I really don’t like to hate.  But there is one thing in particular that I just hate that I love.  It is: Diet Coke. 

I admit, I love Diet Coke. I love the brand.  I love sipping it in the afternoon (especially around the 3 o’clock hour); often I even love it with breakfast.  I love the Olympics for which they are a sponsor.  I love the sound of the can opening.  I love the feel of the plastic 20 ounce bottles. I love the red color in the logo.  I love it over ice.  I could go on and on… 

On the other hand, what I hate about Diet Coke is knowing that the ingredients aren’t particularly healthful, though the industry claims they aren’t particularly dangerous either.  I hate the claims that Diet Coke can potentially even cause weight gain; that its ingredients affect calcium absorption;  and that the articfical sweeteners can have adverse affects in our bodies, though the American Diabetes Association and American Heart Association don’t seem to have any problems with the product.  I hate that it is addictive.  I hate that it’s an expensive vending machine habit.  I hate that I still love it anyway. 

At the same time, I have been successful in some self-imposed spans of abstinence, from which I have often relapsed, too.  Currently I’m off it again, trying to stay away from sources of caffeine to sleep better. 

But then again, considering the movie, “Thank You for Smoking”, I can’t say that I would fight to have the product banned either.  That movie nicely supports the message that we all have a choice.  That we can’t blame an industry for making profits by offering a product that we can perfectly well choose not to consume. 

I could probably write a whole book about the pros and cons of Diet Coke.  (If you’d be interested in reading it, just let me know since I’d love to write it.)  But for now, I’ll close with the following thought which was sparked by these two articles I just came across: 

• “Plain Old Soda Gets a New Pop in a Down Economy” – Time
• “Coca-Cola CFO: Industry must fight soda taxes”  – The Boston Globe

Consider this fact:  Carbonated beverage sales in the latest 12 months ending May 2010 totalled $18.7 billion.  That’s almost as much as BP is putting into its uncapped oil cleanup escrow fund. 

That’s a lot of money that we as consumers (collectively) spend in a year for a little bit of enjoyment.

So….what do you hate that you love?

There is no shortage of quotes posted on Twitter every minute of every day. 

Many are the motivational kind.  The kind of quote that is easy for Tweeters to find, post, and re-Tweet.  The kind that people can instantly feel inspired by regardless of how helpful it actually is or isn’t.

[I don’t want to digress too much, but the following sidebar might be worth considering in this context.  Consider this post that points out how overemphasizing motivation, and ignoring ability and triggers, is what makes Facebook Behavior Change Apps ineffective: “5 Reason Facebook Behavior Change Apps Aren’t Working”.] 

But I digress a bit with that.  Getting back to my point….

Sometimes I, too, enjoy the clever words in motivational quotes. 

However, more often than not, these quotes also just make me want to point out the non-universality of their contrite claims.

I don’t know why, but I often feel compelled to want to reply to those quotes with a “Yes, but…” answer.  I rarely do, publicly, but, if thoughts could talk….

Here’s an example of the type of quote I’m talking about here.  This one came across my Twitterstream earlier today: 

“No farmer ever plowed a field by running it over in his mind” ~ George E. Woodbury. 

Ok. I get it.  Thinking about something isn’t going to get that something done.  That makes sense.

However, instead, my first reaction would be to reply to this apparent bashing of the thinking process with something like this:  “Maybe there is a good reason why the farmer didn’t want to plow the field right away.”

Maybe I should instead be asking myself, why do I even bother arguing with myself over quotes anyway? But that’s probably a question for another day.

Maybe it’s just that I believe “thinking” and “restraint” have served me well over time. Though maybe this  is why I find it harder to write more often than I currently do, too.

At the same time, I believe I’m open enough to consider a possible self-contradiction here.  Today I also came across a blog post which happened to have a very similar concept to the quote I wanted to argue with above.  Same concept, but this post instead strikes an emotional chord with me that I can relate to on a more specific level.  Consider this post by Ken Robert, @MildlyCreative: “An Angry Letter from Your Big Idea.”

