Steve - Have you seen this?

[Sentient]

Hey,

I'm wondering if you've ever spoken with or considered doing something with Devlyn Steele of Toolstolife. You both have similar missions to help people grow. You're both incredibly passionate about those missions. You both give away your best material for free in the hope that it will help people.

You write provocative articles that try to kick people in to motivation. He's built a great daily program that can successfully break it down day by day for people who aren't sure how to tackle their goals. He's also giving it away completely for free.

After just 2 weeks of TTL a lot of people tend to feel way better about themselves. After 30 days they feel like a whole new person.

I'm one of the 300 people who has finished the 90 day course (beyond the scores he's dealt with in private practice) and I can attest it's at least made a major difference for me. Unsurprisingly, I get the most out of it when I actually follow the advice rather than letting it wash over me without effect. Fortunately, since it's broken down to daily chunks it's a lot easier to follow than many programs.

Anyhow, I'll cut the plug short, but I really feel like you should put this on your list of things to check out. The guy wants to help change the world and seems like he couldn't be more aligned with his own purpose in life. I imagine he can't be too bad of a contact to have.

[Bruce Achterberg]

You can post a link when you are making such a post for legitimate reasons. I understand why you might not have, but relax, we're not that draconian around here.

Self Help Programs from Tools To Life Coaching & Motivation Support Groups

The site looks genuinely intriguing (although Steve's simple, elegant navigation wins. Steve's mug shot is better, too ).

[Bruce Achterberg]

It's interesting; I've been looking for more actionable "tools" like this for a while (i.e. places that have step-by-step actionable content) and even considered creating something like this myself. Now that I have access to something like it, though, I feel less than interested.

The first mistake they make is their ridiculous captcha that doesn't seem to work properly with Firefox 3. I'd love to sign up, but because the captcha won't explain how it works (do you put a space between the words or not? is it case sensitive? does it matter what order I type the words in?), nor give me something I can actually read and replicate (it's great that spam bots can't read it, but non-ideal if humans can't, too), I can't. (Yes, I can get past the captcha if I want, but that's not the point. The point is that there are thousands of people who'd have rather unnecessary trouble. Here's an example of a good capcha.) I swear, after wrestling with the captcha, the sign up process has become like playing a slot machine. Will I win this time? *clicks sign up* Nope.

That already gives me a bad impression of the site and tells me that most of the site has probably been outsourced. Outsourcing is fine, but you really need to have a focus on quality. On Steve's site, for example, you can just tell it was made by Steve. "Steve" is just written all over his site in the various way he does things, and there's a consistent level of largely un-matched "Steve" quality throughout the entire site. It's quite refreshing, and one of the nice things about Steve's site. Most sites would take Steve's content and make it ridiculously challenging to find with various non-efficient, "I don't want to make money" methods of navigation and layout designs.

The second mistake I see is that they don't really let you scan through the content at will to actually get an in-depth look at it. Games do this, and it's a big mistake and partly why adults don't really take games seriously. Books and online articles don't do this (let's not get into the articles that split a single article into multiple pages), and they seem pretty popular.

The second mistake has the side effect of making the content seem like it has an emphasis on compartmentalised methods and processes instead of universal truths (this is just an assumption, but it seems accurate; it doesn't seem like a holistic site; it radiates compartmentalisation). Steve's "smart people" approach and years of my own experience have kind of spoilt me, making me extremely picky with the content I do dive into (especially when I can't access the content because I have both a captcha hoop to jump through, then a "you can't easily preview this content" hoop to jump through).

Clearly my next move should be to offer some design consulting to ToolsToLife so I can rake in some cash and monetise these inefficiencies. (Note: I won't be doing that.)

This isn't so much me complaining as it is me saying, "this is what isn't ideal; remove this, and the site would be better very quickly."

Edit: So I finally got the sign up to work. Apparently my user name had an invalid character in it, so it wasn't all the captures fault. The capture is still non-ideal for the reasons I explained above.

Edit #2: I've started testing out a "tool", or at least, I tried to, but they want me to sign some agreement before I even know what I'm getting into. Refer to "mistake #2" (above) for why that's bad. I feel like someone I don't know just walked up to me and said, "Relationships are a process. You must commit to them. Will you marry me?" That's a deal-breaker, like not showering for your first date. My response is "websites are virtual worlds; don't create unnecessary barriers to those worlds when you have no trust with your visitors and have no good reason to create that barrier in the first place." I'm going to go read Steve's site now, or something.

[wulph]

Originally Posted by Bruce Achterberg

The second mistake I see is that they don't really let you scan through the content at will to actually get an in-depth look at it. Games do this, and it's a big mistake and partly why adults don't really take games seriously. Books and online articles don't do this (let's not get into the articles that split a single article into multiple pages), and they seem pretty popular.

This paragraph confuses me. Games do let you scan through, or games don't let you scan through? How does this deter adults, either way? And similarly, books and online articles don't do which?

Could you please clarify?

Originally Posted by Bruce Achterberg

Edit: So I finally got the sign up to work. Apparently my user name had an invalid character in it, so it wasn't all the captures fault. The capture is still non-ideal for the reasons I explained above.

The site didn't make it clear to you (or easily noticeable) that the problem was with the username, so you wasted time fooling with the captcha. This is an even bigger design flaw. I agree with you about the layout -- I can't easily tell where to begin.

