proper corona admin, vol 30

My biggest problem early on in lockdown was that I was washing my hands so often it sandpapered my hands. On the second day of work from home, the skin on the back of my right hand broke out into a rash, and for a week or so it was a minor but nontrivial inconvenience. I made some simple interventions - warm rather than hot water, for example - and things have slowly returned to normal.

I was concerned about my skin again a couple of weeks ago when Boston began encouraging residents to wear some form of a mask in public. My skin's hidden function is to hide the bad skin underneath, and I suspected having constant contact with fabric would have an unwanted effect. Mask or not, I was making a rash decision. Further complicating the calculus was the knowledge that although regular hand washing is an established protective strategy, the success of homemade masks is not nearly on the same order of magnitude from a health perspective.

So far, though, so good. In hindsight, my worry led to overlooking a key detail - I'm not out enough for my skin to suffer the effect of a face mask. I suspect my concerns about my skin are a lot like someone who eats fish once a month worrying about mercury poisoning. A moment of worry is justified, especially in these times, but dwelling on it is another matter, and should only be reserved for regular, consistent, or disproportionate risks.

proper corona admin, vol 29

Some more news from... the front? The back? The hill? The hell?

Oh well. No politics today, at least (unless you are one of those who think everything is political, but in that case I guess this problem is nothing new).

Apartment update

At the start of the lockdown there was a delightful little thought that came my way via the Information Superhighway - the next time you look for a new place to live, the inevitable question will float through your mind: can I imagine myself quarantined here? Those who peek into my current apartment are best advised to answer - yes, yes I can!

However, those who peek into my apartment currently may reach a different conclusion ("no"). Precisely why will be clear to anyone who has seen my apartment in the past month. Let's say my apartment looks like a tipped-over Goodwill donation truck, which is half-accurate because that's where most of my stuff ends up anyway.

Arrested developments

The way I do these write ups, it's hard to remember whether I've already used a joke on TOA. For example, did I write yet about my confusion that no one is talking about how the first step for reopening the country should be downgrading the pandemic to an epidemic? Or that Trump is handling some aspects of this situation so badly, you wonder if it's his first pandemic? How about the one where I point out that the real problem with social distancing is that most people can't figure out six feet, even with two yardsticks?

I'll stop, for now, but if you like these jokes I'll be here all day, and week, and probably month, assuming no one burns this sucker down. This is gonna be our best spring ever, Mikey.

proper corona admin, vol xxviii - politically correct party

Hi reader,

It's the one we've all been waiting for (or an excuse to take a day off from TOA) - proper corona admin, political edition.

The inevitable surprise

I mentioned a few weeks ago that one thing I'm worried about for the future is how two groups are going to come together and govern in the wake of the pandemic. And by two groups, am I referring to left and right? Of course not, I mean two groups defined by their reaction to the pandemic - let's call them The Surprised and The Inevitables.

I should clarify, of course. The Surprised will see this crisis as a shock - pandemics are once in a lifetime events! - and will push a strategy based on "let's return to normal". The Inevitables will insist otherwise - we've been warning you about pandemics our whole lives! - and will insist on a strategy that mitigates against future pandemic risk, perhaps COVID-20.

I'm sure you (inevitably) have a (surprising) prediction?

I have no insight beyond connecting the above observation to what I've learned about life. People sometimes change significantly after a first experience; for example, I started volunteering in a hospice only after I experienced it as a visitor, and my volunteering was a reflection of the way I had changed since that initial visiting experience.

The post-pandemic political landscape is going to see a version of this same transformation. The result could get really ugly, perhaps more so than any dispute from my full adult life, because the pandemic is going to inject a large dose of experience into the political positions of people who may have until now relied solely on philosophy to form their views. It's one thing to vote based on ideas drawn from books and discussions; it's a completely different ballgame when you cast your ballot while still processing a difficult experience.

On the other hand, there is no Rule Of The Universe that demands this effect align with party affiliation, so the pandemic experience may end up disrupting traditional ideological thinking. It's possible the resulting shakeup will slow, stop, or possibly reverse some of the negative consequences of partisanship that have long plagued national politics.

I don't know what will happen, and to an extent I don't care (at the moment), but I'm hopeful that in the next few years those on left, right, and center will take the opportunity to think a little more about the consequences of their political beliefs.

More on partisan politics

As noted recently on TOA, the way Republicans and Democrats reacted to the pandemic by considering policies traditionally associated with their opponent was the most interesting political development of the year so far. Is it a sure sign of the end? Fear not, partygoers, I still feel the threat of partisanship remains very much alive, if only because like most decisions about parties people consider whether their friends are going to the same one.

The way the two-party system works is like a junior high cafeteria, where on one side sit the kids who eat pepperoni pizza, hamburgers, and tater tots while on the other side the kids lunch on sausage pizza, hot dogs, and French fries. Honestly, what would you do? I guess you'd sit with your friends, which is the problem with American politics.

Politically correct, actions

A couple of months before the lockdown, I started thinking about how the most politically correct thing you can do these days is vote. If you can tape that little 'I voted' sticker on your forehead, it's even better than being correct, that's like if your answer impressed Trebek.

I was asked quite a bit about whether I'd voted in the recent Presidential primary, mostly from people wearing stickers over the breast pockets that were strangely unadorned after all our little municipal elections. I've decided to revise my thought above - the most politically correct thing you can do is vote in an election when everyone is certain they are on the same team.

Expert opinions

As I semi-alluded to above, the path to an opinion is paved by either thought or experience, but rarely a combination. There is no 'better' path, and most mountaintops have one view. But we shouldn't share or consider opinions without articulating the difference in the two paths. In some cases fresh thinking is vital while for other considerations the lessons of experience trump all analysis.

Perhaps this standard should be applied to expertise. Often, we associate expertise with The Lone Voice rather than the chorus of knowledgeable people singing the same tune. The value of the individual is often in fresh thinking but for problems that do not require clever insights a sole voice is the siren call. The current pandemic requires expertise where fresh thinking is not necessary. What we need are the right answers for public health questions, with specific emphasis on infection control, hospital operations, and personal hygiene, and those with significant experience in these fields are giving the same shared response.

The lack of a definition on what constitutes an 'expert' means the title is bestowed on any individual or group by someone who is unlikely to be an expert on expertise. Often, it seems an 'expert' is anyone who sounds (or looks) smart while stating an opinion that validates an existing political view. It might be helpful if we agree to consider why a given 'expert' holds an opinion, and how the 'expert' formed the opinion, so we can start the process of freeing 'experts' from the conscription forced on them by the warring factions on left and right.

proper corona admin, vol 27.0

Morning all, a couple more thoughts from the weekend about my current state of affairs with technology.

I mean it, good morning!

Early morning video meetings have revealed to me a universal truth - there are two types of people in the world, those who hate their alarm clocks and those who have inexplicably denied themselves the pleasure of coffee.

Is Youtube an essential business?

Longtime readers will know that I listen to most of my music on Youtube. The only tricky issue is ads. By the way, this reminds me, I know why they are called 'ads', it's because it adds needlessly to what you are watching!

Anyway, sometimes these adds force me to take the controls and hit the 'skip ad' button to get the music started (in these moments, the button should say 'subtract'). In rare cases, an ad will start mid-song, because we all know that when the jester is on a sideline in a cast I secretly want to buy online shampoo, and I sometimes wonder in these moments if sticking my head in the oven will hurt. (In case you are wondering, the button for a mid-song 'skip ad' should read 'FU(tube)'.)

There are profanity-free options, however, for going ad-free. One option is Youtube Red, which for $9.99 per month allows subscribers to bypass all ads while on the site. It sounds good enough to me, but I have to question the point. Isn't the type of person who would pay money to skip ads the same type of person who might buy something based on an ad? In a sense, paying to skip ads is an ad-based purchase, which is the point of the ad in the first place. It seems like a bug, not a feature.

I suppose in an odd way I'm the fundamental paradox about this scheme. My actions may determine the future of this simulation. On one side of the equation is my perfect track record of not buying anything from an advertisement; on the other is this Geico ad about car insurance. I don't have a car, but I'm still driving myself crazy! The problem, as some have so eloquently decided, is choice - choosing to buy means choosing to not buy.

the business bro doesn't want to be around

A commonly ridiculed aspect of business culture is the overused cliche. In the course of a given day, we circle back, we touch base, and we pick each other’s brains. Sometimes, so much time is spent swapping cliches that we forget to do any actual work, but in today's world once the dust settles we'll give 110%, it is... what it is!

Of course, most of these expressions are harmless, just little shortcuts to cut to the... ahhhh! They help us get to the main points of a conversation, like verbal bullet points, and a permanent exasperation with cliches reveals an unhealthy obsession with originality. The examples work best when the speaker is describing how his or her own situation applies to common recognized categories.