Maybe I just seem to prefer more words, details, and explanations (e.g., the Who, What, Where, When and Whys of a concept) rather than over-generalizations and over-simplifications.   Maybe it’s more about how those words are expressed rather than their bottom line anyway.  

But that’s what motivates me.  What about you?

There were some recent news reports that the board game, Scrabble, was changing the rules of the game to now allow Proper Nouns.  

But, before anyone, who hasn’t yet heard the whole story, gets overly excited about nothing, be comforted to know that any kind of sacrilegious move like that would not apply to the Classic version, but would only apply to an upcoming Family Friendly version of the game.

While Scrabble really is “just a game”, our first knee-jerk reaction to the initial news reports does tell us something about ourselves. 

Probably the more outraged people are either really serious players or simply very rules-based people, as opposed to the more casual player who is happy to play to any set of agreed-upon rules.  Which are you?

Maybe you are the type that takes comfort in traditions?

Or, maybe you are someone who has worked hard to master the strategy of the game by memorizing the right words to take advantage of those double and triple letter/word scores?

Personally, I enjoy finding long words which surprisingly amount to very few points compared to those strategically placed short high-point combinations.  For some reason, I don’t seem to want to change my ways in order to get more points?  What does that say about me?

Or, maybe you are the rule-breaker who would be the first one to get your friends to agree to not play by the official rules anyway?

Could we even go so far as to suggest that if you experienced a strong adverse reaction to the initial news reports, that perhaps this reaction may have to do with more than just the Scrabble game, but might reflect how you feel about the need to follow rules in other areas of your life?  …and vice versa?

I don’t know.  What do you think? Is it okay to mess with the Classics?

We usually can’t recognize the tipping point of exactly when a pleasurable pursuit suddenly becomes a dreaded job, a.k.a. work.  Yet, we clearly know when that line has been crossed. 

It’s like the difference between running at a steady pace striving to reach a particular goal versus running to catch or keep up with something just out of our reach.  There’s a distinct difference in the feel of the activity.  The added pressure or stress just takes away any chance to enjoy the freedom of possibility.   

I remind myself of this as I build up new muscles, in my body and in my writing.  If it’s not fun, then why do it.  We have enough pressures in life, why put more on ourselves.   

But instead of quitting the activity that might feel like work at the moment, I find I can also choose to change the activity so that it feels like fun again, too.

I’m not going to let stress and invisible pressures take the creativity out of me, instead I’m going to use my creativity to banish the stressors. There are points of no return, but this isn’t one of them. 

How do you handle your pressures?  Are you winning the battle?

“Showing up is half the battle.”  That is how I started my routine of going to the gym regularly.  I found it was easier to go every day rather than scheduling or remembering to go on some sort of every other day basis. 

Driving directly to the gym after work is simply part of my autopilot routine now, as is packing my gym bag in the morning.  I never have to rationalize whether or not I’m going to go to the gym any more, but instead I put my focus on deciding what to do once I’m there.

I’m writing of my gym-going routine now as I sit here with one hour left on Day 2 of my new commitment to blog daily.  Can I really be at risk of failing to start my new daily writing habit already?

Nope.  I’ve decided that will not happen.  I will make the effort to do what I can with what I have.

While some people believe that blogging on a daily basis will only lead to lower quality posts thus leading readers to lose interest in the blog all together, I feel that since I don’t really have any regular readers (yet?) anyway, why should I even worry about that.

I care about my blog.  I care to present topics that are respectful of my readers’ time.  I also care to create a habit that will make me a better contributor to their time in the future.

So, for Day 2, I will call this “Mission Accomplished” (though I understand the mixed meaning this phrase has taken on in recent years.)   I wish you the best in your daily pursuits as well.   Here’s to building that muscle.   Hope to meet you here again tomorrow.

As you may have noticed, it’s been a few months since I’ve last updated this blog. 

As you may not know, this wasn’t exactly a planned hiatus.  Probably not unlike other writers out there, somehow I got myself into this rut where I didn’t believe I had anything worthwhile to say that wasn’t already probably being said by someone else.  So, I stopped writing.  Though, that is not to say that I didn’t miss the satisfaction of getting my thoughts down in black and white, which I truly did miss.