[Sentient]

Hey Bruce,

I'll be the first to agree with you about some of the navigation shortcomings. I give them a break though. The site is after all still a beta, and it is also free to use.

Basically, this is an offline program that Devlyn Steele created and has been using in his private practice for decades now. He really wanted to put it on the web so it could help more people. Though they're still obviously working out the kinks, what he's done is give open access to a remarkable tool simply because he feels driven to help people get closer to their dreams.

If you really want to get going on the site, then I could easily join in with you. For one, I think the theme music they play is a bit hokey (though it grows on you after a few days), and navigation can be awkward quite often as you said. I've definitely had to hunt around for a while for things in a way I shouldn't have to. The thing is, I don't mind so much, because the content has been SO helpful to me.

You should compile a list of what you dislike and forward it on to their team. They're *extremely* responsive. When they first put some advertising up on the site, I complained that it wasn't aligned with their message. Within a week almost all of those questionable advertisements disappeared.

It's awesome to have the presence of mind to be so aware that you can see the shortcomings and how to fix things. That is a great skill you have. I was completely impressed when I read your post. However, I think you'll have to go through about 5 days of the program first before you can really *start* forming an opinion about it (each day takes about 20-30 minutes). I know I laughed at it for the first three, and didn't even get how valuable it was until I finished the entire thing and went back and looked at some of my old answers to the exercises. Now finally, here I am plugging it.

He really has put together something special. It may work for you, or it may not work for you. But give it a chance first. And while you're giving it a chance, keep compiling annoyances and forward them to their support team. They'll love you for it.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Bruce Achterberg

The first mistake they make is their ridiculous captcha that doesn't seem to work properly with Firefox 3.

Just the other day I saw a bit of genius - a captcha that offered a link to speak the code to you.

Originally Posted by Bruce Achterberg

The second mistake I see is that they don't really let you scan through the content at will to actually get an in-depth look at it. Games do this, and it's a big mistake and partly why adults don't really take games seriously. Books and online articles don't do this (let's not get into the articles that split a single article into multiple pages), and they seem pretty popular.

Can you please clarify what you mean by this? Obviously games like to conceal the surprises in the levels ahead but books and articles can be flicked/skimmed through at will.

[wulph]

Well, after getting started and within the actual program, the layout is MUCH more intuitive, and it didn't take me long to feel really comfortable forging ahead. Thanks for sharing this resource, Sentient.

[Brutha]

I'll be the first to agree with you about some of the navigation shortcomings. I give them a break though. The site is after all still a beta, and it is also free to use.

That is no excuse. Not all of those choices are bugs.
Asking people for their birthdate and their realname is a choice.
Having people agree to a long terms of use is a choice.
Having an annoying youtube video that automatically starts to play is a choice.

(Yes, I can get past the captcha if I want, but that's not the point. The point is that there are thousands of people who'd have rather unnecessary trouble. Here's an example of a good capcha.)

If a capture like Steve isn't handcoded it's no problem for bots to read it.
In addition blind people can't use the website which they can with those speak the words applications.

[Sentient]

Brutha,

In my response, I meant to concede the technical side of the argument to you guys. You win! I'm not trying to represent the site as something it's not. It's a work in progress. It is however set up with unbelievably great intentions, and it's helping a lot of people - even if their navigation is clunky, their captchas aren't up to par, and they are asking for real names.

As for the "long term use" contract that is being referred to, that is a "commitment contract." It's not binding, and has nothing to do with you and the website. It's meant to be between you and you! It's similar to writing your goals or intentions down. If you look at it, all it says is "Hey, I, Sentient, promise to do the work and do what I need to in order to realize my goals." Nothing more than that! It's no more binding than when you write out your To Do list in the morning.

I just wanted to share something that has been really helpful to me and I thougth would help a lot of other people! I didn't want to push anything on anyone, nor was I holding this up as a technological marvel or a masterpiece in site design. It has good content that has helped a lot of people, that's all. You'll need to give them the benefit of the doubt and try it for a while though. If you still don't like it, try to help them improve it or just forget about it and move on.

[Sentient]

Bruce, all of your complaints are warranted. If that is your experience, then you are right in every way.

I'm just confused, that's all. It seems strange that you would draw a conclusion about the content from the site design? Why throw away a piece of gold because it is covered in dirt? Just because you have some polishing to do doesn't diminish the value of what lies beneath. Isn't a website with kinks to work out what you would expect from someone who would be smart enough to use Steve's "Ready, Fire, Aim?"

You can read my previous post about the "long term commitment." I will agree that I thought it was funny to have it RIGHT at the start. I think it would be more appropriate after Day 2 or Day 3. But even so, it's certainly not sinister.

Also you brought up compartmentalization. It actually couldn't be further from the truth. The whole course weaves beautifully from one topic to the next eventually tieing them all together. That is the beauty of tools. It's designed to be entirely holistic.

In the end, I'd say that you can argue any point you want, but you can't argue with results. Offline, his course has helped thousands. Online, the only version I've ever been exposed to, has been one of the most profound experiences I've had. The only other time in my life I've grown more or faster is when I went out doing crazy **** every day like begging for change just to amass the experiences.

I really don't have anything invested in the program. I only shared it because I want other people to at least have the option of using something that helped me out. If even one person reads this thread and goes on to use it, and gets something out of it, it'll have been worthwhile for me.

