new ideas, or talk to others.

Examples

Here are some personal examples:

Eating Squid: x1_4c. I have tried it quite a few times, but I may just need to get used to the texture via exposure. I’m also not sure if there might be a dried squid flavor or variety that I like more than others. I may need to research this.

Running for Fitness: x2_3b. I enjoyed it in the past, but these days—no thanks. I see no reason to take it further. One of my doctors gave me a pamphlet on roller-blading instead, saying he’d prefer to see less joint damage in sports.

Geany Text Editor: m1_6. I keep a file on my changes, am proud of how flexibly I can use it, and I really enjoy my time spent in this editor.

Watercolor Illustration: m1_4a. I’m much better at this than I used to be. Still, I’m sensitive to the fact that my practice feels disorganized, despite my experience level. This is sapping my energy because restarting the practice starts to feel like starting from square one. I can see I need to start on that organization, at the very least.

Tips

• Retracement: Go back a couple levels and act as if you are on that level. A disorganized m1 may need to go back to m0 (See Watercolor Illustration example, above)
• …I’ll add other tips here as the practice develops…

I hope this is helpful to some of you!

Filed in: Energy /120/ | Thinking /70/ | Control /110/ | Publications /44/ | Te /36/ | Productivity /119/ | Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Goals /52/

On occasion I really, really enjoy an energy drink. For years I thought these were basically a tool of Satan himself (I literally thought that, in case you’re not aware of my hard-core religious upbringing).

Since that time, much to the contrary, I’ve found that energy drinks are:

• Usually pretty tasty
• Fun to try
• Nice to look at (the can designs)
• Pleasant delivery mechanisms for caffeine

How I Avoid Overdoing It

Since I started using caffeine, my methods have evolved. As a caffeine user I’d guess I’m a bit of an outlier, because I use caffeine in a structured, planned-out way. I’m more likely to take caffeine in tablet form, at a planned time, than as a drink.

My to-do list often shows entries like, “2 p.m., take 100mg caffeine,” which is an F / Circle activity if you use Task BATL.

To me, an energy drink is more like a fun treat, like eating an ice cream cone.

Energy drinks usually contain anywhere from 90 to 200 milligrams of caffeine. In my opinion this is pretty lightweight. Typical store-bought caffeine tablets are 200 mg. each.

I’ve been supplementing with caffeine for a while now, and my body seems to know when it would benefit from caffeine. When I was just starting to try it, I would get migraines because of caffeine use during productivity exhaustion. I didn’t realize that there are specific times when caffeine use will get you amazing results, and other times when even if you “need” the productivity, caffeine is not going to help as much as other methods and it might even cause you pain or harm.

When Caffeine Really Helps

According to my research, caffeine helps me most when:

• Starting my day (especially after 7.5 to 9 hours of sleep)
• Working out / getting cardio
• Going hiking
• Resuming work after taking a nice nap
• Returning from the dentist (more on that below)
• Driving on a road trip
• Making heavy use of the intuition, especially extraverted intuition

I don’t think I’ve ever gone over 1000mg caffeine in one day, but that would be a pretty extreme day, and most of that would come from caffeine tablets, not energy drinks.

I also don’t really get addicted to things so I’m the wrong guy to ask about consistently overdoing it, or breaking the habit. But if you are getting more than 500 to 700mg of caffeine a day, for god’s sake I hope you are finding some downtime to be gentle on yourself.

I do keep records on my energy drink hobby, for the heck of it (or for the learning of it, which is fun to me). As of right now I enjoy about two to three energy drinks a month, on average.

My Favorite Energy Drink

My all-time favorite flavor & brand is a tie, between Original CELSIUS Sparkling WildBerry and Original CELSIUS Orange. (No affiliation, I just like their products)

• Visually: I love the can shape, and I like how they colored the top of the can black.
• Taste-ually: The flavors are really pleasant and light. Not even close to overbearing.
• Calorie-ually: 10 calories total—great if you are on a cut or otherwise aiming for a caloric deficit. But “low calorie” is also code-word for “light flavor” which is another aspect I like.

One of these, accompanied by a donut, is probably one of my favorite breakfast meals of all time.

Also, if I have an appointment at the dentist, I try to pick one up afterward, as both a reward for visiting the dentist and a method of making any pain-numbing anesthetic effects wear off more quickly. The caffeine works really well at that, for me.

Note: CELSIUS is a “Fitness Drink,” but to me it’s basically an energy drink. Still, the formulation seems different from the average energy drink, so maybe there’s something to it—or maybe it’s just marketing speak. Not sure.

