Is “Not the Right Time” A Valid Argument?

June 26th, 2009 • View Comments 2009 Write-off, Personal

Just wanted to toss a quick thought out there that’s been on my mind of late. If there’s one thing that I’ve learned about life, it’s that a successful life is dependent largely on being at the right place at the right time. That really leaves a lot of things out of your control – or at least, what you perceive to be out of your control.

Let me share a personal anecdote. Recently, I was presented with an offer to relocate to a city that I am planning on living in at some point in my life. 3 or 4 months ago, had I seen this offer, I would’ve accepted it in a heartbeat, and dealt with the minor issues that it would’ve brought up at the point. Now, however, the responsibilities didn’t seem in line with what I’m looking for, I recently got involved in a new venture that I wanted to put some time into, and it just didn’t seem right to leave the community here, and the social capital (or “social capital”) that I’ve built up. It took some thinking about, but in the end, I feel I made the right decision – at least, for now.

However, I had the decision to make. While I made the “it’s not the right time” argument, it was completely under my control, and I could’ve chosen to do it if I wanted to. It’s important to recognize that timing won’t always be ideal, but that alone shouldn’t rule out making a decision one way or the other. Whether it’s with your business or with your personal life, it’s important that you make what you perceive to be the best decision in your life. I suppose it’s all part of the “live in the moment” philosophy that I like to preach.

Sometimes that means making decisions that hurt those around you. Sometimes that means being selfish. Those questions, though, are what you need to answer, not “is it the right time?” – if you wait around for the right time, it’ll never come. It’s such a subjective concept that I think you can always come up with reasons why it’s not the right time – or why it is.

Food for thought, anyway. What are your thoughts on timing, and how it works in life?

So What Does Cutting Bread and Pasta From Your Diet Do?

June 24th, 2009 • View Comments 2009 Write-off, Personal

Yesterday, Emma detailed her day in pictures as part of the Great Write-off of 2009. We’re more than halfway done now!

This week, I’m trying an experiment. Due to long hours and a general sense of apathy, probably 95% of my meals consist of some sort of pasta or bread-based products. Subway is a mainstay of my diet, and I don’t do a lot of cooking past pasta (hah, wordplay) in my place. Eating out while trying not to break the bank for every meal does present itself with limiting options. In addition, I snack a ton on top of that – I have an insatiable sweet tooth that probably corresponds to the fact that my elementary school in Grade 7 and 8 was directly beside a then-Becker’s, and it corresponded with my first source of income from a paper route. The snacking is bad enough for my diet without all the heavy carbs on top of it.

In addition, this is my least active summer thus far. That may change without much effort due to some sports leagues I have coming up, but being stuck at my desk for 10+ hours a day has caused my ordinarily skinny body to start to round out. (At this point, I realize that I’m seriously impacting my dating prospects, but hey, work’s doing that well enough as is by taking up most of my time. I swear it’s not me.) So, I wanted to try something. Not only was I going to make an effort to eat healthier this week and exercise more, I also wanted to cut out all bread and pasta from my diet this week. I started this Sunday afternoon, and have had 4 days of it under my belt.

So, what’s the result? While there aren’t likely any noticeable physical results yet (let’s face it, I am still fairly skinny), I’m feeling a LOT better. Salads and parfaits are surprisingly more satisfying than I remember, and I have more energy than I should, given that I’ve been up at 5:45 every day this week. I’ve also avoided the mid-afternoon lull, where I normally have to resort to heavily caffeinated drinks to avoid QWERTY-face. (Commonly caused by falling asleep at my desk.) I’ve rediscovered my love for the formerly-named Lettuce Eatery (now Freshii), discovered an awesome salad as Fusaro’s, and rekindled my enjoyment of chicken and fish. Although I haven’t quite stayed away from all snacks (thanks, Satish), I’m doing a ton better, and it’s made a noticeable difference in my demeanor, at least.

If you’re feeling a little slow in the afternoon, or in general, examine the heavy carbs that you’re eating. I do find that it makes a big difference in these warm months.

It may even be enough to keep me away from Subway – a bold statement, given that I once ate at Subway 14 days in a row, and 25 days out of 30. (yes, I kept track.)

Adding Registration Fees to Reduce No-Shows: Does This Make Sense?

June 22nd, 2009 • View Comments 2009 Write-off, Communities, Toronto Social Media

This morning, Joe Thornley wrote a post discussing why they’ve decided to start charging a fee for Third Tuesday Toronto (TTT) and Third Tuesday Ottawa, and Justin Kozuch reflected on the topic at his Refresh Events blog. Both seem to concur with the idea that charging a nominal fee (TTT is now $10) will reduce the number of no-shows at the event. Is this the best approach to take? It’s an interesting question certainly; one which I think needs to be examined within the context of the purpose of the event.

I’ll be frank; this $10 fee that TTT is charging will ensure that unless the speaker is someone absolutely spectacular, I likely will not attend any future TTT events. This isn’t a bad thing; I’m not the direct target market for these events, so maybe by not attending I’ll help them get who they’d like.

However, if the purpose of your events are to bring a community together while helping to promote the individuals involved in it, I’m not sure that the nominal fee is the way to go. One of the commentors on Joe’s post said that the industry standard is to open it up to 2.5 times your capacity to account for no-shows. That seems pretty smart by me; opening up for just your level of capacity will never allow you to have a full venue, as something always comes up.

If you’re implementing a fee just to reduce no-shows, I’m not sure that fits with the community building aspect. There’s enough going on in town right now that I don’t need to pay to network with the current Refresh Events crowd, for example. (I still will, but that’s beside the point) Adding a fee to recurring events will certainly help distinguish you from the other events going on, but perhaps not in a good way. If you are planning on adding a fee, at the very least you need to do it at an event that can be perceived as having a higher value of the events in the past. That way, you reduce the shell-shock from having to pay for events which you previously attended for free, and can help ease your crowd into the new system. If you’re still developing your events, your target audience, or the logistics surrounding them, it may not be the best idea to charge a fee. (If, like Third Tuesday, you can’t get your event on the date it’s supposed to be on because that’s what you’re named after, you also might want to think about that – but that’s a personal quibble I have with the Third Tuesday events.)

Just my two cents. What do you think?