DISQUS

Congrats on the launch, Clay! Now get some sleep. :)

I agree that if you want to have a business that makes money, monetization isn't typically an effective strategy.

However, if you started doing something without the intention to make money, and it took off far beyond your expectations, your surprising success can be utilized towards the creation of a business.

I also think that it's ok to do noncommercial things in life, to have a blog on Buddhism or digital photography or Medieval art that doesn't make any money and doesn't intend to.

On the internet, I think why many people want things to be free or even just offer things for free is because part of us deeply wants a commons again, a place where something (ANYTHING) is free again. Social media in my opinion is largely driven by the interest in creating a commons. Our live communities are devoid of places where we can just hang out, for free, with other live human beings, so we have tried to create online communities that are free and counter-cultural. Social media marketing represents the opposing force, the drive of late capitalism to seek new markets in order to sustain infinite exponential growth.

So yes, start an intelligent business, and also have your free blog for a hobby if you want, but it may be smart to keep them clearly differentiated...unless your free blog has tons of traffic and your business is suffering, and if only you could sell your products to your blog readers.... (sometimes it's complex, eh?)

You still sound revolutionary to me. There is a time for figuring out and stating your ideas, and a time to act on them. Everyone has a somewhat different way of doing that.

I've also--for the time being--stopped writing and podcasting and Twittering so much, because I've been doing the thing instead of talking about the thing. The thing isn't necessarily entrepreneurship for me right now, but it is following my own path wherever it leads.

Keep on following your bliss, Clay,
~Duff

Congrats on the move, Clay! :)

I'm sure your businesses will do fantastically well.

Be well,
~Duff

Are we machines, or animals? Perhaps passion is play, creativity incarnate.

I find that feeling passionate is often a sign I'm headed in the right direction, and lacking passion is a sign that I need to adjust or change course!

Most people in our materialist culture tend to want to defend their interior experience (which is more direct) with the indirect knowledge of science, saying things like "eventually science will catch up and prove that subtle energy/mind/love really exist." But I think that's backwards.

I say, "eventually science will catch up--and it is beginning to catch up--and realize that the whole notion of objectivity is flawed, that there is no observed without an observer, and that therefore subjectivity and interconnectedness is more primary and real than this abstraction called objectivity."

If science finds ways of detecting subtle energy, that's great. But science can't even detect or understand love! Most psychological science still believes that mind is an "epiphenomenon," a myth created by neuronal activity. Are we to argue that love is biochemical and neurological to justify our care for each other? Seems ridiculous to me! It's time to say my experience is real, dammit, and I'm not justifying it through that-which-can-be-measured.

Measuring is also good to not get too carried away, which is why I appreciate people like Dean Radin who are looking into the effectiveness of things like distance healing/prayer, psychic phenomenon, etc. Integration of mind and heart is very important so that you don't make an ass out of yourself! :)

Great article. I've been thinking lately about the use of the word "energy" in reference to chi/kundalini/etc.

"Energy" is a word that refers primarily to physics, as is "force" as in "life force energy." By using the metaphors of physics, we subtly reinforce the materialist reductionist paradigm, the idea that all of the universe is reducible to physics. This pisses off scientists--because one can't measure "subtle energy"--and confuses the matter. "Subtle energy" is not objective...but then again, neither is physics, as "objectivity" continues to be revealed as being a myth.

What are some alternative words for "energy" which capture the subjective reality of this phenomena? Well, we could simply use chi, kundalini, n/om, shakti, etc., or we could use English words like vitality, aliveness, or even *gasp* spirit.

Personally I think we should strongly advocate for subjective language like spirit instead of attempting to fit into the fundamentalist materialist paradigm of physics, thus solving the problem of subtle energy by rejecting the frame of the discussion.

Great video. The first time I've seen a self-shot video on a blog that was outside! :)

Our social spaces online and off have all-too-frequently become places where we lead with our well-crafted "personal brand" in an attempt to turn our friends into customers. It's becoming difficult to find places where we can just hang out without selling anything or being sold on anything.

Having boundaries with people and being real (e.g. stumbling things you actually find value in) are wonderful ways to approach this problem.

This kicks ass. Love the quotes, and the story.

The methodology of Core Transformation that I've recently discovered and practice regularly personally and with coaching clients is one method for getting this kind of alignment on a regular basis.

Be happy first, then make money.

Rant on, brotha!