Another brand I like is Adrenaline Shoc, especially the Frozen Ice flavor.

My Least-favorite Energy Drink

Last year I bought a $1 energy drink at a local store, just to test it out while spending a weekend camping. I think it was supposed to be a copy of 5-hour Energy, as it came in a small bottle and similar packaging.

That drink had the most powdery, bitter, taurine & caffeine taste I think I’ve ever experienced. It was so gross that I almost gagged and reached for anything nearby to eat, drink, and cover up the taste.

Filed in: Sensation /40/ | Fitness /31/ | Openness /49/ | Energy /120/ | Interests /111/ | Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Intuition /62/

Edit: This blog post turned into its own productivity system. You can learn more about how it works.

If “productivity” means “getting things done,” we need a new concept within productivity to start addressing a broader set of aspects that matter.

The concept of “getting things done” is way too exclusive. It too easily works against the grain of human psychology. When you fail to “get things done,” you are being “uproductive,” and you reach for labels like “procrastinator.”

There’s always something a person is not “getting done.” So why keep pushing this button? It’s madness. Meaningless madness.

Productivity, given such limited definition, easily becomes a baroque guilt mechanism, almost like a medieval torture device. A quiet killer, difficult to move around in, and excruciating.

Here is a broader set of the aspects that matter:

• Getting things done
• Getting things felt
• Getting things out
• Getting things up
• Getting things said

Each one of these aspects can enable “Getting things done,” in a way that focusing only on “Getting things done” can’t.

We need tools that help us to stop torturing ourselves.

I’ll call this set of things “Whole Productivity” for now, and return to it later.

Filed in: Control /110/ | Productivity /119/

Detacher: The opposite of an addict.

• Quitting bad things, and making big changes in my life, are my gifts!
• But also in a negative way
• Damn, I went off my medication again
• Not the one that saves my life
• But the one that I liked
• Why would I detach from that?

Why would I detach from…

• Something I like?
• Someone I like?
• The world?

I can see everything from here…from the outside. Why do I feel so supreme,

• And yet so troubled?
• I wonder if I could ever detach from my flesh and blood. The things I love…just
• Not in my attention anymore?
• Or if in my attention, somehow not…seen? Done? Anymore.

This is just a sketch of the detacher, especially when they realize that detachment is not just being “great at not being an addict.” I’ve also shared some ideas for detachers if they may be useful.

Note: Some have contacted me to point out that I should correct myself—They tell me that the opposite of “addiction” is “love”, or some other word, depending on their studies or background.

Please keep in mind that those are simply terminologies used by different models/systems, and the detachment model above is what I consider another one for the pile. It has been my experience that it’s usually better to have & use multiple models, as opposed to just one.

Filed in: Control /110/ | Anxiety /32/

Today I’m taking my first steps in publishing a new concept called a “Capture Map.” A Capture Map captures broad sets of ideas so that you can gain an overview, then quickly get deep and begin executing, organizing, or taking things wherever they need to go.

What’s A Capture Map?

A Capture Map is, first and foremost: You, expressing what’s on the inside. Some additional principles:

Open-Canvas Concept: A Capture Map should be thought of as a canvas on which you can express yourself (or your team, etc.) with any degree of abstraction, intent, or lack of intent. If you want to draw a car, that can be part of your map, for example as a core metaphor that expresses your mood, as a theming method for the Capture Map.

Breadth-first Concept: A Capture Map is fundamentally broad-to-deep. Usually you either start with broad effect (“everywhere I go, I see this image,” or “no matter what I do, I’m feeling love throughout my body”) or broad information (“I have at least ten ideas to put down, need to develop a schedule, and want to write down that inspiring quote I just read”). These items are broadly-captured, meaning more time is spent on capturing all the items, and then they are deeply-developed, meaning usually later or toward the end of the exercise, you would extract a direction, organization, conviction, or other outcome.

Whatever the Capture Map shows, the point is that the Capture Map is what’s on your mind. A Capture Map can start and end right there. However, a capture map also…

A. Encourages Development of Captured Items: A Capture Map encourages you to scrutinize the objects on the map. What do they mean to you? What are the accompanying ideas? While Capture Mapping, we seek to extract some inner reverberance, or energy, and leverage that toward expression of meaning and energy in the outer world.

In this way, a Capture Map can help you bridge the gap between art and organization. Sometimes art is just an expression—that’s the end. But sometimes art or image is an inner message to your conscious world. Sometimes art or image is an inspiring bridge to a new technology, or the completion of a long-procrastinated project, or the reconciliation of a broken relationship.

