Growing Up and Other Fantasies

Growing Up and Other Fantasies

“Oh, will you grow up!”

I heard this a lot as a boy, especially from my two older sisters. Perhaps to counter their disapproval, or through some genetic trait or developmental defect, I acquired an attitude toward life that can be best summed up by what a boss said to me when I was twenty-two:

“Alan, you’re only young once, but you can be immature forever.”

I don’t wisecrack when I feel uncomfortable as much as I used to because I’ve learned that those jokes frequently get me in trouble. I still hear “Oh, grow up!” occasionally, but now more often it’s “Will you please act your age!”

I used to think there was some archetypal age when I would be “grown up.” When I was six, I thought it might happen when I was a teenager; when I turned thirteen I thought it would happen when I was sixteen. And sixteen was awesome; I got my license and put the ’53 Dodge I bought when I was fourteen on the road. But it quickly became clear that rolling a pack of cigarettes up in my tee-shirt sleeve and driving with my left arm resting out the window didn’t really make me grown up, which more than one policeman was happy to point out to me.

Then it was draft age (nope), then age twenty-one when I’d be grown up. It was true I could vote and drink, but voting wasn’t such a thrill and, in college, I’d already proven that drinking definitely didn’t add anything to my maturity. I remember whining to my father when I realized that it was time to stop trying to earn a living as an actor and get a real job. “I can’t believe I am twenty-three years old and I don’t know what I want to be when I grow up!”

“Do what I did,” he said softly.

“What?  Become a printer? You’re always telling me it’s a dying trade!” I exploded in my truculent twenty-something angst.

“No. . . .  don’t grow up.” He smiled.

I didn’t appreciate it then, but Ray Culler was on to something. He died one night when he was ninety-five. Earlier that day, he was “cutting up” with the nursing staff. “He had us in stitches,” one nurse said. Maybe being grown up isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, after all.

Then I was married with children, still waiting for the mythical maturity to be bestowed upon me by my advanced age. Oh, I was responsible. I had worked since I was thirteen, had had lots of jobs, paid off car loans, and had a mortgage by twenty-six, but somehow I never felt grown up.

I’ve often looked at others who seemed a great deal more together than me. They usually seemed older, whether they actually were or not.

Sometimes I feel like a grownup and am annoyed when I’m treated like a child. I’m not alone. On the morning commuter train to New York recently, the conductor walked into the full car and wanted everyone to get out their tickets to speed up the process. What she said was, “Okay, kids, let’s get this done.”

The thirty-something woman crammed into the seat next to me muttered, “There are no kids on this train.” 

“At my age, I’m starting to feel like it’s a compliment,” I said in what I thought were soothing tones. Her expression told me that she did not share my view.

I have come to learn that one’s idea of maturity is individual and personal. It comes from inside. Twenty years ago I was talking to a client who was the founder and CEO of a $1 billion media company. Here was a man who traveled by private jet and limo, and owned five houses around the country, two of them in communities whose names began with the word “Palm.” He was complaining that an employee had referred to him snidely as “comfortable.” “I’m not rich,” he boomed and then quickly named two other well-known media executives. “Now those guys are the real grown-ups in this business.” He was in his mid-sixties at the time.

It strikes me that feeling grownup doesn’t happen at any magical age. It can’t be bestowed by others and shouldn’t be derived by comparing yourself to others or having others compare themselves to you.

On one project years ago, a forty-something independent consultant was talking about the difficulty our client was having prioritizing strategic actions. “It seems obvious to me that they can’t do everything. I find myself thinking, ‘Oh my God, ‘I’m the grown-up in the room.’”

“That’s never happened to me,” I cracked. We laughed, but his espousing greater maturity probably didn’t help others to become unstuck.  Perhaps you’ve seen those signs in parking garages and along the road that show your speed in real time in big yellow lights. Turns out they work better than anything at getting people to slow down because you “see” that you are speeding.

Fitbit, which measures your activity in steps and allows you to compare yourself against yourself, is a very successful tool for losing weight and getting fit because the feedback compares yourself to a goal you’ve set, not what someone else wants you to do.

Seems like comparing yourself to others only makes you vain or unhappy. Comparing yourself to a realistic view of yourself can create the motivation to change.

