<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><feed
	xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:thr="http://purl.org/syndication/thread/1.0"
	xml:lang="en-US"
	>
	<title type="text">Of Relevance</title>
	<subtitle type="text">Eve Dmochowska</subtitle>

	<updated>2026-05-18T13:41:42Z</updated>

	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com" />
	<id>https://ofrelevance.com/feed/atom/</id>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://ofrelevance.com/feed/atom/" />

	<generator uri="https://wordpress.org/" version="6.9.4">WordPress</generator>
<icon>https://ofrelevance.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/elementor/thumbs/nmb_tw_0923b-1-rc8jlh9wks440npotabuuo3feqgvx8g7puj9hj9jlg.png</icon>
	<entry>
		<author>
			<name>Eve Dmochowska</name>
							<uri>https://ofrelevance.com</uri>
						</author>

		<title type="html"><![CDATA[Roll Call]]></title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com/roll-call/" />

		<id>https://ofrelevance.com/?p=191</id>
		<updated>2026-05-18T13:41:42Z</updated>
		<published>2025-09-29T19:22:49Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="Uncategorized" />
		<summary type="html"><![CDATA[These are the people / publications I try to read regularly. Some podcasts in there too, and highly recommended books. In absolutely no order.]]></summary>

					<content type="html" xml:base="https://ofrelevance.com/roll-call/"><![CDATA[<p>These are the people / publications I try to read regularly. Some podcasts in there too, and highly recommended books. In absolutely no order. (This is a work in progress, as the website evolves).</p>
]]></content>
		
					<link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com/roll-call/#comments" thr:count="0" />
			<link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://ofrelevance.com/roll-call/feed/atom/" thr:count="0" />
			<thr:total>0</thr:total>
			</entry>
		<entry>
		<author>
			<name>Eve Dmochowska</name>
							<uri>https://ofrelevance.com</uri>
						</author>

		<title type="html"><![CDATA[My notes on: &#8220;High agency or NPC?&#8221;]]></title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com/my-notes-high-agency-or-npc/" />

		<id>https://ofrelevance.com/?p=186</id>
		<updated>2025-09-29T19:15:35Z</updated>
		<published>2025-09-29T14:03:50Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="My Notes" /><category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="adaptability" /><category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="agency" /><category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="taste" />
		<summary type="html"><![CDATA[A somewhat tongue in cheek exploration of recent "Twitter Themes". Underlines importance of being agentic (set and pursue goals), adaptable, and the advantage of honing expertise. Narrow window of opportunity to use agency as a moat to get ahead in a world of AI.]]></summary>

					<content type="html" xml:base="https://ofrelevance.com/my-notes-high-agency-or-npc/"><![CDATA[<p><strong>Title:</strong> <a href="https://jasmi.news/p/dictionary?">High Agency or NPC</a><br />
<strong>Source/ Author:</strong> Jasmine Sun (Substack)<br />
<strong>Cost:</strong> Free to read</p>
<h3>TL;DR</h3>
<p><mark>A somewhat tongue in cheek exploration of recent &#8220;Twitter Themes&#8221;. Underlines importance of being agentic (set and pursue goals), adaptable, and the advantage of honing expertise. Narrow window of opportunity to use agency as a moat to get ahead in a world of AI. </mark></p>
<h3>Notes on Agency:</h3>
<ul>
<li>Agency= <strong>initiative</strong>, resourcefulness, high locus of control  </li>
<li>Agentic people seek to achieve goal <mark>despite uncertainty</mark> in environment</li>
<li>Agency and ambition go hand in hand. You should be able to <mark>develop a strategy</mark> to succeed</li>
<li>What matters is not expertise, but ability to <mark>adapt</mark></li>
<li>We pride ourselves on unique skills that other beasts don&#8217;t have (creativity), but its flexibility that&#8217;s our superpower</li>
<li>In 2008, Paul Graham wrote of Sam Altman: “<em>You could parachute him into an island full of cannibals and come back in 5 years and he’d be the king</em>.”</li>
<li>&#8220;<em>Intelligence is on tap, so agency is even more important</em>&#8221; &#8211; Gary Tan
<li>AI lacks both ability to set goals and ability and willingness to pursue those goals. (<em>I am not at all convinced this is true -Eve</em>)</li>
<li>Agency is still a human moat (for now)</li>
</ul>
<h3>Notes on NPC:</h3>
<ul>
<li>Non Playing Character. <mark>Opposite of agentic</mark>. Blind to AI tsunami that&#8217;s coming. </li>
<li>&#8220;An economy that no longer needs as many people to generate wealth will have less incentive to take care of their needs&#8221;. This is &#8220;intelligence curse&#8221;, from an essay. (look up essay)</li>
<li>Don&#8217;t be an NPC.</li>
</ul>
<h3>Notes on Taste :</h3>
<ul>
<li>&#8220;Research taste&#8221;: knowing what problems to work on</li>
<li>It might seem simple, but it comes from thousands of hours of expertise</li>
</ul>
]]></content>
		
