The Starter, the Sustainer, and the Closer

 We talk about Sturgeon's Law at the start of this episode as it relates to some of the topics covered in last week's episode as well as some of the discussion we continue this week.

We build on the (hopefully good) content from last week and discuss the "starter" role versus the "sustainer" role. Maybe there is, or needs to be, a third role: the "closer".

---

Any views expressed on this podcast are those solely of the hosts and is for entertainment purposes only. None of the content is medical advice or financial advice.

Special thanks to Tim Wright aka CoLD SToRAGE for his permission to use the song Operatique.

Transcript

I Hate Talking: 0:29

Welcome to episode 52 of I Hate Talking. Hi everyone. So today's word or phrase is a phrase and it is a phrase known as sturgeon's law. OK, so sturgeon law is a term or phrase coined by a science fiction author named Theodore Sturgeon, and basically the quote that he coined and this became quote unquote Sturgeon's law is that 90% of everything is junk. OK. So basically it's often used to highlight the prevalence of low quality contact. It's often. And this particular law or phrase is often used to highlight the prevalence of low quality content or work in any field, but obviously since he was a science fiction writer, I think uh when he was describing this originally, and initially he was probably referring to science fiction as a genre, but essentially that became known as Sturgeon's law for any field. OK. So hopefully our podcast does not fall within the 90%. I don't think it does, but maybe other people think it does. I don't know. What do you think? I, I don't know, I enjoy it. I have fun talking to you. learning things like Sturgeon's Law. That's true. Have you ever heard of Sturgeon's Law? No. Yeah, I don't think I did either. I heard it when I was listening to some historical information about science fiction and that came up in terms of that as an author and then the discussion was actually more on science fiction and famous authors, but this was sort of one of his claims to fame as it were. So that is how I learned about it. OK. What kind of books does, I wanna keep talking about Sturgeon's Law, but first, what kind of books does he write? I don't know. I think it was for some of the. Magazines that existed, I think they still exist today. So he's not the 10% of sci-fi that gets read often. No, I'm guess he might not be because I cannot recall any of his particular works. So maybe he himself fell on that 90%, but I don't think he considered that as the 90% himself. So maybe we're in the same boat with him. We think our own content is great, but maybe it's not. You, our listeners can let us know if you would like to hear a particular word or phrase or have feedback on. Any of these episodes, and if you do enjoy the episodes, you can like, share, subscribe, do all the things, just send it to one person and maybe they'll enjoy it, and they can for themselves decide if it's in the 90% or the 10% or send it to 10 people and one person, one person will like it. Well, that's true, I guess if we use that and then I guess why stop there? Might as well send it to 100 people and then maybe 10 people will like it. Do you think that that um applies to like conversations or actions also? That like 90% of what people tell you, you kind of just ignore? It's quite possible. I'm not entirely certain, but it does seem that it is true for at least content, and I think that's what really he was getting at with the science fiction is that 90% of science fiction books or stories or publications are just not very good. And then same thing with other content. So in the modern day podcast or any books of any genre, I think would sort of fall within that sturgeon's law. I don't know if it's really necessarily Conversations or even skills per se. So I don't think that necessarily surgeon's laws apply to doctors as an example where like 90% of the doctors are just not any good, but that more refers to content. Right, OK. That reminds me, I was hearing someone talk recently and they were saying that confident people or people that are good at what they do or what they know. You don't have to talk much. Only have to say very little. People that are not confident, or people that do not know a subject well, We'll say a lot more words to try to justify and fill in the space. That is true. I've seen that with a lot of books that I've read over the years where, you know, maybe the first. 8 chapters of a 20 chapter book are pretty good and the author's doing a good job and then the last 12 chapters is like, they just sort of stopped trying or they just had to write filler word to hit a page count or something for the publisher, and it just falls off the cliff. Right. Now, the publication that I was referring to earlier is Weird Tales Magazine, which I don't know if I've ever read Weird Tales magazine, but I think he was perhaps involved with that in some form or fashion. Other authors would be like Ray Bradbury or HP Lovecraft and people of that generation that were writing science fiction. OK. So that is our word or phrase, Sturgeon's law, not much etymology there because it is just the guy's name and then the fact that it became accepted as a law, I guess we can look up exactly when that became known or when that particular author lived. So, Theodore Sturgeon was born in 1918, died