Conversation

. about why he doesn’t do podcasts. This helped me understand why I mostly don’t either. I’m boring and slow and awkward and if somehow you want to know what I think, read what I wrote, or ask me on twitter. (I do answer most twitter queries.)
Image
6
208
Replying to
I like it when the interviewer is skilled. They get me thinking in ways I wouldn't think by myself. If you think of it as information being extracted from you from thought processes at various stages of maturity, you will have this reaction.
1
13
Replying to and
I had very good podcast experiences with shane parrish, longform, econtalk among others. I'm completely fine improv-shitposting orally on topics where my thinking is still taking shape. That's the point! People are boring where they've "finished" thinking.
Replying to and
You and Scott are both idea synthesizers and do quite well hosting podcasts. But your ideas are also both fairly complex and so as a guest you need a talented interviewer from the right scene to draw them out. You're not gonna do a normal linear narrative.
1
Replying to and
He maintains a way more legible attack surface though I’ve never been seriously attacked because I make sure I’m never worth the trouble. But I’ve also never commanded an army. If I’m ever actually attacked I’m screwed. At best a reader might make a 2x2 classifying the attack.
1
2
Show replies
Replying to and
I don't *listen* to podcasts because it's not a good input medium for me, but I get that a lot of people find it a good way to process stuff, especially in the background with partial attention. So the low density and redundancy/inefficiency actually helps them.
2
4
Replying to and
I am awkward and fumbling if the interviewer is bad, but can apparently be quite flowy entertaining when the interviewer is good... have received a lot of good feedback from people on the good ones basically it's improv and the partnership has to be a good improv partnership
3