But when I hear someone use cliches to describe someone else, I'm alert to a conflict. My preferred example is when someone says "so-and-so doesn't want to be here". It’s often based on nothing, just the speaker's hunch, but a cliche is so easily understood that listeners often let the comment slide, implicitly coming to an agreement with the speaker - so-and-so doesn't want to be here! I consider not letting such nonsense slide as part of my job. I remember the first time I viscerally disagreed with this expression. We had just interviewed a great candidate for my team and I had pushed to offer her the job as soon as possible. She had countered our initial offer, holding out for a higher salary. My boss became upset by the news - I don't want anybody who doesn't want to be here!

Now, maybe he was right about the candidate, maybe he had deduced something about her motivations that was opaque to me, but since it hadn't come up until the counter I suspected otherwise. I was unwilling to use this information to change my mind about her motivations. She had spent hours applying for the job and preparing for the interviews; she had spent seconds discussing her salary. On balance, her use of time indicated that she wanted to work in our team and that she wanted a higher salary. This was true of her and everyone else already in the team. Plus, since a counter-offer is among the most generic negotiation 'strategies', she was as likely in my mind to be performing to a script as she was demonstrating unwillingness to be in the team. But the boss was convinced – she didn’t want to be here.

I've probably spent too much time the past few years thinking about that comment. I've essentially narrowed my concerns down to three basic questions about the workplace. First, why do people in power forget that snap judgments about a stranger's complex motivations often leads to self-serving conclusions? Second, and more broadly speaking, why do people seek an explanation for every action? These are questions that I am content to leave open for now, given that I lack the expertise to answer them (or the cheek to invent them). The third question, though, seems much more urgent, and I'll give it a try - why do we settle so frequently for simple answers to complex questions?

I am speaking, of course, about cliches, and their more violent mutation, the buzzword. A workplace that communicates in sound bites gets in the habit of thinking in sound bites. Is that thinking? I don't think so. If my colleagues are constantly agreeing to 'touch base later', that's not necessarily unhelpful, but I've always found having a set date and time on the calendar leads to better follow up. I think a reliance on sound bites helps categorize, and in a sense working on a problem until it fits a known cliche is one way of leveraging patterns to run a better organization. But it also sounds like a perpetual quest for shortcuts, and I've never heard a CEO talk about all the shortcuts he or she took on the road to success.

If there is a lack of original thinking and a tendency to fit anything new into an existing category, there will be problems when certain ideas, opportunities, or people come along. There will be problems with clear communication, both in terms of content and intent. Someone willing to consider contingencies, possibilities, or challenges will be viewed as a potential threat, even if just in terms of cultural fit, and these behaviors will gradually disappear from the workplace. At some point, I suspect the organization becomes incapable of dealing with anything that doesn't fit an existing category, leading inevitably to a logical conclusion - a collective malaise for hard work.

A good way to sniff out a cliche is to ask whether the words are standing in place of rigorous work. Does the candidate not want to be here, or are we simply unwilling to do the work of generating the extra revenue? If colleagues suggest circling back later to tackle a stalled project, maybe they should put in a little more effort and schedule time instead. The bosses demanding all hands on deck might find less need for dramatic calls to action if they spent more of their time on deck. The danger of the cliche is like anything else in a workplace – sometimes, it’s hard to tell the difference between what moves the team forward and what holds the team back. When I think about workplaces stuck in the latter pattern, their flywheel perpetually powered by cliche, I know one thing for sure – I don’t want to be there.

proper corona admin, vol 26

Finally, after a month, I started reading again. I don't have a good story here, one day was a week, and then almost a month, but in the blink of an eye I'd found the bookmark and picked up right where I left off. I wrapped up the last third of Strangers in Their Own Land, then polished off the final couple of essays in The Empathy Exams. Both good books, both recommended to those interested in their respective subject matter, and both topics for closer review when TOA returns to some kind of normalcy.

This isn't to suggest my eyes were functionally illiterate for the entire month. I had read, here and there, sometimes for an hour or more, but it just seemed like I was killing time. I knew I was back to reading when I decided on that first night to stop reading, a decision based mostly on a stray thought that if I didn't stop, I was putting myself at risk of running out of reading material. This is the kind of ridiculous thought familiar to my days as an excessive reader, and when it floated through my mind I felt like I had taken my first drink of water after a long walk through the desert.

proper corona admin, vol xxv - the last laugh

The Great Corona Lockdown has reintroduced me to laughter, or at least its official delivery vehicles, and over the past few weeks Youtube has generously ushered me from one free clip to the next, an endless torrent of loosely associated hilarity where the joke is never on me. At the time of writing, I've spent more than a couple of nights in this way, surrounded by laughter, and certain eagle-eyed readers are sure to have noticed the references to my laugh tracks buried in some of my other proper corona posts.

I've noticed that although specifics vary, there are certain rules of thumb. These include the value of timing, such that a silly dad joke told in the right moment can bring down a studio audience, or the power of misdirection, often allowing an audience to laugh twice at the same joke - first to the assumed punchline, and then to the real one. And of course, I understand the importance of the audience, and why good humor is sometimes just pointing to where the joke is hiding, often in plain sight.

Perhaps the most well known rule resembles how comedy might be described in a math textbook:

Humor = Tragedy + Time.

I believe Mark Twain is credited for discovering the formula, perhaps by accident in his writing lab when he realized the characters in Huck Finn wouldn't have considered their own tale 'humorous'. Indeed, setting the story forty to fifty years in the past looks like a textbook example of a humorist using time, whitewashing tragedy to amuse the audience. You might not initially think stories playing on racial stereotypes are funny, but with enough time you can laugh until you, too, are blue in the face.

Anyway, I've seen the formula in action quite often throughout my late night laugh tracking, each chuckle strengthening the evidence that humor is the offspring of tragedy. But isn't it true that a twice told joke is the same old joke? I said I've watched a lot of comedy clips during lockdown, not that I've rewatched any. I think some more thinking is in order to reconsider Twain's equation. Like anything, humor can age poorly, so I propose this formula:

Tragedy = Humor + Time

This explains why repeating a joke rarely reproduces the laugh. It also might explain why I don't know anyone who considers Huck Finn 'humorous' - the closest anyone comes is using humor in an academic way, as if the book meets some humorless dictionary's definition of humor. How much longer could Twain have waited before the joke was on him? Time always kills the joke, the same way time often makes the joke, and perhaps the only time we forget this is in laughter.

The truth of this post, though, or at least the basis of it, is rooted in the lockdown. It has nothing to do with the trivial musings about an equation or a runaway list of literary references. The truth is that the first laugh of this lockdown was at the start. I laughed despite all the ways my new role on the sidelines of public health would change my life. I laughed because when I thought about it my life wasn't going to change all that much. And in hindsight I was right, not much has changed, and if I dismiss working from home or the library being closed then almost nothing has changed. I've lost my social outings, of course, but this is no surprise, I anticipated as much when I laughed. I could laugh knowing that I would count on my three R's of reading, running, and writing to fill the social void, to carry me through a lonely, solitary time, just as they'd done for me in the tragedy of a not so distant and not so dissimilar past.

The only thing I'd overlooked when I laughed was that I was laughing. The truth is that the first laugh of this lockdown was the last laugh. The most important component of humor, of comedy, isn't time or timing. It isn't misdirection, it isn't knowing your audience, it isn't pointing at the joke. The most important component is sharing, and laughter is the moment we all share something together - our vision, our understanding, our perspective. In isolation, without sharing and togetherness, there is no laughter, and whatever joke I'd laughed at a month ago has fallen flat, its failed syllables finding familiar grooves in this soundproof room, each passing day returning me a little closer to the tragedy that I'd ever so briefly, ever so recently, had found a way to laugh off because I wasn't alone, and couldn't see that the joke was on me.

proper corona admin, vol 24.0

As I mentioned a couple of days ago, I've spent some time lately counting my digital blessings. Here's what I've appreciated so far.

Zoom

My video conferencing experience has been excellent but I suspect our Platform Of The Moment is a one-pandemic wonder. The problem with Zoom is that it doesn't have one, it's a solid B+ in all regards, but in such a competitive market I think the big winner will need to do more than just improve on Google Hangouts.

Editor's note - Blogger is a Google platform

Editor's note? What is this? I didn't ask for an editor, but maybe it comes free when you buy a URL.

Speaking of Google, now that I've taken myself off The Dark Web I've decided to see how long it takes before 'true on average' appears at its proper place atop the Google search results. Spoiler alert, it doesn't, which makes me question if Google is also a one-pandemic wonder.

I guess we remain in a state of 'iktsuarpok', at least as it relates to seeing TOA on those search results. In the meantime, if you want to learn about stock volatility, how to calculate a 'true average', or read about the sabermetric implications of the 2019 Toronto Blue Jays, just type 'true on average' into Google, you won't need to scroll far.

