Wheaton Scales

In 2010, Paul Wheaton created the Wheaton Eco Scale. He begins by noting our perceptions of other people. Those one or two steps ahead in a similar FESPE (financial, ecologic, spiritual, personal, etc.) journey look “pretty cool”. Those four or five steps “downright crazy”. While, “one level back are ignorant and two levels back are assholes”.

We’re all on our own journeys, coming across shamans, oracles, and gurus at different times. Part of this is why there are no bad books.

The importance of Wheaton Scales hit home during two successive days. First, reading the philosophy/finance forum of Early Retirement Extreme. Commenters noted how communicating about FIRE is such a challenge. Part (maybe most!) of the burden comes down to talking to someone in their language. It’s not about all the things I know so much as it’s about all the things they’ll understand.

Second, sitting in church and listening to the pastor talk about debates, agreements, and conversations among theologians. I know who he’s not talking to – me! He’s talking to the two guys who fact check, give feedback, and have studied the Bible for years.

Wheaton Scales snuggle up nicely in our mental models, like a pet on a cold afternoon, because they match JTBD. The aim of Jobs is moving from supplier language (how I see the world) to demand language (how other people see it). Wheaton gives a model for thinking through that.

And scales like this are nice. And helpful. It’s better to be mostly right than precisely wrong.

Two Rules of Thirds

Rule #1

The game was developed by the same Firaxis Games team that developed the expansions on Civilization V, and most of the new mechanics introduced in these were present in Civilization VI at its launch.[10] This follows from Sid Meier’s “33/33/33” rule of sequel design: 33% of the game should retain established systems, 33% should feature improved systems over the previous version, and the remaining 33% should feature new material

Wikipedia: Civilization VI

Rule #2

When training for something, you should be disappointed in your results a third of the time, content with them a third of the time, and pleased with them a third of the time.

Unknown

What both of these ideas get at is change. Grow or die.

How much change? Well that depends, but the rule of thirds feels like a good proxy. It’s not going to be exactly one-third, but it’s the right approach. Sometimes we should be disappointed in a result and sometimes we need to change a major thing. But sometimes we’ll be pleased and sometimes we need to keep what works.