3 ms·
But how do you avoid from becoming skeptical, like, "Why bother focusing on quality, if it's going to waste anyway. Maybe I should keep throwing shit (quantity)
by wiradikusuma 10y ago
But how do you avoid from becoming skeptical, like, "Why bother focusing on quality, if it's going to waste anyway. Maybe I should keep throwing shit (quantity) and see which ones stick."? So you end up producing mediocrity and leaning towards luck.
- pboutros 10y agoThat's a good question. I think it's probably by enjoying what you do - if you enjoy it and keep learning as you go, you'll probably get better. Basically sounds like a way to get to the "10,000 hour rule".
- BlackjackCF 10y agoI think the idea behind it is that with every rejection, you'd hopefully try to improve a little or start on a new project. Eventually you'd learn something new. The other thing is to conquer the fear of rejection. There are a lot of people who get stuck not submitting stuff simply because they're afraid of getting rejected. But not trying is as good as a rejection.
- Throwaway23412 10y agoI remember a recent submission that made an unintuitive argument: quantity = quality. If you focus on quality from the beginning, you spend too much time in analysis paralysis and get less feedback on your progress. If you focus on quantity from the beginning, you get more feedback the more you produce. It's better to learn what not to do.
- CPLX 10y agoIndeed. As the apocryphal Stalin quote goes, quantity has a quality all its own.
- dietrichepp 10y agoNot everyone responds to rejection that way.
- kamaal 10y ago>>So you end up producing mediocrity and leaning towards luck. You are going to need luck regardless of the quality. Merit is how we expect the world to be, not what it actually is! The author's point is increasing your chances of success by trying more. Which, if you are unlucky a lot, actually makes sense.