BlogSat

I've generally not been a fan of the hard no-laptop (or no-phone) meeting rule ( quora answer from a while ago). My view comes from what a professor of mine once said "You're all adults.... Its up to you how you n ow choose to spend your time and mon ey."  That's been my view for a long time. When I'm not distracting others or if there's not a guest/external speaker, I should be able to, and trusted to, manage my own attention.  As someone who is in a lot of meetings - particularly in some meetings which have a lot of people in them and when I'm not running them - I've recognized when I can listen in the background and do or think of other things - dialing back in when necessary. To the standard objections I hear when I tell people this: Yes, I still need to be at the meeting even if its for only part of it or to prevent certain outcomes. I benefit sometimes from getting a sense of what's going on even if I'm fully engaged for o

About a decade ago I went through a phase where I read a lot of Greek mythology. I read (and mostly listened to) most of the classics and many more. I still can't explain why I thought this was an acceptable interest at the time. :-/ One thing that I thought was completely insane was how important "legacy" seemed to most Greek warriors. The goal for many heroes was to die a glorious death in the battlefield, because what mattered most to them was that the stories of their bravery live on beyond them. This idea was central in many stories and the primary motivation for many characters. I thought this was nuts. I really like the idea of continuing to live. But for most of those characters, there was absolutely no doubt that this was the point of their existence. "Glorious death" was to be celebrated, and the powerful storytelling often left you in no doubt that this was the right thing, indeed the noble thing, for them to do and to believe. Of course, this