Originally Posted by Bruce Achterberg

Edit #2: I've started testing out a "tool", or at least, I tried to, but they want me to sign some agreement before I even know what I'm getting into. Refer to "mistake #2" (above) for why that's bad. I feel like someone I don't know just walked up to me and said, "Relationships are a process. You must commit to them. Will you marry me?" That's a deal-breaker, like not showering for your first date. My response is "websites are virtual worlds; don't create unnecessary barriers to those worlds when you have no trust with your visitors and have no good reason to create that barrier in the first place." I'm going to go read Steve's site now, or something.

[Interpreneur]

I managed to register in less than one minute, much less than what it took me to read Bruce's post complaining about the registration process.

The fact that Bruce and Brutha had problems understanding the registration process (which is the same as every other site on the web) shouldn't deter anyone else from trying it.

I'm sure many people have problems trying to register on Steve's forums also. I think the negativity is unwarranted, but that's just my humble opinion.

[Bruce Achterberg]

Originally Posted by Sentient

Bruce, all of your complaints are warranted. If that is your experience, then you are right in every way.

I'm just confused, that's all. It seems strange that you would draw a conclusion about the content from the site design? Why throw away a piece of gold because it is covered in dirt?

I'm very, very picky with what content I dive into. Books, websites, you name it. I simply don't wish to allocate mind share or time to things that aren't exceptional and near best-in-the-world. I also almost exclusively deal in things that are holistic (i.e. non-compartmentalised), and design--of anything--can be very telling. I never see "just a design"; I see connections everywhere. Interestingly, Steve's website design was one of the first things that caught my eye about Steve's site. His design was 1337, and it turned out that the rest of the site, and Steve, were 1337 too.

The approach I use may seem limiting, but I've found it makes me extremely effective. I like to call myself "specific." I have to do a bit more to make my life work while using this approach, but for me, the extra results are worth it.

While I tend to be a bit vocal about things that aren't ideal (at least, not ideal from my perspective), don't take it too seriously. It's the result of my Maximiser talent theme. I'm inherently optimistic, so if I see something that isn't as good as it can be, I feel an intense desire for it to be better, which often causes a bit of friction with the present.

I'm cool with not using the ToolsToLife website. I'm happy enough with my post and the discussion it spawned. Hopefully someone will find it helpful.

[wulph]

Originally Posted by Bruce Achterberg

I'm inherently optimistic, so if I see something that isn't as good as it can be, I feel an intense desire for it to be better, which often causes a bit of friction with the present.

I was under the impression that optimists see "the glass is [present tense] half full," and not "the glass could be fuller." Maybe yours is another interpretation of optimism, but to me, finding fault with the present is a "half empty" mindset..

Originally Posted by Sentient

If even one person reads this thread and goes on to use it, and gets something out of it, it'll have been worthwhile for me.

So far (day 4), it seems extremely helpful to me, and the materials are superbly produced. I've already started recommending it to others.

[Bruce Achterberg]

So people didn't understand my gaming reference, heh. If I could place bets on aspects of my posts that people won't understand, I could buy some nice stuff. I usually know when I should go into more detail about something, but it pains me to always have to explain things (it takes lots of time and space). Let this be a lesson to never say "this" (it's almost never good to use "this", I find; being specific is so much more clear, although usually, you can get rid of many instances of "this" if you just write better, but that takes time. Pay me to write better and I will. In fact, soon you'll be able to do that. ).

Anyway, let me explain….

To recap, I said:

The second mistake I see is that they don't really let you scan through the content at will to actually get an in-depth look at it. Games do this, and it's a big mistake and partly why adults don't really take games seriously. Books and online articles don't do this (let's not get into the articles that split a single article into multiple pages), and they seem pretty popular.

So I'm saying that books are great, because you can easily flip through them. Games are not, because they force you to (usually) go through a set series of levels--a set progression through pre-defined content or systems. This creates an unnecessary barrier to the game content, and adults who usually have lots going on (families, business, interesting projects) don't have time, or at least, don't really want to be forced to play a game with imposed limitations.

To be sure, games and books are almost always better when read linearly (Photoreaders, please stay out of this for the moment ), but books give you this option and plenty more. Games put barriers in front of you, much like ToolsForLife, and it makes me much less interested in using the site.

Brutha, who has a similar system-design-type background to me, seems as frustrated as I am with unnecessary barriers ToolsToLife throws at you. Whether you can get through them or not, it's such common sense to not have them (ok, I'm biased, but meh) that it blows my mind that such barriers would remain on the site. Heck, I'm designing a site right now and already in it's prototype form, it has better usability design than a site that's in beta. (People like to throw around "Beta" too much these days. Ok, so you're site isn't finished. Why not finish certain critical elements of it before you do other things, or hire people to do it? If you're broke, fair enough. If you're not, you confuse me.)

Maybe it's just not obvious to non-individualiser, non-maximier types that one should outsource what you're not good at to somebody who is or learn how to do it at least semi-decently before you expose people to mediocrity, but I'd say that's no excuse. I'm being critical here, but with system design, there's good reason to be. Every second of time you waste on a poorly designed system that could be pretty easily designed to be better is wasted human potential. I'm not kidding.

[Sentient]

I get what your'e saying with games and levels.

I also know that a lot of people start with a huge burst of motivation and then burn out a few days later. Typically, they will read through an entire book in one or a few sittings and then they will proceed to do......nothing.

