- Feb 2023
They write a bunch of crap down that they wish they’d be able to do (secretly knowing they never will) and then their task manager gets overwhelming and they drop it because there is too much noise. This is why systems like Bullet Journal thrive in a digital world. When something is too hard to migrate to a new page or notebook, you just said it’s not worth doing and you let it go. Bullet Journal is a no-first system.
Bullet journaling works well in a noisy world because it forces people to confront what they're eventually not going to do anyway and gets them to drop it rather than leaving it on an ever-growing list.
Carrying forward to do lists manually encourages one to quit things that aren't going to get done.
- Jan 2023
Expansion is led by focus. By taking time to edit, carve up, and refactor our notes, we put focus on ideas. This starts the Great Wheel of Positive Feedback. All hail to the Great Wheel of Positive Feedback.
How can we better thing of card indexes as positive feedback mechanisms? Will describes it as the "Great Wheel of Positive Feedback" which reminds me a bit of flywheels for storing energy for later use.
- positive feedback
- card index as factory space for ideas
- combinatorial creativity
- card index as flywheel
- negative feedback
- energy storage
- card index for writing
- card index for manufacturing ideas
- Jun 2021
We just cannot know all that life will throw at us, and if we want our grading contract to be fair and equitable for everyone, we need to reexamine it, reflect on how it has been working for each of us, and perhaps adjust it.
This idea of re-evaluating at regular time points can be a very useful and powerful tool in more areas than just writing.
Society as a whole needs to look carefully at where it is do do this same sort of readjustment as well.
It's the same sort of negative feedback mechanism which is at work in the scientific method and constantly improving the state-of-the art.
- Dec 2020
Better community building: At the moment, MDN content edits are published instantly, and then reverted if they are not suitable. This is really bad for community relations. With a PR model, we can review edits and provide feedback, actually having conversations with contributors, building relationships with them, and helping them learn.
- community (for a project or product)
- community relations
- helping others to learn
- helping others
- encouraging feedback
- wiki model
- reverting: creates negative experience
- opportunity to improve/fix something
- receiving feedback
- relationship (people)
- online community
- pull request workflow
- community building
- reverting a previous decision/change/commit
- open source community
- Aug 2020
This means that while groups can generate high levels of solidarity, which can in principle be put to powerful political effect, it also becomes harder to express disagreement within the group. If, for example, an outspoken and popular member of a neighbourhood WhatsApp group begins to circulate misinformation about health risks, the general urge to maintain solidarity means that their messages are likely to be met with approval and thanks. When a claim or piece of content shows up in a group, there may be many members who view it as dubious; the question is whether they have the confidence to say as much. Meanwhile, the less sceptical can simply forward it on. It’s not hard, then, to understand why WhatsApp is a powerful distributor of “fake news” and conspiracy theories.
Instead of positive feedback like this, is there a way to create negative feedback loops in these social media apps?
- Feb 2020