Your explanation is more or less what I’d gathered from your earlier statement. It makes sense.
The org. that can convince passionate supporters of the cause to work for $ and donate may be different from the one that can get the most mainstream donations.
This conversation suggests a good habit to practice: being open about how and why I feel about something real, or would about something hypothetical. Since it’s hard to separate internal openness from public openness, even though it’s really the internal practice I want, maybe airing real motivations/desires more often (as you just did) is better than my conservative semi-stoic default.
Wow. Coordination is hard ;)
Your explanation is more or less what I’d gathered from your earlier statement. It makes sense.
The org. that can convince passionate supporters of the cause to work for $ and donate may be different from the one that can get the most mainstream donations.
It is possible that this is just a phase I am going through, but if it is, it is a long phase.
This conversation suggests a good habit to practice: being open about how and why I feel about something real, or would about something hypothetical. Since it’s hard to separate internal openness from public openness, even though it’s really the internal practice I want, maybe airing real motivations/desires more often (as you just did) is better than my conservative semi-stoic default.