Tools is set up with "Days" that you can't pass until you've finished the one before for exactly this reason. They don't want you to try to do 10 days at once. The entire point is that it is impossible (or at least MUCH more difficult) to change unless it is done gradually over time. You put the odds in yoru favor if you small-chunk it and let things take root. Allowing access to everything would completely sabotage this. This is, perhaps, one of the best parts of the site.

Of course it creates a problem, as you said, Bruce. It's the "I don't know what you're about so why should I devote my time" problem. Credibility indicators are important when trying to make these decisions. I had the same problem you had, Bruce. I didn't know what this program was about either, so why did I trust it with my time? I just looked at it and saw that a lot of other people had benefited enormously, so I decided to close my eyes and take the plunge. It has paid off in SPADES for me. If it hadn't, I could have ditched it at anytime. Fortunately for me, it improved my life already within the first week and it just kept getting better from there. That saved me from ditching it too early and missing out.

It seems like you are wearing an "optimiser" hat in this discussion. You're operating as if you owned TTL and seeing how you would improve it. You notice that there are lots of things you would change and immediately see a site that isn't capturing its potential.

However, there's more than one hat to wear in this situation. Any site may lose potential with "I don't want to make money" design, but if it holds the answers that you need, then YOU lose too by passing it by. I mean, letting both parties win is good business, but you may still stand to win so much that it makes sense to overlook what you deem subpar practices. After all, as a consumer, I often am selfishly looking for the biggest "win" for me. I don't so much care if I buy it from someone else who is optimising their win too.

As a personal example, I recently bought a workout program online. The guy who put it together strikes me as not the sharpest. His materials are also sloppily put together. His book is chock full of typos and his products are in some cases spread across different sites and require me to hop from one to the next to get what I need. I don't care though. His content is awesome, extremely helpful, and was a missing keystone for me "getting it" in terms of what yields results and what doesn't in the gym. He's incredibly successful, most likely in spite of his business practices, all because crappy design or not, his content is still so good it's delivering massive value to people. Could he make more? Sure. Do I care? No, because either way I win by buying from him and lose if I don't.

Either way, I respect your decision. I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't, since one trend throughout my life has been A) Start out by ridiculing B) Cement my firm rejection C) Become intrigued D) Try it E) Become a huge fan F)Become confused why other people don't immediately embrace it. I am, unfortunately, aware of that irony.

Who knows, maybe at some point you'll decide to try it. Maybe you won't. Both are ok, and both will be perfect for you whatever you decide. Even when I do a complete about face in my life, both the rejection and acceptance of an idea seem to have been perfect for my development at the time.

[Bruce Achterberg]

Originally Posted by wulph

I was under the impression that optimists see "the glass is [present tense] half full," and not "the glass could be fuller." Maybe yours is another interpretation of optimism, but to me, finding fault with the present is a "half empty" mindset..

This is a bit off topic, but it at least gives context to my previous posts.

I've said that I'm optimistic. For me that doesn't involve seeing the glass as half full. That's more about positivity and having an optimistic perspective. When I speak of optimism, I speak of the kind that comes from talent (my optimism comes from my Maximiser talent theme).

For me, there are two layers of reality: the present--"what is"--and what I envision--"what could be". In a situation where I envision a "what could be" that is better than the present, it feels so real to me that I can't believe, and am usually extremely frustrated by, the fact that people aren't doing what appears so very obvious to me. This is literally how I view the world, so I can't imagine not viewing the world like this (that'd be like telling me to imagine how a colourblind person sees a tree; I just have no reference point for that).

If you're wondering why I naturally feel frustrated, it's because my Achiever and Activator talents drive me to reach the result I envision, and to do it now (and not later), respectively. I can't make that feeling go away, just like someone who craves order will feel a craving for order in a messy room, or someone who is empathetic will feel the emotions of people around them and won't be able to tune them out. Asking us not to feel such things is like holding our eyes open and saying, "don't see anything"--it defies our biological configuration.

I could go on; this is all text book talent stuff.

You seem curious, so I'll direct you to Marcus Buckingham who will answer all of your questions if you peruse enough of his material. For starters, let his definition of leadership knock your socks off (note: I'm not saying I'm a leader--leadership is about combining talent with skill and knowledge--but I do have the leadership trait of optimism):

A good interview:

Marcus Buckingham Interview

Choice quotes:

Now, from Buckingham: "When I say leaders are optimistic I mean simply that nothing--not their mood, not the reasoned arguments of others, not the bleak conditions of the present--nothing can undermine their faith that things will get better."

— Source: Amazon.com: Stosh D. Walsh's review of The One Thing You Need to Know: ... About ...

The Definition of Leadership

* Great leaders rally people to a better future
o Leaders have a vivid vision of what the future could be, and rally others to strive for it.
o "You are a leader if, and only if, you are restless for change, impatient for progress, and deeply dissatisfied with the status quo."
* The core talents underpinning all great leadership are optimism and ego
* Leaders may be pessimists or even depressive (see Lincoln), but nothing, not their mood, not the reasoned arguments of others, not the bleak conditions of the present, can undermine their faith that things will get better.
* "Properly defined, the opposite of a leader isn't a follower. The opposite of a leader is a pessimist."
* "Despite their realistic assessment of the present challenges, they nonetheless believe that they have what it takes to overcome these challenges and forge ahead."
* Ego: "The key thing about leading is not only that you envision a better future, but also that you believe, in every fiber of your being, that you are the one to make this future come true....You arethe one to assume the responsibility for transforming the present into something better."
* "The difference between a leader with a powerful ego and an egomania is how the ego is channeled. The effective leader takes his self-belief, his self-assurance, his self-confidence, and presses them into the service of an enterprise bigger than himself. For the egomania, the self is the enterprise."
* To help develop a budding leader, don't tell him to be humble; challenge him to be more inquisitive, more curious, and thereby more vivid in describing hs image of a better future, and then encourage him to channel his cravings and his claims towards making this image come true.