Anyway, a number of different inspirations have come together for me lately to inspire me to recommit to some new goals for this blog and I wanted to start by sharing these insights with you here.  I’m hoping these will guide me on a new course, one that we’ll both consider worthy of sticking around for.

My latest realizations are:

(1)    I am truly impressed and inspired by what blogger, Josh Hanagarne of the “World’s Strongest Librarian“, has accomplished with his life and his blog in the past year.  Read about it here: “World’s Strongest Librarian is One Year Old”.

(2)    In reading Chris Brogan’s challenge to blog about the importance of story in your life, I  realized I need more “story” in my life.  Not the kind of made up stuff, but the kind of real “experiencing life” kind of things.  I’ve spent enough time around other people’s “campfires” listening to their stories and I now need to take my turn and find my own stories to tell.

(3)    Like many others, health and fitness has finally become much more of a priority in my life.  I love “The Biggest Loser” and I enjoy following people like Jillian Michaels and Bob Harper online.  And as my fellow bloggers write about the role that fitness is playing in their lives, I’m finding more and more positive influences to follow.  I was particularly motivated by Josh’s post on Adam Glass’s blog and I believe in their message of “Nobody To Impress But Yourself“.

(4)    I was also glad to come across Problogger’s reminder post on “How to Choose a Niche to Blog About“.  I’ve been at this “lost” place before, but now I feel closer to a resolution.  I’m an analyst by trade and know there has got to be some way to create a niche around “thinking” that can be fun and interesting.  I’m on a quest to find (or create) that path, believing it can and will be found, again feeling encouraged by this “Go After Your Goals” post.

(5)    Then there is this steady stream of news reports that I keep reading about studies that contradict conventional wisdom. Studies and statistics always seem factual, yet are still easily misleading and confusing.  Consider the following:

Long-term use of osteoporosis drugs linked to hip breaks
Experts debate merits of breast cancer screening, mammograms
A Wine Diet Study Shows Alcohol Helps Women Lose Weight
Can Your MultiVitamin Give You Cancer?
New Studies Eat Into Diet Math

What do we do with studies such as these?  Don’t they just kill our trust in everything?  (And, that’s not even mentioning what is being reported about politics these days.) Either way, I look forward to exploring philosophies around these kinds of topics with my fellow bloggers and readers.

While by no means am I an arrogant person, I do feel confident to state that I realize I do have things to say, as I believe everyone does.  I’m hoping that what I have to say and how I say it helps others in what they have to say. 

Anyway, who knows what the next 365 days will hold for any one of us.  All I know is that not writing is not going to get me any closer to working through any of my many thoughts and inspirations.  So here begins one analyst’s quest for some worthwhile stories to tell….

The latest “rule” about the “new economy” and the “new job market” (or, rather, on how to take advantage of the economic downturn by becoming an entrepreneur) seems to be: “get ahead by breaking the rules”. 

I’ve always found that advice to be a bit suspect or a bit too “convenient”, overshadowing the role that luck and selective memories often play. 

Of course, that’s not to suggest that we don’t benefit from the “learning opportunity” of missteps, whether due to breaking the rules or not.  However, when it comes to rules, sometimes the “learning” is that some rules aren’t meant to be broken in a willy-nilly way.

Now, you probably don’t really need my advice on this.  There are lots of books on this topic, for example:  “Outliers” by Malcolm Gladwell;  “Ignore Everybody” by Hugh MacLeod;  “What Got You Here Won’t Get You There” by Marshall Goldsmith and Mark Reiter.  I’m not shooting down any of these authors or their books.  I actually have all three of those books on my book shelf.