Recently, I had lunch with a friend who is seventeen years younger than me. He had consistently struggled to get projects in his chosen field. He had difficulty in relationships. Our past conversations had always been laced with his self-comparisons to others who were richer, or more established, or luckier. This, however, was a different conversation. He said, “I have come to realize I am basically happy with who I am. This year I am going to listen a bit more, speak a little less and try to be less judgmental.”

Wow, I thought. He seems so grown up. Maybe I could get there someday.

 

 

The picture above is of our granddaughter, McKenna, when she was ten. Now that she is older, I hope she isn’t too “grown up” to climb trees.

Thought Leadership (vs. a leader in your mind)

Thought Leadership (vs. a leader in your mind)

Thought leadership is a phrase that is overused in consulting.

I first encountered it at the Forum Corporation as a descriptor for the instructional designers that conceived of the idea for a training program and structured the research upon which the program was built. Later, at other firms, it became the descriptor of a different career ladder, i.e., you could rise to partner through service offering development as opposed to sales.

At Gemini, service offering development was controlled by the disciplines, strategy, operations, organization, etc. Some service offering development occurred as collaborations between disciplines. For example, I was on the post-merger integration team, that developed that service offering that was sold to many different industries. Gemini’s Business Transformation service offering designed by Francis Gouillart and published in his book written with James Kelly, Transforming the Organization, was an example of thought leadership.

Business Transformation was called thought leadership at the time. It was composed of an analytical framework, the transformation map that showed the current state of every discipline and part of the organization and the desired state of that vector. Plans were developed and actions were taken. The book used a Cigna project as a case example. The transformation map was used on the service offering description using the Leonardo Da Vinci Vitruvian Man, circle in the square, drawing in the center. Many at Gemini mocked the drawing calling him the ”naked guy.” Later it was the paperback cover.

When Gemini Consulting alumni gather, Business transformation is variously described as:

  • Misguided. I never met a client who said their business needed to be transformed. This was the sole reason for the decline of Gemini Consulting.”
  • Brilliant, but misunderstood. Francis never said you had to or even could do everything at once. Gemini Business Development Executives just saw the dollar signs of ‘whale projects.’”
  • Ahead of its time. It forms the basis of ‘digital transformation’ today.”

By the time I got to Katzenbach Partners, thought leadership was a part of the performance appraisal discussion at most major consulting firms.

So perhaps it is worth talking about. There are a few true thought leaders in consulting firms, Francis Gouillart at Gemini, Tom Peters and Jon Katzenbach at McKinsey, Fred Reichheld at Bain. These folks and others do come up with service offerings, but they also write books and speak about their ideas. Most ultimately leave their firms, join a university or go out on their own.

In fact, being a published thought leader is the single best path to continuing to work as a consultant into you eighties and nineties.

However these cases are rare.

Thought leadership for the mid-career consultant or even the old hand means solving a client’s problem in a unique but replicable way. There are three parts to that:

Solving the client’s problem, this means that the client must be not just satisfied, but enthusiastic about the results, perhaps even to the point of wanting to co-author an article in the Harvard Business Review.

Unique, this means that the firm’s partners haven’t seen a problem solved this way before, and that most people think, “Wow, I never thought of that.”

Replicable, means that others at your firm can understand what you did and copy it. It must be therefore easy to explain and imagine how it might work.

Thought leadership is innovation in consulting. Like all innovation, it comes from seeing things in one context and transferring them to another, analogy. It comes from seeing a need that seems impossible and asking how could that work, visioning. It comes from one of dozens of ideation techniques, to arrive at an idea that is then tested and developed, and executed.

Thought leadership is not talking the most or loudest in a meeting, or using  fifty cent words and quoting obscure academic theories, hoping people will say “he’s so smart” when what they really mean is “I haven’t got a clue what he is talking about.

It definitely isn’t saying “here’s another idea” in the middle of a tight delivery. If is not a designation that one uses to self-describe (“I’m a thought leader.”) nor a defensive response, (“Hey, I’m just trying to contribute a little thought leadership here.)

But if you want to be a consulting thought leader:

Read a lot of business articles, trade press, and academic journals. I think all consultants should do this, but if you are going to be a thought leader, you have to be a researcher first.