My flip phone

Folks, just a few weeks ago I could be overheard spreading rumors about my smart phone future but the bleakness of the past month has put such nonsense on hold. You mean something exists where I can talk and text, yet have no possibility of falling into a Youtube rabbit hole? Sign me up... well, keep me signed up, I guess.

That said, having the constant internet hookup isn't all bad, it's been cool to watch all these soccer 'highlights'... and I can separate fact from fiction in The Last Samurai now... maybe I'm sliding toward my smart phone destiny... let me get back to you on this one.

leftovers - offhand studies

Folks, in the original version of 'Offhand Studies' posted last week, I was going to throw my hands up and say 'look, I paraphrased the comment, find it here in this video'. But TOA is serious now, so I watched the tape to find the comment, and in the process ended up doing a running commentary about the entire panel.

First things first, as previously noted Morey's outburst is at the fifty-seven minute mark of the hour long clip. Honestly, it was like watching a tense soccer game, after fifty-six minutes I didn't think it would happen. Was my memory wrong about the quote? I was almost out of hope, but Morey came through at the end (GOOOOOOOOOOL) and saved me from having to rewrite my original post. Of course, this meant I watched the whole thing over, and that led to the following thoughts.

I remembered early on while rewatching that one surprising thought I had a year ago was that Nate Silver, known for his statistical work at FiveThirtyEight, came off during the conference like a lone prophet returning to warn the populace of the dangers in using too much analytics. In this panel, he makes a comment to this theme at around the 6:45 mark, admitting that he doesn't believe in using metrics for everything (but is willing to help anyone interested in doing analytics correctly). There was also another separate incident I heard about from an inside source involving Silver that, although I am not allowed to discuss in public (to the extent that this TOA nonsense is 'public'), I can confirm increased my admiration of his approach. Overall, I wasn't a massive fan of Silver before going to the conference but I came away from the event with a positive perception of him.

However, I was not impressed by how much he says right, right? Adam Grant is also a big 'right' guy. I'm curious about how saying right became a meaningless verbal tic, right, like, like, saying 'like', right? It doesn't serve the function of 'you know' or 'I mean', which at least demonstrate that the speaker is searching for the right words or thoughts. 'Right' just sounds like someone who wants to convince you that they are... well, right... without doing the work of providing proof.

The discussion starting from around the ten minute mark is illuminating. This group of four, successful in their fields in the most significant possible ways, has absolutely no clue about hiring. I did like Jessica Gelman's idea to ask references about how to best coach the new hire, but this thought would come after the most challenging parts of the application process - resume, interviews, and deliberation.

Morey's challenge at 17:45 about the study question demonstrates the underlying thinking behind his 'offhand' comment. It's not enough to ask Morey the blanket question, he needs to know more about it, but the study likely isn't taking the confusion indicated by such follow up questions into account. It reminds me of a thought I believe comes from Oprah - the most important question is the follow up question. (Perhaps in that wisdom lies a hint about conducting good job interviews.)

This challenge comes up again when Grant talks about narcissism (around twenty-four minutes). Again, Morey leads the way, and Gelman jumps in to add support. It's interesting that those two are more skeptical while Silver seems ready to accept the premise of the study. There's probably nothing deeper here than the backgrounds of the panelists - Morey and Gelman come from results-driven business backgrounds while Silver and Grant are more rooted in an academic way of thinking.

proper corona admin, vol 23.0

Those forced into a near-state of house arrest by The Great Corona Lockdown have enjoyed an extended period of closer contact with at least one other cellmate - a partner, family, maybe roommates. Like most of us, I've enjoyed the inevitable, predictable jokes and stories that result from such situations. The comedy seems to emerge organically from this age-old irony - we are so easily aggravated by the most important people in our lives.

Unfortunately, readers seeking such tales on TOA will need to look elsewhere. I don't think I've made eye contact with anyone I know in a month (editor's note: exaggeration). If most of my fellow inmates are in gen pop, I'm in solitary, and ready to paint a volleyball on my rice cooker.

Lacking as I am of human contact, I've turned to the only logical outlet - well, outlets, where I've plugged in the modem, the router, and my three (!) computers. And I'm pleased to report, it's finally happened, after a half-decade of resistance I awake each morning into my greatest nightmare - I've become a millennial. It would be easy to blame my current dissatisfaction on my metamorphosis - life was so good when I could still focus, you know? But I decided today that it's finally time to get off my own back and find the silver linings in the cloud. I can complain about being a drone, or I can appreciate having wings, right?

proper corona admin, vol 22

A few months ago, I decided it was time I learned a little more about my surroundings in Beacon Hill. I've been living here for over five years, you know? I started with a systematic examination of the local takeout spots and after a few months I have my list of best options. Some of you may be thinking - just in time! And it is indeed true, lockdown means I'm usually home for over twenty-three hours each day so life is immeasurably improved with this list in hand.

But how good is my list? Just last week, I found myself wondering how six months ago I could have thought that an obviously mediocre takeout dinner would be worth eating a second time (1). I suspect that one unexpected side effect of the lockdown is a sharpened set of taste buds. After all, when the very act of getting takeout is a life-threatening task, you become much better at deciding what's worth the price.

Footnotes

1. Oh, like anyone would get dinner based on TOA...

It was my intention to actually publish my list at some point but I think in the current moment it's best to put it on indefinite delay. The way I see it, posting anything that might have a very real effect on businesses is almost a crime these days, especially given that some of these establishments may be right on the brink.

the business bro emails about just one thing

Around ten days ago, I mentioned that I was taking some time to dig through old work in a bid to salvage discarded ideas. One post I'm likely to throw away is a multi-part post about my personal email system, a final draft I prepared at the start of 2018 when I had just returned to work after a two-year layoff. There's no obvious reason to chuck the post - I stand by what I wrote, and I would stand by it if I posted it tomorrow. Plus, I still more or less follow the system, so it's true, which on average (!) is the important thing. (Honestly, given my history with finished drafts, I probably will post it in the future, perhaps during our next pandemic.)

But in the past few months, I've learned that email systems are hardly worth writing about in any detail because most people are in no position to implement entirely new email systems for their existing, chaotic inbox. It would be like walking into the cockpit and recommending that the plane be rebuilt while in flight (1). This problem seems due to the ubiquity of 'learning by doing' rather than, you know, its much-maligned counterpart, 'learning by learning'. The way people start emailing resembles the way they start running - they begin by doing, initially guided by intuition, and mimicking others when possible. If their email has a trivial problem, they solve it by applying knowledge gained in the context of another domain (hello, filing folders!). As they become more familiar with email, their process solidifies, and although they incorporate a new trick or two once in a while, for the most part the process doesn't change much over time.

In other words, when you begin with no end in mind, you end up with nothing, or at least nothing useful. Is it any surprise that most people are ineffective with email? By ineffective, I mean routinely dealing with email-induced problems like (a) losing needed information, (b) failing to locate information on demand, (c) being overwhelmed by volume, leading to missed deadlines, (d) emotional harm, such as anxiety when thinking about email, or (e) performance causing negative perceptions from others. Those signals of an ineffective system, among others, are the consequence of starting with no system at all and letting human nature run its course.

But the answer isn't to think of something better, and then try to implement the solution within an existing framework. That's like starting to climb a hill, getting halfway up before deciding that you want to climb a mountain instead, and then wasting effort looking around for a path into the clouds. The first thing you need to do is to come back down because you can't find a mountain on a hill! Unfortunately, most of us live life halfway up Email Hill, and we see-see that there is no chance we'll go back down just to find a mountain. Our lives, jobs, or healthy disinterest in staring at a computer all f'ing day make it impractical to overhaul the inbox and start anew (2).

No, the answer is to abandon our lofty ideals and focus on practical measures. In a way, it goes back to an idea above - incorporate a new trick or two once in a while. The most effective way to help someone with email is to teach them these tricks (though perhaps equally effective is increasing the frequency of 'once in a while'). The best advice in the world still has a time and place, we can talk systems and theories in the textbooks and panel discussions, but when it comes down to the real inboxes that folks struggle with every single day, the most useful advice is whatever helps people in the moment do a little better than they did yesterday.

So, here's my advice for today, which came from (of all things) an email I sent at work replying to a general message asking for email tips. I've essentially reprinted it as I submitted it with one edit.

Enjoy, and let me know if any thoughts - by email, of course (3).

******

My tip is to limit to one issue per email – one topic, one action, one question, etc. This probably applies to 90-95% of all email. It doesn’t guarantee a short email, but I think it essentially ensures a response, as it’s easier to respond to one long thought rather than 2+ short thoughts. This tip also helps reduce miscommunication, usually by constraining responses to matters related to the original email, and the focused topic helps with future organization and filing.