					<link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com/my-notes-high-agency-or-npc/#comments" thr:count="0" />
			<link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://ofrelevance.com/my-notes-high-agency-or-npc/feed/atom/" thr:count="0" />
			<thr:total>0</thr:total>
			</entry>
		<entry>
		<author>
			<name>Eve Dmochowska</name>
							<uri>https://ofrelevance.com</uri>
						</author>

		<title type="html"><![CDATA[My Notes on: 1-1-1]]></title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com/1-1-1/" />

		<id>https://ofrelevance.com/?p=171</id>
		<updated>2025-09-29T19:16:32Z</updated>
		<published>2025-09-29T11:28:52Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="My Notes" /><category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="productivity" /><category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="second brain" />
		<summary type="html"><![CDATA[Distill writing into one page, then one paragraph, then one sentence. You can't explain anything you can't describe in one sentence.]]></summary>

					<content type="html" xml:base="https://ofrelevance.com/1-1-1/"><![CDATA[<p><strong>Title:</strong> <a href="https://open.substack.com/pub/timduggan/p/the-1-1-1-method-to-simplify-absolutely?">1-1-1</a><br />
<strong>Source/ Author:</strong> Tim Duggan writing for Outlet (Substack)<br />
<strong>Cost:</strong> Free to read</p>
<h3>TL;DR</h3>
<p><mark>Distill writing into one page, then one paragraph, then one sentence. Can&#8217;t explain anything I can&#8217;t describe in one sentence.</mark></p>
<h3>Notes:</h3>
<ul>
<li>Try to distill main ideas/problems into just one page of writing. Then distill the page into one paragraph. Finally, write one sentence as an overview (kind of like an elevator pitch).</li>
<li>Suggestion was to use NotebookLM (or other AI) to do this.</li>
</ul>
<h3>Margin Notes:</h3>
<ul>
<li>A good exercise to get clarity.</li>
<li>I should try to keep most posts under 500 words anyway (this is a natural must-do for <a href="https://nomagicbeans.com">No Magic Beans</a> anyway).</li>
<li>I don&#8217;t want to use AI for any writing whatsoever, but it might not be a bad idea to distill books into one paragraph summaries using AI, just for a reference point of what the book is about, key points. Might work especially well for books I haven&#8217;t yet read.</li>
</ul>
]]></content>
		
					<link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com/1-1-1/#comments" thr:count="0" />
			<link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://ofrelevance.com/1-1-1/feed/atom/" thr:count="0" />
			<thr:total>0</thr:total>
			</entry>
		<entry>
		<author>
			<name>Eve Dmochowska</name>
					</author>

		<title type="html"><![CDATA[Is there any value to being on social media?]]></title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com/social-media-value/" />

		<id>https://ofrelevance.com/?p=161</id>
		<updated>2025-09-29T12:36:10Z</updated>
		<published>2025-08-26T20:32:27Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="Social Media" />
		<summary type="html"><![CDATA[I’ve been toying with the idea of getting back to posting on social media. It’s a strange time to do it, I know, because the state of social media has never been worse, but somewhere deep within me is this niggling feeling that we are going to come full circle, where one-on-ones with real human [&#8230;]]]></summary>

