This is one other point I meant to bring up, @wolftune has mentioned, and I agree, that having time isn’t really the proper word. I can’t make Snowdrift.coop a priority right now is what is intended.
That registers as a little on the harsh side, IMO. This implies snowdrift is nowhere on the list of priorities, rather than ‘its lower down on the priority list than other things on the list that I need to address first’. I consider that ‘I dont have time to respond’ impies '… because I have other higher priorities needs that need to be addressed immediately - maybe that’s just me though.
I adjusted it a bit see what you think, I’m relatively apathetic but don’t want to frame the statement as “I dont care about snowdrift at all”, I’d rather move towards that “I care about snowdrift… but my higher priorities take precedence for the time being” but let me know what you think @Salt
I know how you feel about the time thing, it was a bit of an abrasive concept for me at first. The idea is definitely not to say anything like Snowdrift.coop isn’t important, it just takes away the framing around time.
Continuing the discussion from Individual/collective accountability / agreements for team members:
The problem isn’t priority vs time, the problem with that wording is the negative framing. It’s saying that Snowdrift is not a priority. The positive framing we want is:
have too many higher priorities
It’s not that we’re lowering or refusing to raise Snowdrift priority, just that we are being transparent and honest in claiming that other things are even higher.
The best part of this is that it forces us to face the commitments we are making. If we spend time reading the news or playing video games or going on a bike ride, we are demonstrating in our actions that we prioritize those over whatever else. I’m effectively prioritizing this comment over getting other work done. By owning my priorities (within time, which I don’t control), I can reflect on whether my priorities are ordered correctly to fit my values.
Key point is: positively asserting higher priorities feels different from stating how low a priority the neglected thing is.
On a side note: I actually do not see my own health as high priority beyond a functional minimum. Snowdrift is more important to me. Optimizing myself seems indulgent. However, I realized over the past year that I do a better job with the time I spend on Snowdrift (and other things) when I’m in the best health, mentally and physically. So, I switched to prioritizing health to a higher degree in order to better serve my other priorities.
Well said, thanks for clarifying. I do think the framing I used in my revised second commitment does this decently well.