If the one issue has multiple components:

1. Use a numbered list
• Bullets are OK, too

If there are separate issues, use separate emails, and keep those issues separated. If separate emails seems unfeasible, consider a differ medium of communication (has anyone used Zoom?).

Best,
Tim

Footnotes

1. You can, however, rewrite a blog while in mid-post!

Despite the absurdity of the analogy, Business Bros seem to enjoy this kind of idea. It's like building a ship while it's sailing! Accepting these phrases must be a common feature of Business Bro onboarding, perhaps to better prepare BBs for speaking knowledgeably about what they know not.

Of course, this is also just another example of the main idea underlying this section of the post - when it comes to complex problems, most people prefer to start from scratch rather than repair, and the abundance of advice aligned with the former confirms the lack of interest in the latter.

2. Mount Inbox

The unusual experience I've enjoyed recently is starting two new jobs, eighteen months apart, after working in one role with escalating responsibilities for nearly six years. In a way, the only chance we get to descend Email Hill and look for Mount Inbox is after a job change, and for those folks I suggest doing what I did: write a multi-part blog post about your personal email philosophy, then threaten to post it during the next pandemic take the opportunity before your First Day to envision an ideal email system, then make sure from Day One that you are sticking to your plan.

3. Oh, quiet in the peanut gallery!

Astute readers will smirk and chuckle - does the 'one thing' concept apply to TOA posts, as well, considering most of us have it emailed? 

I have two thoughts, sarcastic reader. First, obviously not, unlike emails these posts are about many things, including your desire to pass time, reader, which is closely linked to my desire to pass time, all of it loosely tied to the knowledge that one day all of this will end, perhaps even by drowning. But if it is drown that we must, let's do our best to avoid drowning in email.

Second, thanks for reading.

proper corona admin, vol 21

There was a certain fear of scarcity in the air just a couple of weeks ago that has, thankfully and logically, fallen to the wayside for all but the most critical medical essentials. However, certain common goods remain in shorter supply than normal, and we are all learning to get on with it in the face of deprivation. Given the lagged nature of supply chain disruptions, it seems likely that we'll repeat this process in short bursts through the next few months, but I think we all have what it takes to get through it.

Social interaction is the one exception, the collective effect of its scarcity impossible to measure yet likely felt by all. As I was thinking about this unique situation, I wondered if there was a fair comparison to make to another form of collective deprivation. I think I got it - rationing, this is essentially rationing. We are being asked individually, collectively, to take our fair share, and when that fair share seems immeasurably paltry - particularly as it relates to almost all social activity at this time just two months ago - we are feeling the same sense of deprivation experienced by a majority of humans throughout history. Sometimes affixing an appropriate label to a difficult situation makes it more tolerable, and I wonder if calling our current moment 'social rationing' would have the same effect.

At the end of the day, though, it's all the same, named or not, we saddle up and move forward. Welcome to the battledome, I guess, and keep those horses six feet apart. At least we have Wi-Fi.

proper corona admin, vol 20

The bizarre consequence of the Corona Lockdown has been my return to having full internet access at home. Here are some scattered thoughts after a month or so.

Passwords

I have a word document with a list of accounts and passwords to help me keep track of all my various logins. However, I never refer to this list unless I guess incorrectly a couple of times. What I'm realizing is the truth of an old organizing principle - put things back where you look for them, not where you find them. A password I can't remember wasn't forgotten, it was wrong, and I should simply change it to whatever I guessed on the initial attempt.

The internet is a SCAM

I've shared that explanation for not having a smart phone - 'too distracting' - trades some truth for expedience. However, make no mistake, the internet is the gold medal winner at The Distraction Olympics, and my admiration for those who manage to accomplish anything from home grows by the day.

Live music

Being at home has prompted many to stream performances, delighting both loyal and new listeners around the quarantined world. I'm not surprised by these reactions, having listened almost exclusively to concert footage rather than studio productions for the past five years or so. There is some important ingredient in a live performance that goes AWOL in production, and it often more than makes up for whatever is lost in the exchange.

proper corona admin, vol xix - back home

About ten days ago, the local ABC affiliate showed a replay of Game 6 from the 2008 NBA Finals. The Celtics crushed the Lakers to clinch the championship series, 4-2, and ended a long title drought. This seems to be a somewhat common occurrence these days, networks rerunning old games I mean, filling the void of LIVE sports with their most famous reruns.

I've so far been unmoved by these games, but for me Game 6 was a welcome surprise on a listless Saturday afternoon. In 2008 I'd watched the first five games of that series with my friends, most of us back on break from college, and I'd hoped all the while for a quick victory. I wasn't bloodthirsty, just selfish, but when the Lakers made it 3-2 my fate was sealed. I never saw Game 6. While the Celtics were winning, I was flying, on the way to Japan for a summer. I remember my hosts the first night, family friends, offering to show me the replay of the game which they had taped onto a VHS. I declined, citing fatigue, but mostly I was confused, having left home to return home, and with only six weeks to sort it out I began convincing myself I had no time for basketball.

Now I'm home all the time, perhaps for six weeks, definitely forever. This time, I know where I'm supposed to be, and I feel fine, rested, settled. I belatedly took up the offer after nearly twelve years. I saw history for the first time, glancing intermittently toward the screen while I proofread TOA posts, and put my life on pause to watch the Celtics run away with the game in the second quarter.

A short way into the fourth quarter, I looked up again and noticed that Trump was giving an update on the corona - you know, that PANDEMIC going around. The interruption meant preempting 'coverage' of the game, but that's fine, this is our version of history in progress, the type of thing our kids and their kids will read about in the textbooks, or whatever they'll use in the ZOOM classrooms, plus it's not like this game was live so no big loss, maybe I should turn the TV off...

Wait, what's this? The game was on! Indeed, in the lower left hand corner, in a small picture in picture box, the Celtics were finishing off the Lakers. I guess the 'coverage' of the game was just on a short commercial break, giving Trump the full screen, but now that Paul Pierce had the ball the game had carved out its own space once more. I could hardly believe it, could scarcely see the screen through the tears rolling down my cheeks, could barely comprehend that the lads at the TV studio thought it was important to keep a game from twelve years ago running alongside a press conference given by the President of the United States about, you know, an ongoing PANDEMIC.

What would we think if our history books had detailed a similar incident? Surely when JFK was giving updates on the Cuban Missile crisis, the TV networks never considered putting a little box alongside showing highlights of Babe Ruth hitting dingers at Wrigley Field. Ladies and gentlemen, the curve may not be flat, but we've reached peak absurdity. I shudder at what the future will think of us.

But I guess the answer to the future's obvious question won't be that hard at all. Why did you do it? It's an answer I've given over and over, about so many of the things I've done - I was only doing my best and, in looking back, I don't see how I could have done it any differently.

proper corona admin, vol 18

The way these little 'corona diary' posts work is that I go through my regular life, the mundane daily routine of it, until something corona-related captures my attention. At that point, I try to write it down so that later on I can turn it into a post. Easy process.

But of course, it rarely goes so smoothly. The most common obstacle is being unable to write the idea down. This happens more than you might think. For example (cliche alert) I often have good ideas in the shower. One time years ago, I realized that I could start flossing in the shower, making good use of the time I often stand there doing nothing. But starting to floss in the shower is hard, I bet it's almost as hard as quitting smoking, and I haven't started yet. Flossing, I mean, in the shower.

Anyway, the other day I realized in the shower that one of Mitch Hedburg's old jokes was a great fit for the current PANDEMIC. Problem was, by the time my hair had dried, I had forgotten the joke. I spent the day trying to remember, but no luck. I finally decided to just watch his old videos until I came across the joke.

Bizarrely, I remembered the joke I needed, but it wasn't when I heard Mitch say it, I remembered while he told a different joke. He said "I'm against picketing, but I don't know how to show it" and I remembered my joke from the shower. But now I had a new problem on my hands - I didn't know how my joke related to the pandemic because I had forgotten to write that down. I flossed my teeth and thought some more, but after a minute I gave up.

Next time when I can't remember, I'll just convince myself it wasn't any good, and therefore not worth writing down.

offhand studies

Longtime readers may recall that I’ve spent portions of the past year promising to write about the 2019 Sloan Sports Analytics conference, an event I left with a notebook full of amusing notes and observations. I must admit, even by TOA’s slow standards it’s not moving very fast – the 2020 edition of the conference has come and gone (and just in time, given corona, and perhaps lucky to have its local reputation intact, given Biogen).

One of the highlights of last year’s event was a panel discussion that produced this memorable thought from conference co-chair Darryl Morey – I kind of reject most studies, offhand (not the exact quote, but I think it captures the spirit.) At the time, I greatly enjoyed the remark, but a year later I think it was a poorly advised thought. At the very least, given that many of his invitees had devoted their entire careers to organizing, conducting, and analyzing studies, there was probably a qualifier or two that Morey could have used to take out the sting.