Collaborate. There are people who invent things on their own in a basement, but they are typically not the type of people who become management consultants.  Collaborate with colleagues, with university and business school professors and with clients. Every Steve Jobs needs his Woz (Steve Wozniak.) Every Francis Gouillart needs his James Kelly. (Kelly was the president of Gemini, a salesman,  and was widely assumed to have simplified and clarified Francis’s ideas for the general market).

Experiment and find clients who will let you experiment, not with half-baked ideas, of course, but gathering data that you may publish or co-publish later.

Teach – the best consulting thought leaders refine their thinking and share their thinking by training other consultants and the world at large.

There are some who would say that the decision to become a thought leaders is a “Grow or go” decision at the partner career juncture, but I say this is something that mid-career consultants must decide much earlier. They must consider whether they want to continually sell as they progress or whether they want to develop client relationships through research and innovation reported and taught to others

Join the conversation by leaving a comment below

 

If you enjoy my writing and you’d like to receive 1-2 new posts per week, I’d be honored if you’d click below to subscribe. No ads nor affiliate links and you can unsubscribe at any time, but you will be eligible to receive free book chapters and discounts on  books when published.

British Airways: I Have A Dream

British Airways: I Have A Dream

Leadership workshops were a frequent component of change projects I was involved in. These workshops contained some combination of sharing the compelling case for change, knowledge and skills training, and commitment building exercises.

The first change effort I was ever involved with was more than thirty-five years ago, when British Airways changed from being a nationalized industry to being a publicly traded company. Between 1984 and 1987 BA went from having the worst customer service in the industry to the best and being the least profitable airline to the most.

This project had a profound effect on me and my career and I have taken a lot of stick from colleagues over the years for how much I talk about it.  So if you know me and are tired of BA stories, or if this was before you were born or such ancient history you can’t see any relevance, I will understand if you bail out now.

British Airways had several different leadership workshops. This story concerns Managing People First (MPF), a one week residential workshop for the top 2000 people of the 30,000 who worked there. MPF ran Sunday at 4:00 PM to Friday 12:00 noon. Days were long. Participants had personal time at 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., but evening large-group and small-group sessions often ran until 11:00 p.m. and sometimes later.

At MPF there were plenary sessions and small groups sessions. There were also change projects where the small groups chose to work together to plan a particular change of their choosing that would contribute to the overall effort. Each group presented its plan to the Chief Executive Colin Marshall on Friday morning..

We included a creative or fun exercise. On Thursday afternoon, we asked the small groups to spend ninety minutes creating a vision of their view of the new BA and their role in it. We told them to “let their hair down” have some fun because they would be spending that evening preparing their change team presentation for Colin Marshall the next morning. We designed this exercise to relieve tension and to allow participants to have some fun using the teamwork built over the week.

At one of the early sessions a small group composed entirely of aircraft maintenance managers had been difficult all week. These men were fifty to sixty-five-year-olds and had all come up through the ranks from mechanics. Though some had taken Engineering qualifications, none had attended University. During the week they had been cynical and sarcastic, and when we explained this exercise, two actually snorted. Then they disappeared.

The facilitators resigned themselves to the possibility that the team had left the training early and were planning how to explain this to the rest of the class and to Colin Marshall the next day. But when it was time to present visions these gentlemen rushed in and asked to present last. Given their attitude over the week we facilitators were wary, but reluctantly agreed. When the maintenance crew’s turn came it was 5:00 p.m. and dark outside. Someone turned out the lights.

As the facilitators quietly panicked, they heard music. It was an Abba tune;  the words rang out.

“I have a dream, a fantasy. To help me with reality…”

One by one these grizzled guys walked in, each carrying a lit candle. While the music played they got the entire group to join them in the front of the classroom.

“I believe in angels, something good in everything I see.”

They handed out lit candles and soon everyone was humming along.

As the song came to a crescendo, without talking, they somehow led everyone to act together.

“I’ve crossed the stream.” The entire group took a step together over an imaginary stream.

“I have a dream.” The entire class all sang in unison. Still gives me shivers.

Apparently, the old guys had first laughed derisively at the exercise and then someone said, “If not us, then who?” They were missing because they had driven thirty miles to get the tape and boom box from someone’s house, and planned the whole thing in the car on the way there and back. In the end they demonstrated their commitment and brought others along.

The next morning when people were still talking about their emotional presentation, these old guys presented to Colin Marshall, a redesigned aircraft preventative maintenance framework that I understand the airline is still using.