I too have been greatly influenced by Think and Grow Rich.

By the way, in case you didn't know already, Earl Nightengale beat you to your summary sentence of the Secret. I forget his actual wording, but it's something like "you become what you think about most of the time."

I'm generally in favor of people getting clear on their goals and creating written plans for their accomplishment. On the other hand, there are many examples of wealthy people, famous people, and other high achievers that did not utilize this strategy, and examples of people using this strategy that do not ultimately achieve very much. For example, my friend's wealthy relatives do not have nor did they ever have written goals or plans to achieve them--they just somewhat ruthlessly and obsessively pursued the acquisition of wealth without much concern for others (not necessarily what I'd recommend, but it's a counterexample).

Certainly a definiteness of purpose is critical for high achievement, if that's your outcome.

God I love when common sense finally makes it's way into business. :)

In some cases, greater results are met by core hours, regular meetings, etc. But so often hours and meetings are mindlessly followed.

The anti-Mark Hurst comments seem harsh to me, and seem to perpetuate misconceptions of Bit Literacy vs. 4HWW vs. GTD vs. 7 Habits vs. ZTD etc.

In my opinion, Bit Literacy is very much compatible with techniques from 4HWW, including email batching, personal outsourcing, etc. Merlin Mann also recommends getting your inbox to 0 daily. David Allen seems to also lean in this direction. The gurus are in agreement!

If you don't wish to learn the inbox 0 discipline, you can always outsource it, but in that case, your VA is then doing the inbox zero processing for you. Help me out--I just don't see the conflict here.

In my last startup venture, we applied principles from GTD, 4HWW, Bit Literacy, and other sources as a team. As a company we cleared our email inboxes to 0 nearly every day, and we decided what kinds of things would be handled via email vs. phone vs. meeting. We found no fundamental conflicts between the various systems, although the implementations do vary at times.

I personally found Mark's terse writing very enjoyable. I also enjoyed Tim's writing, and David Allen's, and Stephen Covey's, and Leo Babauta's. Every author has a different voice and can be enjoyed for their own unique qualities. I found the clarity of Mark's writing put me into a meditative state.

When I interviewed Mark, I found him to be flexible in his thinking, and open to however someone wants to solve the problem of email overload for themselves. Of course he also had his own preferences, as we all do.

There is value in all of these books and approaches. However you want to handle your life and your work is ultimately up to you, and I think each of these authors get this.

Yea, Mark is a bit hard on GTD at times. I think he doesn't quite understand the need for or joy of a complex model. I enjoyed interviewing him though--he's one smart cookie!

Many people have a difficult time with GTD because of all the moving parts, even though it's simply making explicit what people are already doing.

You said in this article "GTD is, however, a bottom-up approach to time management that — used in isolation — can lead to becoming very efficient (doing things well) but decreasingly effective (not doing the right things)."

I disagree from interviewing David. On my interview I asked him directly about this and he said that many people can't really focus on being more effective (getting perspective) until they have control, but he also emphasized flexibility to go to the higher altitudes whenever your intuition calls you to do so.

Just like your 4HWW method is often reduced to personal outsourcing and selective ignorance, GTD is often reduced to efficiency, even though David has a very robust model for effectiveness (the altitudes).

Similarly, Bit Literacy is reduced to bit levers and getting email to 0, and the 7 Habits is reduced to buying Franklin Covey planners and putting your big rocks in your weekly calendar.

It's my belief that if we all chatted we'd see more similarities than differences. I'd love to get all the gurus to dialogue together on Precision Change sometime.

Congrats, Cody! You're doing great!

I learned a ton from my goal-setting for 2007. Here are some of my lessons learned.

Hey Rick,

I know this comment is coming a bit late, but I just happened upon your blog today.

I too was once a shy, fear-laden geek! (And the geeks shall inherit the Earth....)

My main technique for getting over shyness (really social anxiety or fear) was outrageousness. I attack my fears head-on by blowing them out of proportion on purpose. For example: if I'm feeling particularly geeky, I'll go out and buy some UBER-geeky clothing from a costume store or thrift shop and wear THAT as a joke!

The metaphor I use is "finding a way to turn fear into fun."

The other thing that I've found useful is improv theatre and dance, which is basically structured outrageousness! And anything that gets you into your body and into fun social environments (dancing especially) will be beneficial.

Enjoy!

~duff