— Source: bookoutlines wiki / The One Thing You Need To Know

Leaders are Compelled by the Future - "There’s something unique and different that makes a leader, and it’s not about creativity or courage or integrity. As important as they are, you can have those attributes and still fail to be a great leader. A leader’s job is to rally people toward a better future. Leaders can’t help but change the present, because the present isn’t good enough. They succeed only when they find a way to make people excited by and confident in what comes next…….. With leaders, the future calls to them in a voice they can’t drown out. The future is more real than the present; it compels them to act."

— Source: Marcus Buckingham outlines the core concepts of superior leadership | The Practice of Leadership

Rally people to a better future. Great leaders are optimists. Not all have sunny dispositions. Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill battled depression, but they saw a better future where others saw doom. The opposite of a leader isn't a follower. The opposite of a leader is a pessimist. Optimism is more important than the right vision. Followers rally around leaders to make them right. Great leaders are clear. Followers fear change, and the antidote is clarity. Leaders have been advised recently to be humble. But the Jeff Skillings and Dennis Kozlowskis were caused by a lack of ethics, not big egos. Leaders need big egos because they must believe they are the ones to make bright futures come true.

— Source: USA TODAY Education - Careers TODAY

[Bruce Achterberg]

Originally Posted by Sentient

It seems like you are wearing an "optimiser" hat in this discussion. You're operating as if you owned TTL and seeing how you would improve it. You notice that there are lots of things you would change and immediately see a site that isn't capturing its potential.

Wow, keen eye. Just rename the hat you speak of to the "maximiser" hat, and you'd be 100% accurate. I've a feeling you might like this description of me (I'd explain why, but that defeats the purpose; bare with me here):

By nature, you concentrate most of your energy on what you know you do well. You ask, "Why waste time trying to fix myself?" You contend it is wiser and more sensible to build on what you naturally do best. Instinctively, you find that life is quite satisfying when you concentrate on using your dominant talents. You are likely to move much more quickly toward your goals when you practice doing what comes naturally. Driven by your talents, you know you can simultaneously handle numerous assignments. You probably do better work when you have multiple tasks to perform. Being ordered to give all your mental and physical energy to a single activity day after day can erode the quality of your results. Maybe it saps your enthusiasm for what you are doing. Chances are good that you know you spotlight the best ideas people share with you. By giving your full attention to another person, you acknowledge the value of his or her thoughts and feelings. In the process, you usually enhance the individual's confidence. Because of your strengths, you customarily figure out what makes each person special. You talk to, observe, or study individuals who produce nothing less than excellence to identify what inspires them. Unquestionably, you prefer to associate with those who share your passion for taking something good and making it better. Once you understand what drives a person, you can motivate him or her to transform whatever was made better into something utterly superb.

— Source: Bruce's StrengthsFinder 2.0 results, Copyright © 2000, 2006-2007 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved.

I honestly appreciate your in-depth replies to my posts that were mostly not about getting more out of ToolsForLife. You managed to see what I was actually saying and not react to it as if it was criticism (since it wasn't; you could sum up my posts as a map for how ToolsToLife could get from where they are to something better). Few people are able to do this, so thanks--it's actually pretty cool interacting with people like you. (Interesting with other people is cool, too, it's just I don't have to explain what the heck I'm talking about to people like Sentient as much. )

We seem to have vastly different styles, but I will at least consider considering ToolsToLife (then after that, I might try it ). A recent theme for me has been to relax more and not resist all the things that come my way so much. You're practically hitting me over the head (with very nicely written) "maybe you'd like to try ToolsForLife" posts, which is no doubt some sort of message from the universe. Message received--and thanks!

Maybe I'll use ToolsToLife to adopt a "try things before I conceptually discount them" approach and see how it goes.

Seriously though, I am in need of a more effective way to apply motivation (motivation is like the burst of a rocket ship; you need to apply it intelligently or you run out of fuel). Just today I learned that my specificness combined with my specific talent themes causes me to quit things unless I see immediate results, which eventually hinders effectiveness. It was a side effect I was previously unaware of as it involves my current situation. Not sure how solid this idea is, but I figure if I can learn to take action in spite of results, I may get results a lot faster--it just requires I endure a bit of short-term discomfort for long-term results. Steve would call this discipline, but I'm not low on discipline; just channeling a talent in a non-ideal way.

[wulph]

Bruce, thanks for clearing that up.. I have a much better understanding of your position now.

Can you tell me a good site for determining my talents, e.g. maximiser, achiever, activator?

[Sentient]

Bruce,

Thanks for the kind words. Your points became much more clear as the discussion went on. To keep up the trend of honesty, I'll say I did have quite a difficult time seeing where you were coming from in the beginning. I just knew it served no purpose to react to that so I did my best not to. Reread and you'll see where I started to slip up although in general I did a reasonable job of being unreactive...

