I’m not sure which part of the “everything” that has changed for me since I started using Beeminder that’s causing this issue, but I now find that I find that an akrasia horizon isn’t enough to keep me from abandoning goals (goals that past and future me would prefer I not abandon) using allowed archiving, rate changes, etc.
I need a way to not be able to quit certain goals when my circumstances shift enough to cause what my longer-term attention is focused on to shift. Like, this week I’ll decide I want to spend the rest of the summer focusing on X but in two weeks, something will change and I’ll decide to spend the rest of the summer focusing on Y, abandon my X-related goals, and start Y-related goals. Rinse. Repeat.
Now, this is important and necessary and an incredibly useful part of Beeminder’s flexibility and I still think it’ll be important for me to have a trial period for all of my goals to make sure they’re not too pie-in-the-sky, but this has become a meta-problem for my long-term accountability planning. It’s become something of a disincentive to even creating graph-goals anymore. I think of creating a graph-goal related to an IRL-goal and end up feeling like there isn’t much point since recent history suggests that I’m likely to decide to abandon it.
It’s meta-bumming me out!
The best I’ve come up with is the idea to create a Beeminder goal to “Not change any of my Beeminder goals… including this one” that allows me to change one goal a month or something.
@dreev and @shanaqui have had some ideas surrounding using public accountability. I worry about them either being too soft (because I know no one’s likely to really ever check in on them or to call me to task if they do) or too burdensome on others (like if someone else commits to checking up on them).
Has anyone else found themselves in a position of creating quitting a set of revolving goals that aren’t really getting them anywhere and come up with a creative solution for themselves?