Speaking personally, I’ve dropped my involvement with a couple of quasi-political groups because I felt they were just talking shops. I guess a good rule would be: first add value, and then talk about the whys and wherefores. I recall that Scott Adams’ book “The Dilbert Principle” suggests the same principle, except that he describes it in terms of “fundamental activities”.

Ironically, by posting on this blog I am completely violating that principle. Meh.

By the way, I realise it was completely off-topic, but I’d be interested in your response to the whole “two kinds of courage” thing. It’s something that hits me personally because a) I’m looking for a new job, and b) I’m keen on improving my lines of communication with the opposite sex.

Currently both initiatives are going quite badly because I basically panic and start displaying all sorts of adrenaline-inspired behaviours. And then I feel like an idiot and have trouble forcing myself to try, try again. I’ve heard and read no end of advice on things like interview techniques, but it all goes straight out of my head as soon as the neurotransmitter hits the synapse.

This is something that it seems like people should get the hang of as they grow up (being only 24 I of course do not consider myself “grown-up” yet. Maybe in another decade.) Or maybe I’m just missing something obvious. If any of the older, wiser minds around here would care to shower me with pearls of wisdom, it would be greatly appreciated

She asked for the specifics or offered to meet with anyone who needed to present something in a private setting.

Silence descended on the room.

Not surprising. It’s always scary to start talking to someone who may disagree with you, or who you have to convince of something. This is why people are so terrified of dating and job interviews – there’s nothing worse than a near-lethal dose of adrenaline to the cortex.

On that note, I’d suggest that there are actually two distinct forms of courage at work here. One is the “intellectual” courage required to go to the SPR chair’s office and knock on the door. The other is the “physiological” courage required to not have an incapacitating panic attack once you get there.

When we talk about courage we normally mean intellectual courage: having sufficient willpower to act contrary to your emotional preference. But I’d like to see more discussion of physiological courage: having sufficient immunity to adrenaline that you can act contrary to your emotional preference and still do a good job.

“Just do it” was a wonderful motto long before Nike started using it. But having more intellectual courage than physiological courage can e.g. leave your car wrapped round a tree or your foot wedged firmly in your mouth.