B. Employs Modularity: In future updates I’ll be showing examples of modules that can be used, or not used, with Capture Mapping. Some quick examples:

• Map Metaphor: A Capture Map can be expressed as a software application, if you’d like to draw its interface! A Capture Map can be expressed as a video game. Or a drawing of your heart. Or a map with islands. Capture Maps encourage you to employ as much metaphor as is helpful in creating a model for your state of thought or feeling. This model can then be helpful for communicating with others or remembering how you felt or thought in the past.
• List Activities: A Capture Map can start as a bunch of lists scattered around a page. Lists can then be related to scheduling nodes, or brainstorming artwork.
• The Journaling Node: A Capture Map can contain one or several Journaling Nodes, of any shape or orientation. In this way, a full journal entry can be part of a Capture Map, just as a Capture Map can be part of a journal entry.
• The Mood Sweep. Review your Capture Map and ask—what else is not expressed here? What key thoughts or feelings am I leaving out?
• The Index Node: This node can help you spread a Capture Map across many pages of a notebook, by organizing a guide, or index-style section which helps you orient yourself to the various thoughts or expressions in the Capture Map.
• Sound and Media-inclusive: A Capture Map can indicate, play, or otherwise involve sound. Sound indicates metaphor extremely well, and should be used where possible. The same goes for video and gaming. A video game session can be captured as an inner expression pointing at a reconciliation with outer-world problems.

Let’s talk about how Capture Map is different from other map-type systems:

Difference from Information Mapping

• A Capture Map is not fundamentally research-based.
• A Capture Map does not need to look like a “map of related items”

Difference from Concept Mapping

• A Capture Map does not imply relatedness. A Capture Map can hold disparate ideas or data and does not emphasize relation-seeking or reconciliation unless desired.
• A Capture Map does not need to look like a “map of related items”

Difference from Mind Mapping

• In Capture Mapping, there is no particular emphasis on, or pressure to create, a central node.
• In Capture Mapping, there is no general emphasis on color.
• In Capture Mapping, there is no general emphasis on edge styles.
• In Capture Mapping, there is no general emphasis on interconnectedness. Connections may be added or be erased, at any time. (Archipelago concept)
• A Capture Map does not need to look like a “map of related items”
• A Capture Map can start and end with a single image; sometimes that central image is a single, but powerful message to the Self, or to the Team.

So…Do you just draw or write whatever is on your mind?

That’s the first step! Here are some examples.

The item above may look like: A mockup, a graphic design sample. It is those, but it is also metaphor, a map of a way in which I needed to change the way I was looking at my current problem set: Employ precision, elegance, technical creativity, and inner emotion.

Collage-centered Capture Maps:

Collage A:

Collage B:

Collage C:

Collage can be interpreted as a signpost: It’s where you are. But collage can also be interpreted as a map: It’s where you need to go. In each of the cases above, my inner expression told me where I needed to go.

Big Problem: Do I need to be an artist? I’m so not an artist.

Nope! You can make lists, use spreadsheets, and find your favorite music to listen to when doing so. From there, your understanding of the additional techniques of Capture Mapping will probably only get better.

Some of my most effective maps have been spreadsheets with some found icons, googled imagery, or captions spread around the page.

As your practice matures, you will find that a new depth arises. Spreadsheets are not as limited anymore. Doodles are no longer just doodles. They may help you open up an entire new world and lead to everything you ever wanted for yourself or others.

After I’ve drawn, or written, then what?

After you draw, list, spreadsheet, or otherwise express yourself, you can be done! A big point is to get what’s on the inside, out.

You can decide if you’d like to deepen your practice from there, for example by asking…

• What am I ready to do now, that I wasn’t ready to do before?
• What direction did this give me?
• Thinking about a person who creates this—where do they go from here? Where does their work direct them to travel? Or how does their work reveal new and plausible strategies?
• What does this say about me—the colors I used, the words written? What does it say about my strengths in this situation? My pain points?
• “Is that really it? Are there colors, moods, feelings? Are there visions, hopes, dreams?”

Are there steps I should make sure not to leave out?

Here are some anti-patterns! Things not to do:

• Don’t think this is “just” drawing or collage.
• Don’t limit yourself to one idea, or focus on one idea, topic, or goal. The point is to express as many as you want to get out of your mind. New ideas, people, problems, projects, whatever. A Capture Map could easily encapsulate hundreds or thousands of discrete topics.
• Don’t miss out on the analysis step. What came out? How does it feel? What needs to happen next?
• Don’t try to relate everything to everything else. While such relations are possible, they’re not everything. If relatedness helps you, use it. If it doesn’t, don’t.
• Don’t forget that a big part of Capture Mapping is enabling productivity. While it’s not just a checklist tool, it’s also not just a feelings exercise. While it’s not just a spreadsheet tool, it’s also not just a mandala tool.