As I was recently wandering around the deserted paths of a socially distant Beacon Hill, I had a revelation about this incident – ‘studies’ implies one kind of thing, but in reality there are many kinds of studies, and it’s probably inappropriate to lump them all under one umbrella. Full disclosure, I would say that my view tends to agree almost entirely with Morey – give me the events over the conclusions, any day of the week, and I'll figure it out (which I believe is the spirit behind Morey's thought). But dwelling on the idea of rejecting all studies ‘offhand’ indicated that in comparison to Morey I was likely closer to the center, even if by just the tiniest margin, in terms of how I thought about studies and their conclusions.

So, when would I stop and think before rejecting a study offhand? If the study was constructed on empirical observations, I’m all in. I perceive such studies as carefully structured, researched, and analyzed observations of real behavior or activity. The neatest example I could think of was the American Cancer Society study that established the first causal link between smoking and increased mortality, primarily due to lung cancer. If President Kennedy were one to dismiss studies offhand, it would have cost many Americans valuable years in terms of reduced life expectancy.

The studies that always put my guard up are those premised on grand experiments. I won’t analyze every little reason why these findings are often debunked or even reversed years later (though as an example I will link this article that mentions challenges regarding the Stanford prison experiment). It just seems that for so many reasons – a desire for results, poor experimental design, statistical error – these kinds of studies have established a certain track record that has created many jaded observers (me) who protect themselves from being fooled again by simply dismissing all findings offhand.

The biggest difference I could find in these two forms of study is the observer effect. When someone presents study results based on observing ongoing natural behavior, to me that feels like a very different thing than when an experimenter records the responses to a series of carefully constructed cues. In the latter case, the subject is aware of the observer, and that’s a relevant thing (proven, I'm sure, by a study). I believe that researchers put in all the effort they can to account for this effect when they conduct their work, but I suspect the effect is too real and too complex to account for with careful design. At best, a carefully constructed experiment can point the way to the follow up question, but I’m going to remain skeptical of any such result that claims to have the answer.

proper corona admin, vol 17

Two quick thoughts in response to yesterday's post.

First, it wasn't a typo, the first few days of 'stay at home' were a whirlwind of the vital and the pointless. This reality prevented me from developing anything resembling a routine. As details about my new life settled into place, the usual desire for structure emerged and beat order into the chaotic uncertainty of life during COVID-19.

Some may be wondering - wasn't it frustrating in those early days? It sure was, but I think it's important to cut yourself some slack at the beginning. It's important to take care of the essentials first, like rewatching important movies, before creating process to support those needs for the long-term.

Second, in terms of reading, well, it's not in the routine because I'm not reading. Who knows? It might have something to do with how I use reading to recharge (maybe) and how I'm basically fully charged at the moment (possibly). One thing I know for sure, reading isn't important right now. I've learned I'm not alone with this problem, suggesting that there is something deeper at play, or that perhaps I'm suffering from a rare symptom of you-know-what.

proper corona admin, vol xvi - routines

Hi all,

OK, at long last, here's the isolation routine I've developed over the past ten days or so, I was holding out for something better but I think I owe it to myself to post this now or something, honestly if I'm still here doing this in twenty years someone should just come by and kill me, not a threat, just a fact.

First thing

I tend to wake up around 7AM or so, with the range being 630AM - 715AM. It's the best part of my day, for about ten seconds before I wash my hands and check the news, I actually think to myself - you know, that COVID-19, maybe it'll be gone, no goodbye, no see ya later, just left.

Early morning

I make coffee and go for a walk. I go to the Public Garden, do a lap, and come back. I never sit on the bench but it's therapeutic. If I see people I usually step into the road, choosing who to let into my weird little world, asymptomatic 'superspreaders', stepping aside, I see every negative thing coming at me from ten miles down the road. It's not a question of why should I, but why shouldn't I?

I'll take a crack at it, what if the guy I step aside for works for MGH, and later today he picks up Corona from some patient, and then on the way home he coughs a few times and gets some people sick? Sure, MGH guy is really happy with himself, did the job well, but those people he got sick, one guy was about to cure cancer, and now this guy is sick, and eventually dies, and since cancer isn't cured that means maybe a whole bunch of other people die, here and in some village in the Middle East and everywhere in between? Maybe if I just held my ground and he freaked out when I brushed up against him as we passed, maybe he calls out sick instead... tomorrow I'm staying on the sidewalk, at least I'll be original.

Anyway, the whole thing takes about thirty minutes. The only exception is Saturday, I skip the walk because I eventually go grocery shopping. I also skip the walk if I have some kind of important work commitment, an early start never hurts, all that long division and other vital tasks that earn me good bank so that I can live here for the rest of my life.

Breakfast

Plain Greek yogurt, with a (big) spoonful of honey. No apples, I don't like them apples.

Late morning

I usually catch up on my internet admin until around 9AM or so. 'Internet admin' includes things like reading articles I saved the prior day or going through long-term projects like deciding if I want to add certain book recommendations to my list. One day, I'll give you the skinny on every art book every written.

At 9AM, I'll switch over to work (weekday), grocery shopping (Saturday), or cooking (Sunday). I might make more coffee, or eat a bunch of caramels, it's pretty arbitrary when I think about it.

Lunch

I usually fry or scramble eggs with cheese, then include those in some giant bowl that will contain some of the following: baked Japanese yams, roasted tomatoes, roasted Brussels sprouts, sauteed spinach, sauteed mushrooms, boiled beats, steamed broccoli, steamed green beans, roasted eggplant, sliced peppers, roasted zucchini, or baby carrots.

Why bother? One day, I'm going to wake up, and I'll be fifty, so I owe it to me. When people tell me they struggle to make good lunch decisions, my reaction is something like this - do you have any fucking idea how easy lunch is for me? It's a fucking joke! And I'm sorry you can't do this, I really am, because I wouldn't have to sit here and watch you fumble around and fuck it up!

I have my pick of eating utensils, but I only see chopsticks.

Afternoon

The afternoons see the battle continue, it's work, work, work on the weekdays while on weekends it's the far more grueling challenge of writing. There's honor in it, it's real work, keeping my ear to the grindstone, like being a shepherd.

I'm averaging around five hours per weekend day, which is a solid start, but its a small sample size. By now, I've drank enough coffee to kill a small horse. The pattern regardless of day is to work 45 to 75 minutes, then take a 10 to 30 minute break, repeating until evening. When 'once more into the breach, dear friends' fails to resonate with me, I pack up and call it a day.

Evening

I run six days a week. If I do a short run, I'll do some kind of strength workout in my apartment, otherwise it's straight to the showers. If the timing is right, I'll catch the evening news, and although I'm initially bothered by the content it will eventually occur to me that these people, the newscasters or the 'experts' or some professor, they don't have the faintest idea what they are talking about. When I look at the President, I don't see an intelligent, confident man, I see a cocky, scared shitless kid.

Dinner

Most nights, I keep it simple, eating rice and natto (fermented soybeans) or bread and butter. Twice a week, maybe three, I'll order some kind of takeout, and the next day I'll regret it, because now I'm eating my rice and beans knowing there's something like a real dinner out there.

Night

I try to keep up some resemblance of connection, perhaps through emails, calls, or video chats. If I have time, I do what I'm doing now, and write some more, but I struggle to write about anything I didn't learn in some fucking book. I'd like to talk about me, and who I am, but I'm afraid about what I might say.

Last thing

Most nights end with some kind of grand, heroic struggle, a classic epic where I try in vain to defeat the undefeated opponent, like a lone paddler in a raging sea. It always ends in reflection, on all this shit, and I wonder if I'm just doing the best I can, whether I'm surrounding myself with the wrong fucking books, can I go the rest of my life without having to really know anyone, pawning off ideas like they're my own, waves are crashing into my little boat, someone's fucking with me, wondering whether it's all my fault... the coloring, that's the problem, making me feel like a failure, I can smell my ceiling, counting every second until it's over... surely, it's not all my fault... I owe $1.50 in late charges for the wrong fucking books, maybe they won't be there tomorrow... not my fault... time's up.

proper corona admin, vol 15

One of the silver linings of The Great Corona Lockdown has been a chance to hit the reset button on my exercise routine. In normal times, I try my best to stick to an idealized plan but my workouts often nestle into the compromises among my various commitments. This means that I rarely get a chance to exercise without paying some kind of cost - a morning run means less sleep, a basketball game means bringing my equipment to the office, a bike ride to an appointment means less energy for strength workouts.