The fact that both wulph and I had some work to do to understand you may be something for you to maximise going forward. It could also be an artifact of this particular conversation, but I'm sure you have a good handle on this already.

Finally, I'll plug tools one more time and say that had it not been for the course, I probably would have gotten a bit more antagonistic. If you look at my post history I started writing a reasonable amount and then stopped all of a sudden. The stop came because i realized I was just taking issue with a lot of people's thoughts and I couldn't honestly tell myself why that was productive or important. I think I probably would have soldiered on regardless if I wasn't directing more awareness towards the issue. ..And I probably directed more awareness towards it because of the daily work I was doing in Tools.

Anyhow, wulph started it too so perhaps he'll give his opinion on it at some point down the road. I should probably give it a rest for a while...

Have a great day and thanks for the discussion.

Though I am still curious why I never got a one liner from Steve on this thread re: potential contact with Devlyn Steele. Bueler?

[Bruce Achterberg]

I actually got drawn to come to this thread by my intuition. Can you believe I'm being spiritually directed to make forum posts now? Heh (no surprise; I've spiritually put up my hand to be of better service, so here you go).

Anyway...

Originally Posted by wulph

Bruce, thanks for clearing that up.. I have a much better understanding of your position now.

Can you tell me a good site for determining my talents, e.g. maximiser, achiever, activator?

The ones you list are my talents, heh, but I can tell you a good site that you can access once you buy a good book:

StrengthsFinder 2.0 (that's a link to a thread where I wrote about StrengthsFinder 2.0)

You wouldn't believe the amount of times people ask me about talents and strengths, heh. Soon I hope to have a nice centralised place where you can access all of my wisdom about strengths and talents and everyone can be less confused. Maybe someone will actually use my affiliate links, too, and I can keep doing this and not be broke.

My forum post archive should be rich with info about strengths and talents, you just need to do a forum search for it. Plug in my name and type in 'talents strengths" and you should do pretty well.

Enjoy!

[Bruce Achterberg]

Originally Posted by Sentient

Bruce,

Thanks for the kind words. Your points became much more clear as the discussion went on. To keep up the trend of honesty, I'll say I did have quite a difficult time seeing where you were coming from in the beginning. I just knew it served no purpose to react to that so I did my best not to. Reread and you'll see where I started to slip up although in general I did a reasonable job of being unreactive...

You certainly did more than a reasonable job. Taking into account my experience with others, you're probably in the top tier in terms of "people who actually consider things Bruce says before outright dismissing them and saying not-kind things."

I'm not complaining!

You'll note that you're getting a more natural, more easy-going me in these responses because I feel I can be myself without you taking me seriously and super-reacting every time I say something. This is good; it makes for more authentic, interesting, and especially more fun interaction.

Originally Posted by Sentient

The fact that both wulph and I had some work to do to understand you may be something for you to maximise going forward. It could also be an artifact of this particular conversation, but I'm sure you have a good handle on this already.

I need to build long-term relationships with people for communication to be most effective. My specificity causes me to be widely misunderstood, but in the right conditions, it also allows for extreme effectiveness (relative to usual effectiveness levels; everyone is capable of it, but few embrace it, hence the relatively non-extreme levels of effectiveness).

But yeah, I do have a good handle on this. What I'm starting to get used to now is embracing the notion of providing value to others. I'm already pretty intuitive, but when I write posts that feel right, I seem to get really positive feedback about them. I must be tapping into some sort of need, or something, since I don't get responses like that usually--only since I've been embracing this new position of mine and using my intuitive abilities I developed the last few months from playing games. Yes, that's right, from playing games. Ha!

And technically the term I'd use for what you described would be "optimise." "Maximise" describes usage of the trait, not the practice of optimisation. (See what I did there? Maximiser talent + the picky correction = exactly what a Maximiser would do. Although that was deliberate--and the optimise part was true! Heh.)

I'm *very* curious to further explore this phenomenon, partly because it's interesting, partly becuase it's inherently enjoyable. Sign me up for lots more interaction and writing like this; it's good fun and I'm all for it. Maybe I should just interact with everyone like this, but I find it tends to cause people to just whine a lot, heh. Maybe I should do as Steve does and acknowledge that they're infected with the whininess-disease and continue serving as an example of what you can be like if you don't complain all the time. Hmmm.

Originally Posted by Sentient

Finally, I'll plug tools one more time and say that had it not been for the course, I probably would have gotten a bit more antagonistic. If you look at my post history I started writing a reasonable amount and then stopped all of a sudden. The stop came because i realized I was just taking issue with a lot of people's thoughts and I couldn't honestly tell myself why that was productive or important. I think I probably would have soldiered on regardless if I wasn't directing more awareness towards the issue. ..And I probably directed more awareness towards it because of the daily work I was doing in Tools.

Anyhow, wulph started it too so perhaps he'll give his opinion on it at some point down the road. I should probably give it a rest for a while...

Have a great day and thanks for the discussion.

Thanks, I will. You seem to be having a good one already.

Feel free to share more of your experiences about ToolsToLife.

I'd be curious to know what exactly content the 90-day course covers, and why it's so good.