What I learned was:

  • Leaders sometimes emerge from the least likely places.
  • The greatest “resisters” can convert themselves to be leaders.
  • A cynic is a failed idealist who uses sarcasm, irony and mockery to mask intense desire to “believe” in and commit to ideals once again.

And I learned to “trust the process.” If the case for change is compelling and the vision clear and inspiring, people choose to change themselves and contribute.

“I’ve crossed the stream; I have a dream.”

Preferences, Habits, and Moral Imperatives

Preferences, Habits, and Moral Imperatives

“That’s just WRONG!”

I was stunned. Twenty-one and newly married, I was living with a member of the opposite sex who wasn’t my mother or my sister for the first time.

“LOOK, I appreciate that you changed the toilet paper roll when you used the last of it, but you are going to have to learn to DO IT THE RIGHT WAY! The paper must come out from the TOP of the roll where it is easy to grab, NOT from the bottom of the roll where it gets lost and you’ve got to touch the roll to find the end. VERY UNSANITARY!”

I grew up in a household that was an underhand TP domicile. I never thought about it much. Much later my sister explained the rational for placing the toilet paper roll so the paper comes out the bottom.

“When it comes out the bottom you are likely to tear off less toilet paper as opposed to when it comes out the top and the paper tends to keep rolling and go everywhere. Plus, the cat loves to play with an overhand roll, batting at it until the TP is all over the bathroom.”

This proves that there are logical reasons (rationalizations?) for either preference. But at twenty-one, faced with the evaluation that I was doing it “WRONG,” I quickly acquiesced to becoming an overhand TP domicile. Fortunately, my second wife also runs an overhand house so I have remained on the side of TP rectitude, except when I visit my sister.

The clash of small domestic preferences and habits often happens early in a marriage, if not between the bride and groom then certainly between them and the in-laws. My new father-in-law, Stewart was a big man, very conservative, and I was an anti-Vietnam war-hippie-type; we didn’t agree on much.

We did, however, really enjoy watching All in the Family together. He identified with Archie Bunker, the right-wing main character, and I identified with his son-in-law, Michael, who Archie not-so-affectionately called Meathead.

One scene started with Archie coming in to hurry Michael along getting dressed Michael put on his left sock and then put on his left boot. Archie was incensed.

“Whoa, whoa, whoa. What’re are ya doin’ der?! The whole world puts on a sock and a sock and then a shoe and a shoe and there you are doin’ it all WRONG!”

The bit goes on with each of them rationalizing his preferred way of putting on shoes and socks.

“With my way, if there’s a fire and I hafta leave I have on a sock and a sock. It’s even, see?”

“But if it’s raining, with your way your feet get wet whereas I can hop around and still be dry.”

Stewart and I laughed and laughed and it prompted a comparative discussion of preferences.

His mother always told him to button his shirt up so he started at the bottom button; I, on the other hand, started at the top button. He believed that by visually lining up the bottom button he would be less likely to button incorrectly. “You have to look in a mirror to do that.” “No, I don’t; I just feel the top button and the hole.”

Stewart steadfastly maintained that you should put on your shirt first and then your pants. Otherwise, he maintained, “You’re always buttoning and unbuttoning your pants, first to hold them up while you get your shirt, then to tuck your shirt in.”

I put on my pants first and then my shoes so I protect both the creases in my pants and my ironed shirt by tucking it in last.Our comparisons went on for some time. Perhaps because the conversation started with a comedy routine, we didn’t turn our evaluations of preferences into a moral imperative. “That’s just WRONG!”

All too often, in marriages, in the workplace, in politics, what start out as simple preferences become habits and then internalized as the RIGHT WAY. Consequently, a different preference, which has become someone else’s habit, is the WRONG WAY. I am making light of these disagreements, but for some people and some preferences this can become a holy war. We must convert the other to the moral imperative of OUR WAY to avoid the penalty of eternal damnation for us all.

I know women for whom the way of doing some household tasks is so important that they would rather do all household tasks rather than let their “idiot husband” do the work. In some cases the husband, being no fool, lets them do that. I also know some men who feel protective about taking care of the family car, or anything that requires mechanical, electrical, or carpentry skill. Their wives, not being stupid, let them do all that stuff.

What starts out as a mild preference quickly becomes a habit and then creates a kind of belonging.

