MM Holiday Campfire — Dec 28, 2020

Campfire, marshmallows and conversation! The MM team gets together regularly in a sort of free-form discussion that’s not quite a chat, and not quite a discussion. It’s a cross between instant chat and performance art.

Good morning!

c: had a fun experience with Vivian Carrasco’s, Within (U) podcast a week a go. The episode with me is out, There’s also a seperate video conversation we recorded after the podcast recording– not sure if she put that up on her YouTube yet though.

c: …so would that be activity from a previous podcast guest? har-harr.

M: That is quite the alliterative title. I like it :slight_smile: Haha, kinda? XD We can count it

c: More seriously though, who’ve we’ve seen…

M: I just saw Lynn Jung discussing her menstrual cycle and being an athlete, really solid discussion. It’s in her saved stories on her page: I’m glad to see more athletes openly talking about their cycles and training. It’s a really important part of health and training, and shouldn’t be a taboo subject.

c: I did just notice several posts on IG from her (scurries off to find one)

c: SQUIREL ! and the top of my IG feed has an upcoming guest of ours, but back to find that Lynn Jung post . . . …totally going to go pin Lynn’s episode, number . . . 47. Pinned.

M: Mmmm gorgeous rocks from John Beede. And yes, Lynn has been pretty active lately.

c: and I got distracted fiddling with the 3-word data visualization—I edited it into her episode’s page…

Data visualization

M: It’s liiiive!! :smiley:

c: yeah, I wrote a little about it, "3 words…" visualized just to see if anyone was interested in talking about it.

Episode 100

c: so now that we have all the episodes through 99 recorded, it’s probably safe (ruh-roh raggy) to talk about 100 more seriously. I mentioned it the monthly podcasters call(*) and asked the 30-or-so podcasters what would you do for your 100th episode (two people on the call are already beyond 100) and got a bunch of ideas… all of which were obvious and things I’d already put on the internal doc we started, but eg

What about a four-prong attack: Each of us comes up with something we each want to say. Can be super short, or longer, or whatever. Can be written out and you read it or just some outline of thoughts. We’d record that when we’re together, but it’s just one person talking. We start making noise (I’ll mention in episode intros, we can do social posts, forum posts, email, linkedin, etc) about “what questions do you have for us as we approach 100?” We’ll do a little 3-person recording—come prepared with a question or 2 (or 3 or 4) for someone else on the team. That way if we have audience-Qs… great. We use them too. Or if not, we still have some Q&discussion prepared. We each come up with one or two (or 3 or 4 :slight_smile: favorite moments in the podcast episodes and we’ll go back and grab the audio.

It’ll be a beast for PP to edit it together, but our work is straightforward.

M: More than safe…. We really should talk about it. I like the ideas we’ve discussed above, it hits on reflection and looking ahead.

c: (*) that’s a reference to the assembled alumni of . Thousands of people have gone through the courses and the active podcasters (several hundred) are in a private alumni community.

c: ok, here’s where the parallel video call makes this not easy :stuck_out_tongue: i feel like we need to find for anyone to easily send us some audio… and then we can open the flood gate. Have a question? (send it) Have a favorite moment? (tell me and I’ll include the audio) etc. [and there is such a tool, but I have to go google-fu-find-it, found one, tried it on the call, etc]

M: I like that idea. It keeps it easy for people. I also think direct contact works the best. As annoying as that is. :confused:

c: yeah, I think easy is the key. Yeah, direct is best… I’ve done that before where I manually dm’d everyone—every insta follower, every FB page-follower, etc. It does generate engagement. Yeah, I think I’ll setup a Speak Pipe account, verify it works (the demo didn’t work in my Safari when I gave it a 2-second effort) and then we I can reach out to everyone one by one… nice, 100 episode celebration = me reaching out one by one to a 1,000 people :stuck_out_tongue: . . . o t o h, that’s EXACTLY what this whole thing has felt like. HEY! #winning

c: yeah, yes. I’ll make short MM url that has instructions and a link to the Speak Pipe and [forum’s free] anyone can jump on that thread if they have more to say/ask. MIS [self :confused: ] And the other thing that everyone says should be done is for me to a sort of “what I’ve learned” after doing all of this work.

M: That’s usually a good thing to include, as well. There’s several different ways you could approach that.