I'm partly procrastinating on applying it since, well, I'm super-picky at what I apply-especially "when" I apply it--and am busy allocating mindshare to some other projects. I did say I'd at least consider considering to try it, and I've done that, so it has a potential chance at being scoped out if I feel so inclined (I'm big on intuition; if I'm not feeling something, I usually don't do it. Works for me).

In general, when you want somebody to try something, I find it's best to explain the benefits instead of telling them that they should do it or speaking to them with the subtext of "you should do this." When I'm more open about sharing how beneficial something has been to me instead of trying to preach it to them like a zealous newly-converted enthusiast (not saying you're doing that, but I do it often, heh), you tend to reach the person as opposed to hitting their "why is this person trying to get me to do something" shield.

Originally Posted by Sentient

Though I am still curious why I never got a one liner from Steve on this thread re: potential contact with Devlyn Steele. Bueler?

Heh, probably because I already responded. I'm practically a walking Steve-encyclopaedia, so to explain, Steve being the super-efficient guy he is generally likes to use his time wisely, so in cases where a response isn't needed, especially when I've come in and wrote pages and pages, he will general channel his efforts elsewhere (at least, those are my observations; Steve can speak for himself).

Maybe Steve saw your thread when he was feeling empty and motivation-less and exclaimed "why bother?" when he saw this thread. (You have to have read the post I linked to to understand that reference.)

[Sentient]

Originally Posted by Bruce Achterberg

I need to build long-term relationships with people for communication to be most effective. My specificity causes me to be widely misunderstood, but in the right conditions, it also allows for extreme effectiveness (relative to usual effectiveness levels; everyone is capable of it, but few embrace it, hence the relatively non-extreme levels of effectiveness).

But yeah, I do have a good handle on this. What I'm starting to get used to now is embracing the notion of providing value to others. I'm already pretty intuitive, but when I write posts that feel right, I seem to get really positive feedback about them. I must be tapping into some sort of need, or something, since I don't get responses like that usually--only since I've been embracing this new position of mine and using my intuitive abilities I developed the last few months from playing games. Yes, that's right, from playing games. Ha!


I'm *very* curious to further explore this phenomenon, partly because it's interesting, partly becuase it's inherently enjoyable. Sign me up for lots more interaction and writing like this; it's good fun and I'm all for it. Maybe I should just interact with everyone like this, but I find it tends to cause people to just whine a lot, heh. Maybe I should do as Steve does and acknowledge that they're infected with the whininess-disease and continue serving as an example of what you can be like if you don't complain all the time. Hmmm.

I used to work for a hedge fund where the organizational directive was "truth." They were obsessed with truth and held it above all other values. Communication within that firm was brutally honest. I could call my boss an idiot if I wanted to - as long as it was based on truth - and suffer absolutely zero consequences. In fact, I'd get rewarded for doing that if it helped him make an actual improvement. Indeed, people were often promoted and rewarded for telling the CEO where he was mucking up.

The people at the top level all LOVED the place because they felt like they could be totally themselve there without worrying. On the other hand, there was more than a reasonable amount of whininess at the lower levels. People there were getting their feelings hurt.

I often had discussions with people there about the best way to handle this. I think from a "bulletproof" standpoint they made the right choice to just not acknowledge feelings. It could after all lead to a slippery slope that then lead to compromising on truth because you were scared about another's reaction. On the other hand, there's no reason why an adroit manager couldn't juggle both of them. You're as non abrasive as possible and communicate in the terms most effective to the person who is listening to you, but under no circumstances do you compromise on truth yourself.

If I ran a company of my own, I'm not sure how I would do it honestly. You can't always count on stellar people being in the right positions, so perhaps I'd take the same approach. In my personal life, I decided I can trust myself to play by a different set of rules. One of my favorite of the NLP presuppositions is that you have *total, complete responsibility for your communication.* That means if you say "what a wonderful day we're having" and the person next to you goes off on a rage (strange example I know) then it is your responsibility since your words caused it.

Why would anyone ever hold a deranged belief like this? Because it's useful! It puts me in a state of mind where I think more about the other person than I do about myself. In the end, my communication typically ends up being more effective as a result. In essence, I try to speak the way I need to in order for them to "get" what I am saying. This requires navigating the other person's quirks, habits and perceptions. This is as opposed to just speaking the truth straight out and leaving them to sort it out on their own.

There's something to be said for "shock and awe" too which seems to be Steve's (and a lot of people around here) favorite method. It could be summed up as "To hell with whininess, I'll just speak my truth and hopefully it'll get you to wake up long enough to see its validity."

Both approaches seem pretty valid, and it's nice to have both in your arsenal.


(heh, hopefully I didn't just totally misread you, whcih I'm open to having done, and there is something useful in that above discussion for you)

Feel free to share more of your experiences about ToolsToLife.

I'd be curious to know what exactly content the 90-day course covers, and why it's so good.

Sure, I'll give you a quick rundown of the structure.

Tools overall philosophy is: Much of our behavior is a result of our ingrained thoughts and habits. Let's change those habitual thoughts and maybe that will free us up to make changes. Many attempts at change fail simply because our old habits suck us back down into our unsuccessful ways.

Consequently, the first 30 days is basically a cleaning house of negativity and building of self-respect and trust. You do simple things, like smile throughotu the day, brush your teeth, and drink water. And you do them often. Each one of those subtly communicates that you like yourself. Strangely enough, it actually seems to work really well. It turns out when you tell yourself 100 times per day that you love who you are you eventually get the message. In most cases, after 30 days, you find you rarely complain anymore, and it grates on your ears when others do so. You also find it exceedingly hard to fool yourself into believing your old excuses. You've just been conditioned out of it.

