In response to your point: …getting a startup to ANY traction is hard enough…you think you're that much more effective than other founders that you can pull it

In response to your point: …getting a startup to ANY traction is hard enough…you think you're that much more effective than other founders that you can pull it off part-time? I agree that getting any traction is difficult, which is the primary reason I am trying to spread the risk through multiple projects. Entrepreneurs usually put all their eggs in one basket, to the extent that the average return on entrepreneurship ends up being less than the opportunity cost of getting a standard job. I simply don’t think this is necessary, especially in the realm of Internet startups. Of course I am also interested in other alternatives to spreading the risk, e.g. entrepreneur collectives, equity swaps and the like. But I have yet to see anything where the numbers work out well. So I ended up with this approach (for now). Anyway, having had some success and actively reflecting on it and others, I have come to believe that usually success can be traced to a making a few good decisions or coming up with a few good ideas and then executing those decisions and ideas exceptionally well. Coming up with those good few is the hard part, in my opinion. In my experience, however, this risk distribution approach has yielded me those good decisions and ideas faster. Maybe it is letting things ruminate more instead of moving at 100mph all the time. Maybe it is just me. I don’t know. But the less time has not been an impediment to date, and I think it has actually helped move in the right direction more of the time. Like I said in the post, “Needless to say, I have to work smart and efficiently for this principle to even be executable.” I guess it wasn’t “needless to say.” As for executing exceptionally well, that is where the other principles come in (see my other response).