in 1985, and there is some references that this came to be coined as a term in 1951. Oh wow, I mean, that's relatively recent, but I was expecting it to be like 20 years ago. Yep, so the exact quote here according to Wikipedia is 90% of science fiction is crud, but then 90% of everything is crud. And that was surgeon's Law. OK, well then there you go. So the reason that we brought that up is that we thought it was an interesting phrase, not one that you really run into every day, but one that may be applicable to some things that you do run into every day with particular content that you are listening to or reading or watching. And it sort of ties in with our episode last time where we talked about rough and just in terms of when might be a good time to quit something or sort of the time bound nature that may be required in certain things that you may involve yourself in and wanted to perhaps continue that conversation where we left off last time with The sustainment versus the starter role when you are either starting something new in terms of an activity or a initiative versus those that may be better suited to sustain such initiatives and activities. Hm. So I think we said that typically I will fall into a sustainer role and you will fall into more of a starter role. OK, well, when you said that, it just clicked in my brain because there is a position I've started to take on a volunteer community position. And it's a lot of hours, a lot of work, and it's volunteer, but I'm really enjoying it and like really energized by doing all this stuff. But is that kind of like how I'm a starter, like, I'm starting this project. I'm starting basically from the ground up in this, this organization, and so maybe in a couple of years, I'm gonna have a hard time with that motivation that I have currently. I think so. Now, the good thing about this particular role is that it is somewhat seasonal in nature, so you probably have to do a lot of work at this particular time and So maybe next year I'll ramp up again. -- Maybe -- you'll ramp up and that might be a good routine for you that might find enjoyment and energy in the initial efforts and then not necessarily have as much energy and excitement to continue doing something. Now I think that's not necessarily always true, but perhaps chickens, sourdough bread, podcasting. I don't know if all those things quite have the same level of excitement in your purview as they did when you first started those things. That's true. My sourdough is done. It's gone. Where to go. I still enjoy eating it. I haven't had any in a while. Well, for anyone who doesn't know, I broke my wrist and right tendons in my hand a month ago. I haven't been able to make it. And at the time, I did not put the sourdough. I made it. I made our last sourdough the day I broke my wrist and right thumb tendons. So, I, I didn't put it away like I should have properly cared for it. And I was focused on the pain and such and healing. Currently, I only have one hand that's functional, and it's not my dominant hand. So it's just sitting there. Indeed, and then chickens, I think, probably had a lot of excitement about the chickens originally, but probably less so nowadays. Yeah, I get excited when we get new chicks. That's exciting. Or when they haven't laid in a while, like in the winter, and then they start laying again, that's exciting. But the day to day monotony of it is rough. And podcasting. We're still doing this. You still said you enjoy talking and producing hopefully good 10% content. I enjoy it, yes, and I love talking to you. That's what I like. I like talking to you. I wouldn't mind if it was just you and I talking face to face every night like this, or if we're talking in a mic. I think I don't like, OK, well, now this is turning into like a session for me. I'll turn it on you soon. I think I don't like having to do stuff. Like having to do this every week, having to take care of the chickens every day, having to put away the sourdough properly every time I make it. It's just not fun. Yeah, well, you resonate with that. Sometimes, yeah, I guess if it's something that I don't necessarily find intrinsically valuable or see a particular large benefit in doing, and that may be where some of the enjoyment is. Very low. But in terms of, I think maybe the motivation is different where I'm doing something because I feel like it is a duty to do it or a particular responsibility or that it does have some valuable output in terms of like we have fresh eggs or we have homemade bread or hopefully we are producing good content that people enjoy and actually learn something about themselves or very these topics that we have. So I don't. Necessarily do all those things for enjoyment. So maybe the motivation is different and that is maybe what actually drives some people to be sustainers versus starters or maybe that's just our particular interplay between us two and things that we do in our lives. Well, yeah, now I want to know from other people, if they consider themselves a sustainer or a starter. What's your intrinsic motivation? Cause I definitely like joy, I like Having fun and lightheartedness and joy. And I know, I mean, I know you do. I know you like it, but, uh, you, I feel like shut that part of your brain off a lot of times to go to duty. Yeah, it's a very comfortable space to be in that space for me where it's just whatever I'm providing is what