After the 30 days, they take advantage of your new, solid foundation. You keep drilling on all the old stuff, and they start adding in new techniques. They spend time talking about visualization, results vs goals, how to set goals and track them, motivation. Other topics are ushered into the mix like relationships, identity, To Do lists. It can seem like a haphazard mix, but what starts to emerge is a sense of "the successful individual." You start to see how really this stuff you do from one day to the next is just a natural extension of what a holistically happy, positive, driven, fulfilled individual looks and acts like. By slowly adopting all the pieces of that individual, and doing so on top of your solid foundation, you begin to emerge AS that individual by the end.

Of course the caveat is, as always: You do the work, you get the results. You read the chapters, watch the videos, but don't actually LIVE it in your daily life and you'll get some benefit for sure, but you won't be transformed.

It's funny, my mother is on Day 5 and now she's harassing my father to do it. I also signed up my sister and she's joined the fray too. So, what i wrote could all be true. That or it could be the most successful cult ever!!!

If you've got any ?'s just shoot. Hope that was helpful. Oh, and PS another friend of mine echoed your original comment. He went to the website and for the life of him coudln't figure out where to go next. He's also a CS major so that is saying something.

Finally, I'll make a comparison between Tools and Steve's work. I'll start off by saying that no comparison is really necessary, in the sense that the two very easily coexist within the same growth effort. I'd say the presentation of ideas by Steve is often more in depth than what you'll get in tools. He has a lot of original insights that are presented in unique ways. Tools touches on a lot of the same topics, and the material within it is good, although head to head Steve's writing is better. The value doesn't come from there though. It undoubtedly comes from the fact that it is an actionable plan for *living* the material day in day out. If I were designing a master course, I would probably put Tools first and then after people had reached proficiency I would sick them on Steve's work to get even greater insight. Also, because they were already solidly successful, they would be able to implement his ideas rather than just nodding along and then returning to their old ways, or trying to change and then failing.

[matt1968]

Originally Posted by Sentient

Sure, I'll give you a quick rundown of the structure.

Tools overall philosophy is: Much of our behavior is a result of our ingrained thoughts and habits. Let's change those habitual thoughts and maybe that will free us up to make changes. Many attempts at change fail simply because our old habits suck us back down into our unsuccessful ways.

Consequently, the first 30 days is basically a cleaning house of negativity and building of self-respect and trust. You do simple things, like smile throughotu the day, brush your teeth, and drink water. And you do them often. Each one of those subtly communicates that you like yourself. Strangely enough, it actually seems to work really well. It turns out when you tell yourself 100 times per day that you love who you are you eventually get the message. In most cases, after 30 days, you find you rarely complain anymore, and it grates on your ears when others do so. You also find it exceedingly hard to fool yourself into believing your old excuses. You've just been conditioned out of it.

After the 30 days, they take advantage of your new, solid foundation. You keep drilling on all the old stuff, and they start adding in new techniques. They spend time talking about visualization, results vs goals, how to set goals and track them, motivation. Other topics are ushered into the mix like relationships, identity, To Do lists. It can seem like a haphazard mix, but what starts to emerge is a sense of "the successful individual." You start to see how really this stuff you do from one day to the next is just a natural extension of what a holistically happy, positive, driven, fulfilled individual looks and acts like. By slowly adopting all the pieces of that individual, and doing so on top of your solid foundation, you begin to emerge AS that individual by the end.

Of course the caveat is, as always: You do the work, you get the results. You read the chapters, watch the videos, but don't actually LIVE it in your daily life and you'll get some benefit for sure, but you won't be transformed.

It's funny, my mother is on Day 5 and now she's harassing my father to do it. I also signed up my sister and she's joined the fray too. So, what i wrote could all be true. That or it could be the most successful cult ever!!!

If you've got any ?'s just shoot. Hope that was helpful. Oh, and PS another friend of mine echoed your original comment. He went to the website and for the life of him coudln't figure out where to go next. He's also a CS major so that is saying something.

Finally, I'll make a comparison between Tools and Steve's work. I'll start off by saying that no comparison is really necessary, in the sense that the two very easily coexist within the same growth effort. I'd say the presentation of ideas by Steve is often more in depth than what you'll get in tools. He has a lot of original insights that are presented in unique ways. Tools touches on a lot of the same topics, and the material within it is good, although head to head Steve's writing is better. The value doesn't come from there though. It undoubtedly comes from the fact that it is an actionable plan for *living* the material day in day out. If I were designing a master course, I would probably put Tools first and then after people had reached proficiency I would sick them on Steve's work to get even greater insight. Also, because they were already solidly successful, they would be able to implement his ideas rather than just nodding along and then returning to their old ways, or trying to change and then failing.

Thanks for recommendation to the site Sentient, I'm currently on day 6 and I'm impressed. I was going to give a summary of my experience with the website but you've done such a good job of describing it above, I'll leave it to you!

I would just add that I am very impressed with the authenticity of Devlyn Steele and the website. I'm also very impressed with the quick and considered response to any feedback or problems they receive. Like you say, it is by no means perfect but the attitude, intention and spirit behind it are first class.