#quickbits 2

Jun 06, 2025

this one is a bit incoherent!

what i saw / what i thought

after popping a poll on Linkedin, I decided to pull the trigger and actually head to an improv class.

in an effort to better my storytelling, and reduce rambling-improv felt like a happy medium between a formal public speaking class and straight stand-up.

there were far more people than i’d expected and i will definitely be going back.
what I liked: this is me learning something completely new
what I didn’t: not a con, just an observation, the class went for 2 hrs and during the break, no one seemed to look at their phones. It became apparent I have a problem with this.

what i can’t stop thinking about

the ikea effect/ betty crocker’s add an egg-

i’ve been thinking about how to create a sense of co-creation in the videos/skits i make at work. I never wanted to be a “content creator” (gross term) and i don’t think i’m particularly good at it from a technical standpoint (editing especially).
I do like scripting, ideation and planning a shoot.

I’ve been thinking about what life is going to look like in 3-5 years, if I’ll still be making little videos, what I’d want to be doing.

the idea of building something that people care about but that isn’t important is really interesting to me.

meaning… how can I create videos/a series etc that isn’t “making an impact” on the world at large, but simply exists for entertainments sake?
similar to how Larry David had a rule for Seinfeld “no hugging, no learning”, I have my own guidelines for content I’d like to make.

the media I think about when I say this falls into one of two categories.
not highly highly funded
or
not a ‘polished’ production.
it’s things like Very important People by Dropout TV

or “Gayle” by Chris Fleming

it’s random tiktokers making 100+ part series

or “the Katering Show”

back to the ikea effect though.

how can i include “the viewer” in what I’m doing, maintaining my goal of making things that are
1)funny
2)not goal driven

i’m doing this on a micro scale through linkedin polls and conversations with people.

the research is there that people are more invested in things that they have expended effort into. however! when I queried Linkedin with a poll for what I thought was a pretty obvious metaphor, the results surprised me.

(the metaphor was that “the button” is AI, and ease of creation is the thing promised.)

according to the “betty crocker theory”, people should want to have to break an egg before they felt satisfied with the results.

granted, it’s a tiny sampling of the community, and the use of metaphor is properly obscuring results here but why the change?
would people truly be happy with creating the most impactful thing in the world, without the satisfaction of having expended effort?

I don’t know where I’m going with this and honestly got lost along the way.
It’s something I’ve been thinking about though!