is motivating me. And to your point, I do enjoy starting some things, but it always would be within the guardrails of what is like acceptable. So if it's too far outside, perhaps my skills or too far outside of things that I I would enjoy doing that, those things I may not actually pursue, but If it is something new within that. Narrow confines, and that is something that I perhaps would get joy from starting. OK. And also just super, super fast, circling back for our chickens. Yeah, they've lost their excitement, but also our rooster is really mean and we need to rehome him. And so it's, I get kind of scared when I go in their coop because He like tries to attack me, and he's never tried to attack you. I get it, but he tries to attack me and so I don't want to go in there anymore. That is true. So some of these things will have particular difficulties or challenges or whatever the case may be, but I think, again, the sustainment will sort of override those particular challenges and I'll. Just perhaps grind my way through or bulldoze my way through those particular challenges and move on to the next thing. -- But -- do you want to live your life that way? I know, I know for sure you think your way is best. Just uh medium. No highs, no lows, just straight. But don't you ever miss like the actual joy and enjoyment and things? I get joy and enjoyment from doing things well and providing for other people or getting things to a point where they can be sustained and run on a routine and once those things are set, then they can continue to function and That is one way that I think I do derive joy, so maybe there's just also not only differences in motivation, but also differences in the source of joy where I will enjoy something for a far different reason than you might enjoy something and vice versa. Yeah, cause I mean, sometimes if I have fully enjoyed an activity, and it ends, I'm sad, like, oh, it's over now, where you'd probably sigh with relief, it's finished. In some cases, yes, I will actually be happy that said event is done. I feel like, is it similar to how at events, I always push us to leave early. Or if we have an event, I always make it shorter than your average. Because in my head I'm always like, I want people to leave and be like, man, I wish it was longer. I'm so sad it's over. And nothing brings, I get so much joy from hearing people say that when they leave, like, oh, I'm so sad it's done. That was great. So is it kind of like that? Because I feel like you'd stay till the end, or you would have something be longer typically, I always like leave before people want us to go. We got to go before they start thinking we should, it's time to leave. That is a particular strategy that you employ. I don't know if I really have strong feelings on it one way or the other. To your point, I will do something until A particular end time or if they're, like we talked about last time, if there's no end time, and I sort of just do it. In perpetuity. Obviously, that's not something that has a specific hour event, but more related to Days and weeks and months and years where there's not necessarily particular time bound. What about, as an example, TV shows or movies like The Office, we both love The Office. Uh, you stopped watching it when Steve Carell left though. Well, I think I attempted to watch the next season or maybe some of the episodes where they were doing some of the interviews and I think he was still part of the cast at that point in time. But yes, I think I did attempt to watch some of it and actually I think I may have, even though I didn't enjoy it, grind through some of the episodes, but like if you ask me about them today, I will not even recall some of them at all in terms of some of the character interactions or particular things that they had in those episodes because I don't think I was truly paying attention just because I was not enjoying it, but I think I did watch all of them just to mark them all as watched. One time years ago, we were on a Office trivia contest. And you could definitely tell your answers by the time they got to like 7.5 seasons, that's when Correll leaves. And I remember being like, we're on a team. I, it's OK, I got this. Don't worry. Because your knowledge is super high and then it gets to that point and it drops drastically. But what my point of bringing it up is, in your opinion, you would have rather them just stopped, right? Like, Instead of ruining it, it's not the right word, probably right, but like, We'll stop on a high. I don't know, that's what my thought process is like, at least for your opinion, you would have rather them stopped when it was the funniest. They're such great memories versus being like, uh, the end was OK. Yeah, perhaps. I think it went on far too long. So, uh, after the high and after Steve Carell departed, maybe finishing out that particular season and then calling it the end would have been fine, so. Yes, I think the extended portions of multiple seasons after his departure was far too much. So don't you think that there's a very valid role for a starter and for a sustainer to stop? The stainer can't go on forever. Cause I mean, could you imagine if you're watching Dwight right now in the Office? 