Hey, I know this is unusua, BUT I HAVE NEW IDEA!

c: “dialogs” so the problem with the “panel discussions” we recorded was the logistics were bonkers [coordinate 5 people for an a hour+ call— yikes] but also I felt there wasn’t enough space for anyone [of the panelists, not me] to get into any real depth. Panels can be great for discussing a specific topic but it really only works well when the audience is in the room too. Panels are good at jumping around to different topics. “So when you guys were making the movie, what surprised you?” [from audience] and the director jumps in. done. “What scene that got cut did you miss most?” and star talks about backstory that we didnt’ see. It best when the panelists are tyring to converse amongst themselves, and if there’s no audiece, I [any one person] can’t “pull” them enough. So the “panel discussions” petered out.

M: That’s a good point. There was always some juggling. So what’s your new idea to replace panels?

c: Then there’s this other project that nobody knows about where me and two other people got together for a repeated conversation… like we set aside a time and then we showed to just see where, whatever was on our mind that day, ended up leading the conversation. Started out being those two people asking me to show up and facilitate their conversation and just turned into 3 people talking. Buuuuuuut that also petered out… mostly — my opinion here, not sure what the other two thought — because we weren’t getting anywhere. (aside: conversations dont have to get somewhere, but we three were working hard to make that space it just didn’t feel productive.)

c: SO taking those two points, plus 3days 18hours of me doing recorded conversations ( ) . . .

c: “dialogs” » what if, two people showed up. One person (alternates each meeting) starts with [I love structure] one sentence of context, and a question. “So I was walking my dog yesterday and I was struck by how the fresh air brought up new ideas. What is it about perambulation and fresh air that changes our thought patterns?” So whomever it leading sends that to the other person in advance. And that’s where we start. So it’s clear who is supposed to be “thinking out loud” or sharing stories, books, whatever. Tight timeframe. Thing is 20 minutes short. So we’re in/out/done in half an hour. ITS NOT RECORDED. The point is for us each experience it. and we’re done. No focus on does it look good, sound good, it’s just two people having a tight conversation. But there IS some intention… I had a thought I share it we talk about that. We stop. Next time, we switch.

M: Almost like a framework for the conversation, with a specific intention. Conversational practice, with a specific goal.

c: a key feature though it’s ephemeral. That’s part of what makes great conversations great. There it was. It’s gone.

M: True. It’s hard (impossible) to replicate; knowing your words are being recorded changes everything. It’s not a safe space…

c: so my plan/thought was to create a standing window of 30-minute slots and to then I can say, if you want to do this, click on my Calendly link . . . done. Then it isn’t hyper-scheduled and made into this big thing. It’s a bare-minumum structure to get the conversation to happen.

M: It’s not a ‘catching up’ call, it’s meant to explore particular ideas. Like a sounding board, brainstorm session, whatever it might be.

c: well, it’s not even “movers mindset” specific (since not recorded) … it’s hey want to talk to me[craig]? click. I’ve people in mind taht I’d like to talk to, but I’d be open to random people. This also comes up when someone I know peripherally… 15 emails in, “hey let’s talk about this quick go click this URL…”

M: Are you thinking of specifically inviting people in addition to leaving it open, or just leaving it open and seeing what happens?

c: it’s open, but not obvious. So yeah I’d tell people about it (I have a short list in mind already) … if it got out, who cares. Just a super easy way to make it happen. “Neat! Click this URL so we can find a time.”

M: It’s an interesting idea, I think it has potential.

c: I want to think more about it, there’s a particular person I want to discuss this with—I’m curious to know if this would scratch the same itch for multiple people. I’d write up a blog post that explains how to do it yourself. It’s really about: What’s the minimal structure needed to facilitate a really good conversation?

M: the kind that moves you forward, pushes you, challenges you. The timing is a key.

c: yeup. I see a few key parameters. It has to be intentional in time/space, so you’re required to “show up” with your full self with the right mindset. Time time forces you hold the thread…

M: It forces you to distill things down in advance. You’ll only have time to discuss the things you think are the most important.

c: yee-up. Anyway, 'nuf about that. :stuck_out_tongue:

c: we can’t do a whole campfire thought…

c: without…

c: AMEME!!!

M: Hmmm. New years meme? Holiday meme? Random meme?

c: ok, let’s go with an honest, non-snarky…


M: Whoa, look at you. Getting all sentimental around the holidays

c: never one to let an honest moment, lie…