The 'stay at home' advisory has changed all of it. I'm now able to ensure my workouts move me closer to my goals without ceding progress toward another priority. There is, simply, nothing else in the way. I haven't enjoyed this freedom to focus on exercise goals since I hurt my ankle in 2014 (when being on crutches for six weeks forced me into a lifestyle not dissimilar to the current situation). Like I did back then, I'm doing as much cardio work as I can tolerate, then expending the rest of my energy on strength work.

A universal truth about disruption is the opportunity to establish new routines. One new exercise I'm trying out is the Bulgarian split squat. If effective, it will do wonders for my current strength imbalance while forcing my core into more strenuous stabilization work than when compared to a two-legged squat. There are plenty of helpful instructional videos out there, but I won't pass up the opportunity to link to a Liverpool player demonstrating good technique for this exercise (well, based on his body leaning forward rather than staying upright, he probably should start with his front leg closer to the bench, but what do I know).

proper corona admin, vol 14

One of the great buzzwords at the start of our 'stay at home' advisory was 'essential business'. If you were essential, you could remain open, but for all others the Governor's decision meant closed doors. The initial list that came out was, to me, a laughably long nine pages, but let's make sure I clarify two details - (1) I laugh at most things and (2) I don't really know what my expectations were for the length of the list.

Let's put it this way - how many essential businesses are in the state? I have no clue. I'm starting to think, though, that I was right when I laughed - the list was too long. I mean, guess what, folks? JP Licks is open. Yep, JP Licks is an Essential Business. Who knew? The only health condition ice cream cures is having too much money in your wallet - a bulging pocket presses down on critical leg arteries, I heard. I also think it's a great idea to have people lick something exposed to the virus-leaden air, over and over, while they hold it with their hands, which of course can't be washed while holding the cone.

Of course, the pot shops remain (at time of writing) closed. Who knew? The only health condition pot cures is anxiety, which no one has right now because we're all doing great, doing just great, waiting in line for our ice cream and wondering what our leaders have been smoking.

saving dice-k

A blessing of The Corona Lockdown has been the chance to look around the dusty corners of my past, unearthing the various trash and treasure I've left behind for long-forgotten reasons. I'm not talking about my stuff piled in the corner, I'm talking about the half-assed first drafts from back when I started TOA, and most of the time I've left those right where they belong. But I thought one half-post I'd abandoned about Diasuke Matsuzaka - 'Dice-K' - was worth another try, albeit in a new direction.

My first draft was based on this article that outlined some of the injury problems Dice-K was dealing with during his third season in MLB. His woes were a major disappointment, considering my excitement in 2007 when he first signed - I was so pumped up I watched his introductory press conference! Things did not go smoothly, however, his career trajectory plummeting like his famous gyroball - a pair of inconsistent seasons, an injury-plagued third campaign, public sniping over training and rehabilitation methods.

I initially started writing because I was interested in translation's effect on the dispute. Was 'savings' the right word, particularly in a country not known for saving? In short, Dice-K saw training as one half of a saving-spending dichotomy, the equivalent to depositing money into an account for future use. On the other hand, the Red Sox seemed to view training as one end of a spending continuum, like making the minimum payment on a credit card bill to retain as much cash as possible for tomorrow. Maybe Dice-K (or his translator) should have said he'd reached his credit limit

But clever analogies about word choice only go so far - it makes the training disagreement appear like a trivial matter of financial philosophy, but that wasn't at the core of the issue. In hindsight, I see that the real dispute is much more elementary - Dice-K was thinking about this entire career while the Red Sox were thinking about their six-year contract. Until the player cared about the team getting value for their money or the team cared about preserving health throughout the player's career, this argument was going nowhere.

What happens during an argument when both parties fail to recognize the main dispute? Nothing, and that's exactly what ensued, though it did make for entertaining sports radio fodder. Dice-K essentially blamed the inadequate Red Sox training program for causing his arm problems while the team fired back and accused Dice-K of not training hard enough. If you aren't so into sports, the chatter sounded a lot like other famous recurring arguments from history:

Person A: I keep jumping, and coming back down!
Person B: You haven't jumped hard enough!

Person A: I keep praying, and everything still sucks!
Person B: You haven't prayed hard enough!

Person A: I keep listening to U2, and it still sounds like rubbish!
Person B: You haven't listened hard enough!

At what point does someone stop jumping, praying, or listening? I don't know. I believe in gravity, have some theories about God, and listen to Bono quite often, but I don't know when I started doing those things. You should ask Dice-K if his gyroball broke, or when it did. The inflection point always fascinates me. I used to think that eventually we realize we are wrong about various things and change our ways. But sometimes it's the road itself that changes, a sudden curve appearing in the blink of an eye, and we move in a new, unexpected direction, the surprise unfolding ahead, the unrecognized image in the mirror, forever humming the same tune, with no choice but to remain loyal to the path we've traveled all along.

proper corona admin, vol 13

I had an idea for a TV show - bring back The Office, with everyone 'working from home'. Don't even explain why, just have Michael Scott on NBC tomorrow night at 8PM. Can't miss, right? Plus, this would be the cheapest show to produce of all time. Jim is already in the mood (and he needs to score some points, he's been on my shit list since that Super Bowl commercial).

Fake news, Boston edition

Mayor Marty announced some new recommendations on Sunday, two of which I thought were especially important - curfews and face coverings. TOA readers, please follow both recommendations, call me if you need help. But, again, recommendations, that's the key word. It's been fascinating over the past couple of days to see the local reaction to these recommendations.

First, the curfew is a recommendation, but you wouldn't know it from certain local media outlets, you'd think the mayor had declared 'arrest on sight' effective at 9PM. People have been getting in touch, asking about the curfew. I was confused at first - the recommendation, you mean? It took me about ten minutes browsing various websites to figure out where people were getting this 'news'. Now, I don't think anyone is outside during those hours anyway - where would they go, what would they do - but I'm not impressed by the media gleefully exaggerating to the point of misinforming.

It gets worse when you consider the options. There were two recommendations on Sunday and a media outlet interested in exaggerating for possible public benefit should have chosen face coverings (Mayor announces mandatory face coverings, effective Monday). The thousands of regular, terrified people out during the day spread this virus, not Guy Montag wandering around alone at 11PM. If you want to lie, tell people to cover up, not that they need to be home by 9.

But the only relevant concern is, what happened? I can't speak for the curfew, the latest I've been out since The Great Corona Lockdown began was 830PM the other night to get takeout (and I haven't even come close to waking up before 6AM). However, I can report that on my morning walk yesterday, I estimate around 80-85% of people were not covering their faces. Way to go, Boston, you all have great teeth, mine are turning a shade of gross thanks to my liquid diet of coffee and red wine, but you'll never know it. Maybe we'd do a better job of following best practices if this virus had conveniently rolled around on Halloween, or if the news had treated us to a better trick.

life changing books: what the dog saw

Since it's been ages since I've posted any kind of book review (but plenty in the archives!) I thought I would share a quick thought on how Malcolm Gladwell's What The Dog Saw changed my life.

The key was his chapter on Cesar Millan, 'The Dog Whisperer', a dog trainer who helps owners create supportive environments for their problem pets. Gladwell notes that Millan believes many owners create their own problems by forgetting that their dogs are animals (yet another reason why I think it's crazy to give pets human names). One consequence is an inability to read the animal's cues and respond appropriately to the pet's needs, this inability often being at the root cause of any eventual conflict between animal and human.

The chapter goes on to describe some strategies. The life-changing idea was symmetry - Gladwell writes that many animals don't see the world in our detail, instead relying on shapes and movement. Animals are therefore more likely to comprehend symmetry and humans who present themselves with balance and posture have a better chance of commanding respect from an animal.

I've followed this advice to the letter in the ensuing years. I almost always greet dogs and cats by squatting down to their eye level and extending both palms directly in front of me. Whether this is making any difference or not is beyond me, but I'm often described as being good around animals, including those viewed as shy, territorial, or generally problematic by their owners.

Footnotes / endnotes

0. Obviously...

The book's title comes from the chapter I describe in the post.

Millan has been at the center of criticism for his method (perhaps this is why Gladwell found him appealing). This ancient post from Gladwell's blog puts forth an interesting defense - what you see on TV is highly edited.

proper corona admin, vol 12

Not much to add today, readers, so just a quick announcement about the future, see below.

Announcement - don't even think about it

Big announcement, folks - God help anyone who forwards me anything claiming to describe 'lessons learned' from the COVID-19. This applies for the first year after I finish my next Guinness at a bar. Further, this ban applies to TED Talks for the rest of my life.

If you haven't guessed, I am dreading the flood of pop science books, six-part podcast series, and seventeen thousand word 'think' pieces about this pandemic. I'm sure several such publications are imminent, but count me out, out, out! Corona has the two key ingredients for future time-wasting content - the audience already knows the basics yet the specifics remain vague. Therefore, writers or speakers will feel licensed to say anything they damn well please about COVID-19, which essentially makes it the equivalent of reality TV. No, thank you.

