You end up with double the burden of namespace tracking, and if half your audience resonates with one name and the other half with the other, you’ve just created a problem where there are two terms floating around for the same thing and newcomers don’t know that it’s a single conversation.
Yeah. Point conceded.
I would expect that I’m in the 95th percentile or higher for having put real attention and modeling power behind this domain.
Yeah, I did phrase the initial paragraph carefully because I expected you to be fairly attentive to this already.
I’m emphasizing this topic because I think post-names is the single biggest area in your sequence that would benefit from increased attention (and, however hard it is to make further progress, in at least a few cases, lack-of-it-being-better is the main obstacle from some of the posts being something I will proactively link people to all the time)
The world is full of unfair facts and I believe one of them is “even if naming things optimally is very hard, we need to get really good at it anyway. Especially if naming things turns out to be the dominant way we’re providing value.”
I will admit that I haven’t been putting much strength behind naming the posts in this sequence, so your wish that it receives more attention is basically granted for the last nine posts.
Also, hopefully goes without saying (but maybe even if it does, beneficial for *other* people to hear it said?) that the sequence has been generally great and full of valuable nuggets.
(I perceive Conor has having opted into a more direct [i.e. slightly harsher] style of feedback that I would not give to people who did not seem to have opted into that)
Yeah. Point conceded.
Yeah, I did phrase the initial paragraph carefully because I expected you to be fairly attentive to this already.
I’m emphasizing this topic because I think post-names is the single biggest area in your sequence that would benefit from increased attention (and, however hard it is to make further progress, in at least a few cases, lack-of-it-being-better is the main obstacle from some of the posts being something I will proactively link people to all the time)
The world is full of unfair facts and I believe one of them is “even if naming things optimally is very hard, we need to get really good at it anyway. Especially if naming things turns out to be the dominant way we’re providing value.”
I will admit that I haven’t been putting much strength behind naming the posts in this sequence, so your wish that it receives more attention is basically granted for the last nine posts.
Yay!
Also, hopefully goes without saying (but maybe even if it does, beneficial for *other* people to hear it said?) that the sequence has been generally great and full of valuable nuggets.
(I perceive Conor has having opted into a more direct [i.e. slightly harsher] style of feedback that I would not give to people who did not seem to have opted into that)