Brand loyalty is like that. We start out slightly preferring Ford F-150 pickup trucks over Chevy Silverados and over time become F-150 people. Or Charmin people, not Scott people. Or Harley people and definitely NOT any other kind of motorcycle people.

Sports teams tend to drive that sense of belonging as well. Sometimes sports tribalism comes about because you grew up in Boston and everyone rooted for the then-hopeless pre-2004 Red Sox when they played the Evil Empire New York Yankees. Or if your city doesn’t have a team, you adopt some other city’s team. Then you hang out with others of that preference and suddenly you are chanting “Let’s Go Mets.” Or waving the Terrible Towel.

Clearly, I think that preferences or even habits are unworthy of moral imperative or Armageddon.  But sometimes I feel alone in that view.

In business I saw battles over which inventory valuation process to use (last in first out, LIFO, or first in first out, FIFO). I saw true believers in LEAN spout many reasons why Six Sigma is wrong as a continuous improvement system. Really? Can’t we just agree to improve?

There are some preferences over which we have little control; perhaps they are genetic. Left- or right-handedness is technically a preference. Most people believe you are born with this preference for one hand or the other. My father was born with a left hand preference. In 1904, left-handedness was seen as WRONG by adults in his life. These adults tied his left hand behind his back, so he developed the habit of using his right hand.

Dad could use either hand for many things. When he taught me how to hammer he would hammer with his right hand and then switch to his left, not missing a strike. It frustrated me that I’d have to stop to rest, and his two arms were twice as productive. To this day, I still can’t hammer with my left hand.

In my part of the world, right- or left- handedness is accepted as an insignificant preference, neither right nor wrong. However, in some places where toilet tissue isn’tubiquitous, cleanliness requires using your left hand for hygiene and your right hand for other tasks including contact with others. In these cultures, using your left hand to hand something to someone is not just a poor preference. It is wrong.

It is worth considering what is a preference, what is a habit, and what is truly a moral imperative.

In the United States we routinely discuss how much of personality is genetic (nature) and how much is environmental (nurture.) This kind of absolute vs. relative debate now includes personality traits about which some people have deeply held values, e.g., gender and sexuality.

Here and elsewhere in the world, many have turned politics into moral imperatives. Turning one’s own belief, preference, or habit into a moral imperative for someone else seems mean-spirited at best and hateful at worst. How does one discuss or compromise about a moral imperative?

We might individually prefer more or less government or more or less safety net; we might think problems are best solved militarily or diplomatically; or argue over how much debt is too much. We might choose our own personal liberty over public health regulations based upon our own risk preferences, but is it fair to say that others must share those risk preferences?

In some cases, we have moved from preference to contend that those who have different preferences are wrong. Not only are “they” wrong, but they are an “existential threat.” The pride of belonging to our tribe has become destructive. We can’t abide those in another tribe.

In my own life, I’ve come to the following conclusions:

  • Some preferences and habits, like toilet paper roll placement, are largely irrelevant. I’m happy to do whatever makes peace.
  • Some preferences and habits fall into the “live and let live” column. “You button your shirt your way, and I’ll button mine my way, and we never have to discuss this again.”
  • For those preferences and habits that affect both of us, we have to talk. We focus first on where we agree and compromise where we don’t.
  • Seriously question moral imperatives and holy wars. Most of the time the hill isn’t worth dying on.

This isn’t to say that everything is relative or that there isn’t a right and wrong. There are issues of moral imperative, but they are fewer than many espouse today, and they certainly don’t include which way the TP comes off the roll.

Please share your thoughts by leaving a comment below.

If you like my writing please click the button below to receive 1-2 posts/week. No ads or affiliate links and I will never sell, share or otherwise distribute your information. You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the unsubscribe button on the email.

The Gatekeeper

The Gatekeeper

The man was old. His skin was lined and brown like tooled leather. His clothes were worn but well mended. They now fit him loosely and it wasn’t clear if they always had fitted him this way, Perhaps he wore loose robes to keep him cool in summer and warm when the biting wind blew down along the road from the mountains. Or had his body age-wizened leaving him with loose clothing.

With the sun he rose and after a small breakfast went to the gate of the walled city. The road that passed the gate was well-travelled, but not by many. There was another city a half-day walk in either direction down the dusty road. Most of the travelers walked; a few had loaded beasts or pulled loaded two-wheeled carts. There were no horses here.