So, just to be clear - I don't care if the virus is related to the marshmallow test, or the trolley problem. I don't care if Michael Lewis interviews six people that most people will pretend to have heard of about the virus. I don't care if the Apollo program, Netflix's corporate office, and the first-ever rugby team share some hidden quality that proved essential to fighting back the virus. I don't care if the virus is a metaphor for vulnerability. I don't care if some loser rode Blue Bikes every day during the virus and wrote about it on Blogger. DO NOT send me recommendations to these future books, talks, or programs.

Please.

Thank you in advance.

reading crazy

The other day I heard the following – there are many problems with, and I'm not advocating for the Unabomber's manifesto...

Now, reader, what’s your first thought (1)?

Wait, hold that thought, I should add some context. The above comment wasn’t part of some ill-advised defense of the terrorist. At no prior point during the conversation was there any hint of the Unabomber's eventual mention (TED Talks presents – Famous Teds?). The quote came out of nowehere - one second the conversation was on topic X, the next second it was on the Unabomber.

The reason I bring this up is the same reason the speaker brought it up – he had heard an interesting idea and had simply found it impossible to stop thinking about it. As it was the case that the idea came from the Unabomber’s manifesto, he had no choice but to reference the Unabomber in the process of describing the idea. Interestingly, this led me to a similar kind of place - now I have an idea in my head, and it's simply impossible to stop thinking about it. Luckily, my idea is only tangentially related to the Unabomber – what is the point of reading the Unabomber’s manifesto?

I’ll dust off my old game theory textbook to outline my thinking. If I read the Unabomber’s manifesto, there are only two possible outcomes – I either find something interesting, or I don’t. The latter scenario is fine, it’s like if I became a Manchester United fan, it would simply confirm that just because something is one those 'unknown unknowns' doesn't mean I need to go and know about it. I'd be a rubbish explorer, I'd rather not dig through the trash if leaving the unknown unknown is an option.

However, the former would present a peculiar challenge. Given that I find something interesting, I can now either (a) never mention the interesting idea, effectively pretending like I didn’t read the manifesto at all (and therefore throwing away my entire reading effort) or (b) mention the interesting idea. But if I want to mention the idea, I have to explain the source. I could start like the Harvard grads, you know how if you ask them where they went to school at first they say 'around here' like maybe it was UMass-Boston, but of course ten seconds later they clarify that, yes, it was Hah-vahd, emphasis on the accent to be more 'local'. That's kind of how my explanation would go, initially I would say the interesting idea came from 'a manifesto' but it would all fall apart after a short interval, the can of worms I'd opened through evasiveness eventually being slammed shut minutes later by my dramatic revelation of the source ("OK, fine, it was the Unabomber, the Unabomber's manifesto! Are you HAPPY now?!?").

Sadly, once I say 'Unabomber', it will become impossible for most people to focus on my point until they can do that whole thing where they ask “wait, but you don’t think he’s a good guy, right? You think he was bad, right? I mean, he sent bombs, you know?” and so on. But that's kind of my point. Even if you found an interesting idea, when would you be able to use it in a conversation? Most people, sensing some kind of trap, would simply avoid or shut down further discussion once they found out the source of the idea. It's one thing to learn something from a written work, but I do question the point if you can't make use of the idea in a practical setting. It would be like planning to power a deep-sea submarine with solar panels.

Is there any reason to read the manifesto? I thought about it and came up with some possibilities. First, I concede that the moment the manifesto came out might have been the appropriate time to read it. This is limited by time, though, and I think far too much of it has passed to make it an appropriate reason today. The suggestion that a modern reader would find something interesting in it now feels flawed. If something in the manifesto was worth reading, wouldn't I already have heard it by now, secondhand?

I suppose for some people the experience matters, that certain curiosities cannot be satisfied by simply watching Criminal Minds reruns on Ion television, so for these people the act of reading it would matter from the perspective of using firsthand material as a step toward understanding. There is some value in reading the thinking from someone whose destiny has already been revealed. In the case of someone so obviously horrible as the Unabomber, I bet it’s even educational if you can find yourself agreeing from time to time with some of the ideas. This way, you won’t become an instant sucker the second you hear someone say a thing or two you might agree with – think of it like practice for the big game. As someone with a self-described BS allergy, I can reliably report that finding common ground with the stooges, lunatics, and evildoers of society is like getting a regular booster shot - you become immune to BS when it arrives without the answer key.

The opposite consideration matters, though perhaps not as much – we should have some tools to know how to handle the outrageous things that come from the otherwise sane, reliable, or trustworthy people in our lives. Disagreement tends to be a question of degree and I think it becomes easier over time to tolerate other views if you have the skills to parse out the magnitude of the difference. My thought is that reading something like the Unabomber’s manifesto is good preparation for getting the right sense of degree in the face of a disagreement – OK, I don't feel the same way here, but this is nothing like I felt when the Unabomber was prattling on that every human problem was waiting for a solution built on principles and logic.

The possible benefits aside, however, I don’t think there is a good argument for reading this today. I’m fairly certain that his work is only being read in the context of his crimes and not on the strength of the ideas. The fact is that good writers can create context within their work, using pen and paper to change the world, and we shouldn't talk about the scribbles from a terrorist in any way that equates it with writing.

Footnotes

1. Source, thoughts, and a lazy recommendation

An important clarification, the quote is from Chuck Klosterman on his podcast Music Exists. You can find the podcast on Spotify, and the specific quote from the 49-minute mark. I only lightly recommend the show – music is really challenging to talk about (unless it’s specific to something you already know and, in many cases, like).

Amusingly, I Googled ‘Klosterman Unabomber’ and learned that he’s had a bit of a history of referencing him. I vaguely recall reading something about the Unabomber in one of Klosterman’s books. As it was in the podcast, his references are more along the lines of “now here’s a weird thing I found hard to get a out of my head”.

proper corona admin, vol 11

The pandemic has left me a lot more time than usual to sit around and think - but not enough time (yet) to turn all that thinking into useful writing.

Here's the current 'big board', a list of ideas that grew out of the pandemic which I may - or may not - end up writing about in greater detail.

Obedience

I once read that great failures start with the wrong form of obedience. I used to think about it in terms of working for a corporation but it seems to apply better to public health. Disobeying certain community advisories is merely a form of obedience to a larger idea of individualism, liberty, and freedom.

Surprised or inevitable?

The pandemic has the potential to forever change political ideology. The main rift could separate those who saw COVID-19 as a disruption, a one-off from which we can do no more than return to normal, from those who saw it as a consequence, a natural result of every decision made in the past century. In short, the answer to the question - was the pandemic a surprise, or inevitable? - will matter more in determining political ideology than anything that seemed to count in the past decade.

Innocence and experience

Another major shift will result from people grounding beliefs in experience rather than ideology. If you thought it was hard to talk to people who were offended by your ideas, wait until they suspect you are denying their experience of the first half of 2020.

Mass culture

What is the point of 'participation' in something that, by its very nature, is unaffected by your participation? Why do we miss it? This is a retrofit of an old post that I started writing and threw away, the main idea initially being that I had started noticing a plummeting feeling each time I watched the TV, slowly, fading to black.

Expertise

We seek the counsel of lone 'experts' but true expertise is the consensus of a large group of, well, experts. Should we listen to individuals at all, or should we find a way to give a unified voice to groups that know best about a given topic, concept, or situation?

proper corona admin - vol X: daily reminders revisited

Hi folks,

Longtime readers may recall last year's breakdown of my daily reminders, a list of phrases I read each morning to keep myself focused on the priorities of the moment (1). I thought today I would share what those priorities have been during The Corona Lockdown (in italics), organize them into broad categories (in bold and italics), and explain my thinking behind each priority's inclusion on my list (no emphasis).

It's a crisis, folks

A major challenge during March was simply wrapping my head around the idea of a pandemic. Things were changing... but what did that mean for me?

ASAP

The most important adjustment was shifting my mentality from a peacetime to a wartime approach (2). The time for deliberating - what's the best deal, what's most efficient, what fits my principles, etc - was long past. Instead, anytime a decision came up, I rapidly gathered as much information as I could before making a firm, decisive choice.

So, get internet access at home? Yes, first by a cheaper hotspot purchase, then a full upgrade to a cable connection. Have my modem delivered, free shipping, within two days? No, I biked to a Best Buy to pick it up same day. Should I make trips to potentially crowded locations, like Haymarket? Yes, but essentially at the crack of dawn, arriving before half the vendors had started setting up.

Rororo, calm calm calm

The ongoing challenge in a pandemic is to stay ro - 'calm' in Icelandic - because although it's vital to constantly collect new information, it's important to keep a certain perspective, particularly in the face of ever-mounting bad news.

