Is this a weasely meta-beeminding rule change?


#1

I have this nifty all-green meta-beeminding goal (inspired by this thread [update: now archived, in part related to this post]) that tomorrow will require me to have all of my goals in the green to avoid derailing.

They’re all green now, in fact — except for my weight loss goal.

I don’t expect to have that weight loss goal in the green by EOD tomorrow, either. It could happen, but that would require some possibly unhealthy choices, and without any guarantees.

Upon reflection, my weight goal is the only one that isn’t directly under my control. All others are definitely within my power to stay on target. How much I weigh is much less under my control. And for this reason, I’d like to exclude it from my all-green goal.

I often rely the fine print rule that Bethany or Danny (can’t remember which, or where) have articulated: If you would have fine print that addresses a situation you’re in now if only you had thought of that situation at the time you created the goal, then go ahead and add that fine print, and apply it immediately.

That rule would seem to apply here, which would allow me to exempt the weight goal right now, before it causes me to derail. I’ve examined this honestly, and that is the choice I would make.

But I wonder if this is weasely behavior, primarily because of the optics of adding an escape clause right before derailing.

What do you think, community? Does adding that fine print now and scoring an all-green point pass the smell test?


"All Green" meta-beeminding goal
#2

My first instinct is to say “yes, that makes sense.” In general, I’m a big proponent of not using goals one can’t control directly to enforce change. I’m also generally prone to semi-weaselly actions and beeing nice to oneself generally, so long as it’s achieving the goals.

That said, I looked more closely at your stats and other goals. It looks like your weight loss goal is a brand new one, and that you’ve set yourself a goal that I’d consider pretty steep for weight loss, with an endpoint in the relatively near future. There was a week of flat spot at the beginning, but no buffer accumulated during that time that would have put you in the green now. You’re soundly on track with this goal so far, but not ahead by any means.

Maybe that’s weight fluctuating in the way it normally does. That’s a question for your own past experience with weight loss: given the actions you’ve been taking so far, is the slower rate of loss an unexpected result? Or is this actually a symptom that there’s something you can control that you haven’t been? Are you exhibiting “all-green” behavior in all the relevant areas (whether you literally track it or not)?

Essentially, I think of an “all-green” goal as indicating that one is not only meeting but exceeding one’s goals. If that’s what you mean by it, would you say that’s currently true? Or are you actually committed to more than you can achieve?


#3

Note for newbees: setting a target weight and end date on weight loss goals is generally a bad idea, because of the steepness that results after any flat spot (e.g. a derailment). Can start it that way in order to get a sense of what the slope would be, but then change your commitment to target & slope, with no date.