Actually, I probably don’t even need to write a whole blog post about this, especially since I could pretty much consolidate my main point into 140 characters as I did on Twitter here:

Yet, if I were to elaborate a bit, I’d suggest that maybe there should be some rules, or at least guidelines, on what to know about rules before breaking them. If such rules on “how to break the rules” were to exist, here’s what I think they might include:

1. Know what rules exist, both explicitly and implicitly, in your realm of operation before trying to change things. Don’t assume rules do or don’t exist as you imagine them.
2. Know why certain rules exist.  “It’s always been done that way” shouldn’t always be blindly accepted, but may not be without merit either.  Investigate.
3. Know who created the rules, when, and for what intended purpose.
4. Know if the right rules were created and if they are meeting their intended purpose.
5. Know when to push the boundaries and when to respect them.  Don’t naively mess with strong forces like Mother Nature.
6. Know when “the times” have outgrown previously necessary/useful rules.  Rules seem to have pseudo- unwritten expiration dates.  Know when they are fresh and need to be respected.  Know when their time is about up or overdue.
7. Know if rules are being appropriately applied.  When the context, situation, and players change, do the rules need to change, too?
8. Know if existing rules are being respected and consistently enforced.  If not, find out why before taking action on it.
9. Know if old rules need to be tweaked, tossed, or replaced by new rules.  Chaos and anarchy isn’t always the best and only counter rule.
10. Know if the rules are hindering, hampering, or hurting more than they are helping.  Are they hampering creativity, productivity, efficiency, and flexibility?  Creativity, innovation, or uniqueness are key differentiators.

In general, whether we like them or not, rules do serve a purpose. They maintain order.  At the same time, rules aren’t always perfect; some are good, others are not so good (and there exists a full range of possibilities in between). 

For example, consider basic road traffic rules.  They basically work (e.g., what side of the road to drive on; what signs and symbols represent; etc.) 

Other rules are more subjective (e.g., company cultures, dress codes, ethics), but are still necessary to create guidelines of behavior, fairness, and civility.

There is also that much quoted phrase that goes something like this:  “It’s better to ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission.”  But as I began this post, I’ll reiterate the point about our selective memories; let me know if that blanket statement about “asking for forgiveness” has never bit anyone in the behind before either.

What do you think?  How easy is it to succeed at “breaking the rules”?

What makes my thoughts or ideas any more or less prophetic, important, or meaningful than anyone else’s?  

I’m sure I could say some things that some people in search of such wisdom haven’t heard before.  They’d probably be rather impressed with what I’d communicate.  Who knows though…if I were referencing commonly held beliefs or affirmations often heard in circles that others just haven’t encountered yet, perhaps they would hear the same thing somewhere else along their journey anyway. Isn’t there a phrase about: “When the student is ready, the teacher will be there”? 

At the same time, sometimes we just need to hear things multiple times in different ways before they sink in or trigger us into action. 

I could spend a considerable amount of time writing something like an ebook that no one will ever read either because it wasn’t of interest or because I didn’t know how to get it in the right hands. 

What’s the opportunity cost of anyone’s time spent doing anything? 

If “laughter is the best medicine”, might we all not be as well off  just watching a bunch of sitcoms rather than doing something futile? 

Yet, keeping an unwritten idea alive in one’s mind takes up a lot of energy and space that could likely be utilized more effectively for other things.  True?

I guess in the end we never know what really matters.  What makes us happy could be one criteria.  What pays off in some way (either for our own pocketbooks or in helping someone else)  might be another possible criteria.

Then there’s the “do no harm” part that we could all inadvertently cause in spite of the best of intentions, too. 

Maybe simply adding a disclaimer that the writer don’t know everything about anything might help portray the provided ”advice” as “food for thought” and prevent it from inadvertently being blindly followed by anyone. 

But then again, being polarizing is what attracts attention and sells.

In the end, this just makes me wonder how marketable something intricate, compelling, yet interestingly inconclusive could possibly be?  And, there is just one way to find the answer to that question…and it seems that will involve doing, and not only thinking and wondering about it.

Confidence and conviction are admirable traits.  Thus, many of us are familiar with the phrase: “if you don’t stand for something, you will fall for anything.” 

Yet , when it comes to things like political discussions, even the civil ones, with all the divergent points of view out there, I always wonder how anyone can be 100% sure that their view is the only right (or best) view. 

When we look at experts’ forecasts about what the future holds, we don’t have to look too hard to find almost every possible point of view vehemently defended by someone. In the end, who is ultimately most accurate will only be revealed by time.  Someone will clearly be right, whether by design or by accident, it’s just a question of who, what, and when.