One way I stay calm is to make sure that if I don't absolutely need to do act, I should stop and think until I can make a decision without influence from external pressure. Scarcity is a real factor today but not one for civilians to worry about most of the time. For example, as I noted a couple of weeks ago, I think people who are able to get by without being picky should go to the grocery store at close, not just because it's an indirect way to help a neighbor, but because at no other point in my life would I go to LOL Foods early the next morning just because they were out of butter the prior evening.

Creating a daily routine

TOA diehards (you sorry lot, hang in there) will know the value I place on routine, mostly as a way to establish the foundation needed for quality work. The challenge of the past month has been two-fold. First, how do I recapture the power of my previous routine, now disrupted? Second, what new measures can I take to harness my otherwise scattering energy?

Nothing good happens after 10pm

When I planned out my ideal routine for this stay at home period, I determined that waking up sometime between 530-630AM was ideal. This would give me the chance to get into the day, unhurried, with time for some kind of activity before starting work. The only way I can get up at that hour, though, is to set myself up for success the prior night. When 10PM hits, the only acceptable activities are stretching, amateur dentistry, and a little reading.

No computer use within 2 HRs of bedtime

This is in tandem with the above - if I shut down the computer early, I can get into the bedtime ritual a little easier. There are a host of reasons for this, including but not limited to the effect of digital lighting on sleep hygiene.

Of all the items on this list, I've found this one the most challenging. Soccer highlight videos, simply, lead from one to the next, and I have some catching up to do after a few years without home internet. I cut myself some slack in the early days and that has helped me get over the hump.

Work 45 to 75, rest 10 to 30

I've more or less locked this habit in place but I want to stay on top of it in these pandemic days. In addition to a 'work from home' transition, I'm also now writing exclusively at home, and need to remain mindful of the most productive time distribution I've identified in my work.

Working from home

As noted in the last item above, the shift to a 100% remote schedule created immediate challenges. I generally adjust quickly and the WFH situation was no exception, but the following two additional reminders helped in the transition.

Don’t engage on irrelevant POSITIONS - find common INTERESTS

The biggest challenge of shifting to a remote team is maintaining certain processes in the midst of a transition toward a new communication style. I'm not speaking strictly about mediums here, I mean a shift from the continuous, immediate results of an in-person method toward the stop-and-go nature of remote communication. In a remote environment, you often wait for answers, and in this jerky flow of information lies a potential bottleneck. It's vital to be on the same page about goals and desired outcomes in these moments while retaining flexibility about specific details so that time spent waiting for information doesn't also become time spent waiting to start working.

No one cares - coach your team 

The list of excuses for poor work is almost infinite at the moment - I can't focus when working from home, I want to go to a restaurant, I want to see so-and-so, I hate pandemics. Go on, have a moan, these are understandable complaints and most people are understanding. But at some point, the whistle blows, and everyone looks at the scoreboard. If you end up on the losing side, no one is going to care about those excuses.

A coach is a good analogy for the situation. There are things anyone on a team can do, but only so much that each person should be doing. All a coach can do is coach, so in that situation a coach focuses on coaching and leaves the rest to the team. Right now, all we can do is focus on doing the entirety of every little thing within our roles, and we should do so with a minimum of excuses. It won't guarantee anything, but it improves the chances that humanity ends up on the winning side.

Mental health

Must I elaborate? It's like what Conan says about Carrot Top and his props - we've all relied on these tools to stay sane just within the general terror of life, and now in the face of this PANDEMIC, they've taken away all our tools (plus he and Norm say a bunch of other stuff, which you can watch in the rest of the clip).

Anyway... here are my two shoddy replacements for those tools:

Do the next right thing

Uncertainty means no plan, no outline, no path to show the way forward. In a sense, it's like we lost our autopilot, and are now feeling the constant pressure of flying an airplane the old fashioned way. What can we do when each moment feels like another chance to crash and burn?

It's hard, but a singular focus on each moment as it arrives can be a huge help. This mentality is the tenet of mental toughness, allowing us to let go from the mistakes and what-ifs of the past while also freeing us from the disappointment of losing things we were looking forward to in the future.

Be bigger than you feel

It's easy to give for the sake of the whole when the whole is something you interact with freely and routinely in the regular course of life. But it's much tougher in today's call to action by inaction, when the purest demonstration of community is voluntary withdrawal from the community. Our bodies, minds, and hearts file constant appeals against our self-sentencing, but we must respect the original verdict and trust in the larger idea.

This thought doesn't mean overcome, ignore, or bury the negative feelings of the moment. It means accepting them, allowing them in, and learning to keep moving despite the heavy chains these feelings throw around us. To be bigger than you feel, you must first know how you feel.

Vision 2020

Life's changed but that's no reason to abandon every goal I set prior to the pandemic.

What three things?

Social interactions have changed a great deal and almost without exception communication has decreased with every single person in my life. Still, I think the original spirit of this idea lives on - what are the three things I can learn from the upcoming interaction? These days, perhaps it's as simple as checking in on health, wealth, and happiness, but having the 'three things' framework ensures I don't get distracted by idle chatter and speculation about forces beyond our control.

The underlying theme

You can only change so much. Ultimately, there is a core to each of us, and it comes along for any ride.

Am I really trying my best?

It's a decent idea to reflect each morning on the prior day. Did I stop and wait when I should have, or did my impatience compel me to needless pass a fellow shopper? Am I fully checking in, or allowing jitters to choose words that end conversations? Do my decisions get the most of my energy?

There seems to be less and less of each day than ever before, but what hasn't changed and what never will is that we can still try to get the most of each day.

Footnotes

1. Process refresher, and update

The full list is around fifty to sixty items but I don't bother reading them all. Instead, at the start of each week (usually Saturday) I pick eight to twelve items for the week, then read those for the next few days. Given that in exchange for about ten total minutes per week I get better control of my thoughts, emotions, and decisions, I would argue it is my single highest value activity.

During the past few weeks, I haven't made any edits to the weekly list. This wasn't by design - I seemed to have gotten it right the first time, and conditions are changing so slowly that I haven't been forced into adjustments.

2. A big thank you, from TOA to the real warriors

Now, don't get me wrong on this analogy, I'm not out there doing the real work here, and I'm not pretending that anything I've done lately should be compared to a true war effort. It's simply a way to highlight the change in how I've made decisions.

proper corona admin, vol 9

Howdy reader,

Some scattered observations from the front - well, more like the back, or back office, of The Great Corona Lockdown.

Traffic

The local stay at home order has, understandably, reduced street traffic to around 10-15% of its usual level. However, what's seemed to go up is poor driving. If we use the official TOA metric for poor driving - turning the wrong way on a one-way street - my best guess is that I've seen such infractions occur at double (or even triple) the usual rate.

You may be thinking, rather eloquently - huh? I agree. I initially suspected there was some kind of social proof at play here (drivers simply following each other around, like lemmings) but I soon stumbled on a much more likely excuse - with fewer drivers around, it's simply less likely for cars to queue up at a red light. Nothing makes it more clear that a street is one-way than a car stopped where opposing traffic would otherwise flow.

Traffic, part two

TOA subscribers may have noticed that the morning email is arriving later than usual. Could this be evidence of higher internet traffic causing server strain? Only a 4500-word article from Vox can tell us for sure.

Spring is here, sort of

Each person has a different idea of spring's first approach. Whether you smell the flowers, feel the warm air, or simply enjoy the daylight given by an ever-generous sun, these signals are critical because, once noticed, it's hard to get back into the wintry mood.

For me, the return of hibernating Hubway racks - eh hem, Blue Bikes - always marks a sure sign of spring. The rack by the Public Garden at the end of Charles Street reappeared today, and it was a bittersweet moment. Spring will be there, when we make it, so have patience...

Have patience?

I almost have the whistling part down, Norah Jones can (and should) handle the rest.

Just need a little patience... hang in there, readers.

the toa newsletter - april 2020

Hello hello,

Longtime readers will know that April Fool's Day is a huge problem for me. You see, on this fine day, nobody believes a word I say. Some will (accurately) point out that I've created my own mess, citing formatting, bullshit, or just the very concept of TOA itself as lies that I've perpetuated with delight over the past four years. The biggest joke of all was probably in 2017, when I didn't even bother with a post.

I came up with a great solution, though, for today. It's an announcement, but if I print it no one will believe me, so I'll just show it by link. Have a look, and rub your eyes (editor's note - NO! DO NOT RUB YOUR EYES! AND DO NOT GO OUTSIDE, SIT AT HOME AND READ TOA INSTEAD).

Ladies and gentlemen, we are not joking around anymore (well, assuming it works, and I set it up correctly, etc...) -

https://www.trueonaverage.com/