What software do you use for this?

So far the most widely-available, general purpose Capture Map software I’ve found is graphics software:

• Inkscape, Affinity Designer, Adobe Illustrator, etc.
• MS Paint, Kolourpaint, JS Paint, etc.
• Libreoffice Draw, or any of the Libreoffice software packages. Also MS Word, Softmaker Office, etc.

Note that one of the advantages of using an office package can be specific elements like built-in spreadsheeting. A spreadsheet could be an important part of a Capture Map which deals with tabular or spreadsheet-ready data. Further, presentation software could help add interactivity or an extra dimension of depth to a capture map, for example showing how an idea on the map could change over time.

What about paper, pens, pencils?

I’ve used it all. This is why I developed Capture Mapping, as a way to unify all of the good things I experienced in various media.

In the future I hope to share more about this new concept. It’s been a lot of fun to build. Finally:

What should an INTJ keep in mind about this concept?

Details Matter: I know it can be tempting to say, “oh, so it’s just…(something I knew about, or knew how to express before)” but in fact the details really matter. In my research I never found a system matching its design, philosophy and results in one package.

Experience Matters: You may not be able to “know” this until you practice at it for some time. I hope to continue introducing materials to assist.

Filed in: Control /110/ | Planning /17/ | Energy /120/ | Publications /44/ | Goals /52/ | Thinking /70/ | Intuition /62/ | Technology /41/ | Therapeutic Practice /144/ | Productivity /119/

Last week I disabled comments on one of my Youtube videos. I don’t exactly have a big, popular channel, but in the span of one day:

• Two commenters used the comment section to lodge general complaints about people they don’t like. Legit grievances I think, but I was concerned about specific aspects of the comment leading to a flame war. This kind of thing is all over Youtube and it’s just a disgrace. A huge disappointment.
• Another commenter complained that I hadn’t put enough work into a video. And yet, the whole idea of this video was to quickly put something out there in order to help people.
• Finally, one commenter looked up my phone number and called me for tech support.

Aaand, that’s about when I decided to disable comments on that video. This week I’m thinking of disabling the rest.

(And is it just me, or does Youtube’s messaging template for disabled comments make you feel like a jerk for doing this? Deep inside, just about everybody wants to think of themselves as a person who invites community feedback.)

This video makes some good points:

That is, with the possible exception of “Reddit is full of thoughtful productive…” …eh. If you’ve participated in Reddit discussions, you know that exercising huge amounts of restraint while filtering out annoying comments is also part of the Reddit experience.

Behold: Today’s Solution-focused Human, Ready for the 2020s

This all got me thinking: What kind of comment system would I like? I’m not comfortable just taking shots at Youtube or Reddit without contributing in some way.

We may never see a “filter out annoying human psychology” button, because human psychology is amazingly dynamic, adaptive, and flexible. But here are some ideas based around what I’ll call a Comment Engine. Hopefully it speaks to the needs of dynamic, adaptive, and flexible human psychology.

The idea is to encourage developers, or even just interested folks, to design plug-in “comment engines” rather than forcing a fixed comment system design on everyone. Comment engines could, in turn, draw on a wide pool of bots, parametric filters, art assets, and other style/computation-transcendant templates to design unique, creative interaction systems.

As an example, a restrained and quiet online religious community may not even need to bother with a bot or filter that sweeps for inappropriate language. But they may decide to use bots to encourage new discussions and raise the activity level a bit. This could be done through an award system, customizable in-comment profiles, etc.

And as a plus, content migration between differing comment engines is designed in. A periodic comment engine switch would be designed in as part of the system, not a problem to cause huge issues down the road.

Here are some ideas for variants:

The Comment Engine: Creator Choice

• Allow creators and publishers (individual Youtube channels, Facebook personalities) to pick from differing comment engines. This way, they can try out those they like and see what fits best.
• Creators can also challenge participants to design CE’s that fit their community best.

The Comment Engine: Community Choice

• Allow communities to enable a variety of different comment engines across their communities, in different locations / discussions.

The Comment Engine: User Choice

• Allow individual users to submit comments via the engine of their choice. By default, other users will have to filter for, and activate, that engine in order to participate in the discussion via that engine.
• For example, a user could submit a comment via their favorite engine, to see how it’s received.
• Others who like this comment engine could be notified when it’s activated.
• Other users can indicate in their settings whether they want to see any or all comments. Specific comment engines and characteristics can be left off, so they’ll never see that kind of discussion.
• Content creators can highlight or share comments from various engines, giving attention to the type of comments they want to encourage.