Recently on Bloomberg radio I remember hearing “the future” described as this: “the future by definition is unknown and unknowable” and it’s about “tilting the odds in your favor”.

Let’s consider that theory of “being Contrarian” as one strategy for tilting the odds in our favor.  Certainly doing the opposite of what the masses are doing or expecting will put you in a smaller pool of players to stand out in. 

Popular “Contrarian” examples include: Warren Buffett’s investment style; the book “The Contrarian Effect” by Michael Port; and the fictional character of George Costanza, from Seinfeld, whose fictional life turned around when he started doing everything opposite of what he normally would do.

But like any theory, life isn’t operated like a programmed computer.  Not all equations have the same calculable factors, circumstances, or solutions. People are human.

Contrarian or conventional wisdom isn’t always right (or wrong).  I truly believe there is value in regularly, fairly, and reasonably questioning any theory or strategy.  On the other hand, remember, too, that you can also be fundamentally correct in your assessment of a situation, and things could still turn out quite opposite from what you expect.

I believe that there is often more than one theory or strategy that can work as a potential solution to a problem depending on the situation, players, and circumstances involved (known and unknown).

So, I find that the “common sense approach” is always a good concept to bring into the mix.  No matter what theory or strategy we choose to pursue, it seems to make sense to be flexible when other valid points of re-consideration present themselves.  But then again, it depends on what our “common sense” is based on, too. Either way, if we’re not looking for the possibility of a theory having flaws, we are much less likely to notice potential flaws even if in plain site.

I personally have found that there’s nothing wrong with taking your time when making decisions about which strategy or strategies to pursue, especially when potentially large consequences are at stake. “Slow and steady” can win the race over “fast and sporadic”.  We can learn from anything, but I don’t believe we need to experience every possible misfortune to learn about life either.

What do you think about “Tilting the odds in your favor”?  Is it possible?  Is speed of action a game-changer?”

The ubiquity and accessibility of the Internet has long since given flight to the belief that: “Everyone has a book in them.” Some of us will write that book.  Some of us won’t. 

Motivational gurus will work to encourage us to get our book(s) written.  Additionally, The Long Tail theory will insure that a broad range of books (of varying content and quality) will get written and read.

Clearly writing a book that gets published and read by others makes most authors feel worthy and satisfied at putting forth their best effort to leave a, hopefully lasting, legacy of some sort behind.

Yet, just because a book gets written doesn’t mean it’s a good book.  Of course, “good” is a broad and relative term.  Clearly not every book idea is worth writing or reading, regardless of whether or not that indubitably will take place.

Of all the good books that do get written by good writers, the reality about books is as follows: 

• There will be good books that never get read.
• There will be good book ideas that good writers never get around to writing.
• There will be bad book ideas that never get written (and rightfully so).
• There will be good ideas that don’t become good books.
• There will be good writers that write bad books.
• There will be bad writers that write bad books.
• There will be bad books that never get read (and rightfully so).
• There will be bad books that will get read.
• (Interestingly, there won’t be bad writers that write good books, because writing a good book by default gives its author the credence of being a good writer.)

 

 Either way, before an author puts pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard) self-doubt will surely find a way to creep into the picture.  Common questions that come to mind include the following:

“Am I a good writer?  Is this a good book idea? Is it original enough?  Does anyone care about what I’m trying to communicate?  Has someone else already tackled my book idea?  Will my life experiences really make my particular observations and way of framing them unique?  Can I be unique yet still evoke a commonality of experience that enough readers can relate to?  Will my “unique” way of capturing and conveying an idea be anything more than just another way of capturing and conveying the ideas of another author who already beat me to the game?”

In the end, it seems that the best way to answer those questions is to invoke that success strategy of “fail fast and often”.  I suppose we’ll never know what the true potential or legacy of a book idea is until we get it written, edited, and out there.  I’ll keep you posted on how things turn out for me.

If you (or someone you know) has any related experience(s) to share, please share below.

Other related posts by this author:

• “Is Original Thought Still Possible” (EzineArticles.com)
• “To Write or Not To Write?” (EzineArticles.com)