The old man fitted himself into a niche by the gate and read. In late morning a young boy would come with his mother. They would bring cistern of water and offer it to travelers without charge. They sold small vegetable cakes for a copper each.

The city was the halfway point. Most drank, the water ate the cake, and walked on. The old man read what most assumed was scripture.

From the road, a man would call out “You there, Old man,” To these,  the woman and boy seemed invisible. The old man would raise his head and smile,. “How can I help you traveler?”

The man would complain about the heat or the cold and say he was thinking about an early end to the day..

“What kind of people live in this city?”

“Where are you coming from?” the old man would cheerfully inquire and the traveler would tell.. “Oh, what kind of people did you find there?”

The traveler would sneer, “They were venal and mean. They looked like they would beat me, Everyone tried to cheat me, but I was too smart for that. They served me garbage and day old food and thought that I would sleep on last month’s straw, telling me it was all they had.. It was awful!.”

“Alas, traveler. This city is filled with those people as well. It’s best to walk on down the road. Perhaps you’ll have better luck there.”

Some such travelers thanked the old man or threw a copper in the dirt at his feet. Most did not. The old man went back to reading.

On occasion a person would buy something from the boy and his mother, smile and converse with them.

Then this person would siddle over toward the gate and say, “Excuse me, Grandfather. I am sorry to disturb your study.”

The old man would look up and smile, “’Tis naught but some old poems. How can I help you traveler?”

The traveler would then ask about the poems or tell his own name and ask the old man’s. Eventually pleasantries would be dispensed with and the conversation would proceed as before.

“What kind of people live in this city?”

“Where are you coming from?” the old man would cheerfully inquire and the traveler would tell. “Oh, what kind of people did you find there?”

“Oh ‘twas wonderful! Everywhere people offered to help me. Our dealings were always fair. They fed me well and I slept on the same straw they themselves used.”

“You will be most welcome here traveler for here you will find people of the same kind. Please come in..”

This story is old. I believe it is a story told by Sufis, the Islamic mystics who used stories to teach lessons of right living, but the story may be older than that.

I first heard it from a trainer in a management training program. The lessons he taught were that people often perform according to your expectations.

It is a story about life orientations. If you expect to find people “venal and mean” you will find plenty. If you expect that people will be helpful, giving and fair, you will find them so.

Of course, the old man, the gate keeper, has a different perspective. It is his job to sort those who join his community. If people find others venal and mean then they are likely so themselves and he sends them elsewhere.

If they find others helpful, giving and fair he warmly welcomes them.

The gatekeeper was the keeper of the culture; he conducted screening interviews.

I worked at a small consulting firm that conducted many selection interviews. To many applicants it seemed like they “interviewed with everyone at the company.” In the beginning that might have literally true, but even as we grew it wasn’t unusual to have more than ten interviews.

I remember one candidate. This person had been a partner in a large firm and was put-out to be “interviewing with kids.” A former partner with a track record as a “rainmaker,” was something the firm needed.

The junior associates universally said “No.” They found this person “arrogant, demeaning, and not respectful to them and to clients talked about during the interview.”

The partner who brought in the applicant was angry, sputtering “Perhaps junior associates can bring in million dollar projects?!” In the end, the firm made no offer to the rainmaker. Protecting the culture was more important.

This was around the time that Robert Sutton published The No Ass-hole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn’t. Several people at the firm used the book’s title as a way of justifying culture building and culture protection.

These days there is quite a lot of discussion and lamentation about working for bullies, narcissists, sociopaths, psychopaths and other generally unpleasant people.

I recently responded to one social media post:

First, Don’t be that guy.

If you find out you are that guy, get help. Change or stay home.

If you work for that guy and you are close -tell him -ever-so-gently- “Hey, you know- you might be that guy.” It might be a good idea to get help from colleagues before you do this because jerks can be vindictive. (In any case, don’t expect to be thanked.)

It is better if you can keep jerks outside the gates to begin with.

“What kind of people were at the last place you worked?”

Please scroll down to comment.

If you like what you’ve read, please subscribe. Click on the button below you to receive 1-2 new posts per week. No ads, no affiliate links. I will never sell, trade, or otherwise distribute your information. You can unsubscribe any time. Just click the unsubscribe button on the email.