Some blend of the above would also be really cool to see. And since it’s tech, the evolutionary factor of a comment system continually evolving could by itself solve a lot of problems with behavior.

I have some ideas for individual engines, too, but that’ll have to wait for later. I don’t think it’s unrealistic that a new “world wide web” of comments-as-personal-pages could arise, giving room for both personality and expression while balancing community needs.

Filed in: Ne /17/ | Relationships /78/ | Technology /41/ | People /74/ | Ni /42/ | Intuition /62/ | Essays /52/ | Thinking /70/ | Ti /30/

Some of you emailed with kind words, hoping you hadn’t caused any offense.

Nope it wasn’t you guys, it’s other folks. And those people aren’t going to email me to check in on how I’m feeling about them, that’s for damn sure!

Two fun examples of stuff I get below:

Informationally Yours

These are emails that are like info-fragments. No introduction, no anything. It’s like I queried a database and got my results via email.

“Listen to the Serious Guys Podcast, episode 31. It is all about what you just wrote.” This person is projecting knowledge of third-party stuff, which makes them smart and interesting, similar to how a real, living, breathing database would be. I guess. But that’s the whole frigging email! Man, talk about being ready to be replaced by a robot—there you go. Also, telling people that what they wrote is just like something else…hmm—think about how that reads.

(My full article URL in the subject line) “There is a book about this, by XYZ Press.” Thanks Alexa!

“This was interesting, thank you.” Aw shucks. I’m sure your programmer just put that in as an easter egg! (Again, this is the whole email)

If you do this stuff, add some humanity to my reading experience. I do that for my readers all the time; it’s a gift maybe, but there’s also kind of a minimum bar to meet no matter who you are. (Also self, if you catch yourself doing that ever…also, stop.)

Special Commentary Track

Others write with meta-commentary:

“This article is just OK. Do you know if your readers are reading this? People skim on the web, and what you wrote may be hurting your chances of communicating to people who skim everything.”

“It’s not really about (what the title of the article was). I think you need to think about that again and revise.”

(Usually this person is an aspiring writer and they can’t get started, in an ironic twist. They’re projecting)

So yeah, don’t do this. This is how people destroy relationships in no time at all. True or not, again there’s a minimal bar of interpersonal harmonizing to be met. Plus it’s usually a qualitative flex. You know what that means? If I reply to what you wrote, you are going to get roasted because I’ve analyzed this writing style since my INTJ dad used to write me letters of criticism as a kid. I know how to point out the critic’s weaknesses. That’s become one of my superpowers. From warping and stretching their professional experience to serve as justification for any point of view, to using hyperbole to fill in where logic and objectivity are sadly lacking—I’m noticing all those critical blind spots from over here, when I read these emails.

If you can’t skim the site and don’t like that, eh. To me I get it but I’ve also put a lot of thought into the topic. I’ve been familiar with the various web writing theories since I started writing for the web years back. But there’s also this thing called “some people really need to learn to appreciate the details of things,” and a lot of those people are INTJs. That’s a huge part of my own journey—moving from info-nugget guy to nuanced, deeper thought. Embracing and organizing complexity. The benefits have been amazing, therefore I’m probably not going to spend much time making this blog “skimmable”.

Conclusion

It’s really awkward to reply to those, so I usually don’t, and I never have time to listen to whatever it is, so I thought I’d try to save those people some effort, give them a bit of warning up front that they’re wasting time.

That’s it!

I don’t really like being grumpy like my 10th grade P.E. teacher or something. But also, I am unashamedly and amazingly grumpy sometimes—this blog operates on that as a foundational principle ;-) and I hope things like that give everybody else a bit of space to be human, too.

Filed in: Relationships /78/ | People /74/

The more I write about productivity, the more disappointed I am with you all.

• You never told me that productivity and fun were meant to go together.
• You never told me that procrastination is not worth much, as a word. Yeah, that word is not helping anybody.
• You never told me that our entire way of looking at productivity, as a global culture, is broken, depressing, and merely focused on “getting things done.”

Well, thanks a lot for that. Sheesh!

I’m working on more solutions on top of what I’ve already written about here.

But it’s nice to kind of zero things out. I feel like I can see much more clearly now. Productivity is a clean slate across which I intend to scrape my long, jagged fingernails. I’m cackling and enjoying it.

Filed in: Productivity /119/ | Procrastination /23/