15 years later, what he would be doing. Yeah, probably still farming beets, I would imagine, because he probably is a sustainer and he does things the same for a very long time or forever. His generations back, yes. Indeed. So perhaps there's a missing role and that is the closer that there needs to be another attribute within the starter and the sustainer to Tell everybody when it's done. Yeah. I mean, right with a book, if you're writing a book, just being like, hey, it's done, the book's finished, or a series or a task or whatnot. I feel like that could be a very valid role. Could that role be the sustainer or the starter, or is that a third party completely? Well, I think that's perhaps a question that we can contemplate. I don't know if we'll have time to fully discuss that in this episode, but we'll maybe give it a shot here. So I think that naturally, it will be the sustainer that probably takes on that role because they are the one that is continuing things that have been started. So maybe they need to come in and determine that this is Reached its final conclusion or maybe another alternative is that the starter comes back and start something new and then that replaces what the sustainer was doing. That's what we do. Or there's the the third role that maybe could be a separate role and they are the quote unquote closer, as I said, where they are saying it's time to end and then wrapping things up accordingly. OK, I mean, I see that as you were talking, like, me being the starter and the closer often. Because then I'm like, OK, I'm on to this new task. Let's do this instead. And cause you know your limitations, you can't do both. You end up like, OK, this one's done, now we're on to this new project. Perhaps I think it's a little bit different because the closer I think in the office example is going to indicate that the activity or show or whatever the case may be is past its useful life of whatever it is. So it has been expended, it is no longer providing value or is no longer funny, whatever the case may be, whereas what you described with the starter just coming in with a new project. is de facto stopping whatever the person was sustaining, but not necessarily for the express purpose that whatever was being sustained has fulfilled its purpose. OK, I can buy that. Also, do you think that the starter, in my head, I picture the starter being like tons of energy and motivation, and thoughts and plans right at the start, and then they burn out quick. And then the sustainer almost needs a starter, right? Because who's gonna start it or who's gonna have that big push at the beginning to Like when you're starting. A mower or starting a pressure washer, you need that real big burst at the beginning. And then it continues, right? In very simple terms, yeah. You don't like that. You don't like that, you need me. Well, I just didn't think the the analogy was quite spot on, -- but -- OK, give me a better analogy. Uh, better analogy would be some sort of electrical component that does need more energy at the beginning, so anything that has capacitors within it. So, for example, anything that is a cooling unit will have a lot of extra electrical equipment to boost the voltage in the very beginning, and then once that unit is running, then it will switch over to just standard power essentially. So I can see where you're going with like perhaps the starter components of a mechanical device, like a mower or pressure washer, but Yes. The, the point is, I guess the same is that there needs to be a burst of energy at the beginning to get things started to overcome some of that. Momentum need and then once the momentum is there, the sustainer can pick it up. Right, but like as a runner, right, like there's a sprinter that has that huge burst in the beginning, but they can't last forever. Or cross country. It's gonna be pretty steady the whole time. So it's kind of like both, right? Like if you use a sprinter in the beginning, and they tag in a cross country guy afterwards. And then they're gonna get really far, really fast. Yeah, perhaps, and I don't know if there's any relays like that, but I would imagine that in some relay races that you may put a particular sprinter or long distance runner at certain places within a relay race for that exact reason. OK, also, any listeners, if you know, side note. Our one of our kids was telling us how much they love running. It's so much fun and they feel so good when they do it. And I was like, oh, we could get you into cross country or track and field. I was getting him options, and he's like, I don't want to do any competitions. He's like, is there a competition? Well, yeah, sometimes he's like, I don't want to do it then. I just want to run. I want friends to run. So if there are organizations that just run and they don't compete for medals, or if you know of like, is that an option? Can we put him in cross country and not let him compete? he just find so much joy in running? I have no idea. We'll have to look into that or like you said, our listeners can let us know. But I guess that's another thing that We will start and sustain for as long as it is enjoyable. Or beyond, because I think we still do some things that are maybe not as enjoyable, but they do serve a purpose. Right. Yeah. Well, I think that covers what we wanted to talk about in terms of sustainment and starter and we even added in the closer there. So I think it is time to close out this episode. So, from your friends at I hate Talking, until next time, remember, it is only through talking that we begin the journey to understanding.