					<content type="html" xml:base="https://ofrelevance.com/social-media-value/"><![CDATA[<p><em>I’ve been toying with the idea of getting back to posting on social media. It’s a strange time to do it, I know, because the state of social media has never been worse, but somewhere deep within me is this niggling feeling that we are going to come full circle, where one-on-ones with real human beings will be prioritised over algorithms, blogs are going to rise in popularity again and we will crave connection. And maybe, just maybe, building up a personal account on one of the platforms will help me meet real people, and have meaningful conversations. It’s iffy, I know, and I am not fully convinced, but I thought it’d be worthwhile to write down my thoughts on how I view the state of social media in 2025, and what possible upsides there may be for me to start posting again. (As usual, writing this piece helped me clarify things, and shift my original perspective. The power of writing! Never gets old).</em></p>
<p>I’ve tried to figure out why being on social media is suddenly important or relevant to me, and I think it’s because <em>I want a platform where I can distribute my (yet-to-happen) writing</em>.  I might be fooling myself, but I think that if I know there is a potential audience to read what I write, no matter how small, I might write more. This motivation works remarkably well for my personal newsletter, <a href="https://newsletter.sneakersandheels.com"><em>Sneakers and Heels</em></a>, which I have published for 75 weeks without fail: I write it because I know it gets opened, and it’s a pleasure to write stuff others willingly read. <strong>I want more of that motivation</strong>. </p>
<p>Although I don’t post much any more, I do <em>consume</em><sup class="modern-footnotes-footnote ">1</sup> social media and for the most part I find it to be a complete shitshow. People step over each other with increasingly cringy posts and AI slop, and taunt negative discourse. But I am not willing to give up easily, and am hopeful that there are some redeeming spaces or opportunities among the thorns. When I was active on social media (about a decade ago) I found it beneficial both for work and fun, and I’d like to think I can develop a personal system, or a methodology, where I gain some of that benefit back. </p>
<p>/<img fetchpriority="high" decoding="async" src="https://ofrelevance.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/WhatsApp-Image-2025-08-26-at-22.30.54.jpeg" alt="" width="523" height="709" class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-162" srcset="https://ofrelevance.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/WhatsApp-Image-2025-08-26-at-22.30.54.jpeg 523w, https://ofrelevance.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/WhatsApp-Image-2025-08-26-at-22.30.54-221x300.jpeg 221w" sizes="(max-width: 523px) 100vw, 523px" /></p>
<p><strong>It will take patience to build an audience who is willing to listen to me.</strong> The often cited rules to achieve this are to post consistently on a niche topic, and engage (a lot) with others  through comments and reposts. (<em>Fwiw, I’ve seen these rules broken often, with success</em>). So: patience and dedication. <strong>No magic beans</strong>. I am prepared to do the work (fine!) but I am not going to allow myself to be pigeonholed into a niche. My approach to social media will be to treat it like a lunch date with my friends: the more diverse the topics the funner the time. Niche is boring and contrived. I’m sure it works for people who have a “<em>strategy</em>” but all I have is verbal diarrhea.<sup class="modern-footnotes-footnote ">2</sup> (Sidenote: LinkedIn is an exception. There I&#8217;ll behave as if I&#8217;m going to lunch with <em>colleagues</em>, with no champagne in sight).</p>
<p><strong>And, no guarantees</strong>. Just as I have my goals, the algorithm has its own goals for the platform. Those goals are usually a boring combination of <em>maximising users’ time spent on app</em>, <em>maximising number of unique users</em> and <em>maximising revenue from ads</em>. Until I show I can significantly contribute to any of those goals, the algorithm isn’t going to be very supportive of <em>my</em> goals. I’m going to have to work hard to overcome the chicken-or-egg inertia of a beginner with no audience, and accept that for a long time I will see little return for my efforts. </p>
<p><strong>Case in point:</strong> I re-published an old <em>Sneakers and Heels</em> newsletter from the Beehiiv platform (where I have subscribers) onto my relatively new Substack account. The premise of Substack is that it comes with a built-in audience, but that’s false advertising. My Substack note got <em>zero views</em>. On Beehiiv, that same newsletter got <em>a 62% open rate</em>. I would have been very disheartened if I had written the 2,000 words on Substack, and no one even had the <em>opportunity</em> to read it.  I know this isn&#8217;t a fair comparison: if I had zero Beehiiv subscribers, I&#8217;d also get zero views, but at least there is no false hope. </p>
<p>There’s a risk all the effort might never be worth it. In the “old days” of social media, most of our followers would see at least <em>some</em> of our posts. Today, it’s not unusual for established accounts to only reach <em>1-2%</em> of their opt-in audience. Mark Zuckerberg testified that only 7% of your Instagram feed is content from your friends. <strong>The ROI of the effort taken to build an audience decreases continuously</strong>.  I don’t want to fall into the trap of believing that even if managed to blood-and-sweat my way to 10,000 followers on a platform, my book launch announcement would be seen by all those 10,000 people. If I was <em>lucky</em>, it’d be seen by a couple of hundred, at best. (To verify this, spend some time on Twitter/X. It conveniently shows the reach of a post. Stalk some big accounts, and see their reach versus their following.) </p>
<p>It’s important to check expectations against goals, but also quite tempting to think that my experience will be different (quicker and easier). I look at my current feed on X or Threads or Substack and think…<em>if they can do it, so can I</em>. But that’s classic survivorship bias: I am not seeing all those people who thought the same thing, tried, failed and are now (by definition) not anywhere to be seen in my feed. I can’t see them, so I think they don’t exist. They do. By the bucketload.</p>
<p>So we know it’s not easy, takes a long time, and might not even be worth it. But it gets worse. That pesky algorithm that stands between us and our audience is also highly temperamental and inconsistent. Even if we crack the code, build an audience, encourage engagement and make money, all that can change overnight and leave us up a creek without a paddle. The algorithm can at any time shadow ban you, deprioritise your posts, change the algorithm, or even delete your account. It’s happened to others before, happens all the time now, and will continue to happen in the future. In other words: I am investing time and effort into building something on someone else’s land, and that land could end up being quicksand. </p>
<p><strong>What else?</strong> A lot! Users are leaving the platforms, and even if they stay they hate it more and more. Audiences are split between so many platforms that it&#8217;s difficult to keep up, and tempting to think I must be active on <em>all</em> of them. Spending time on social media means I am not using that time to rest, parent, write or work. Feedback of my posts might be inaccurate, and in a bubble. People can be cruel and rude. I might equate reactions (comments) as a direct representation of the value of my work. I might get dejected if my content gets no engagement. </p>
<p><strong>So, is there any upside?</strong> Sure! There&#8217;s a chance I will enjoy it, I will meet new people, I will get feedback and discussion, more people will read what I write, I can build stronger one-on-one relationships. I can share, and be heard, and vent, and get sympathy. I might help others, or make them smile. New friends, new opportunities, new skills, new info. I can become a cheerleader, and be cheered. </p>
<p><strong>I think the rule here is: </strong>if you want to be on social media, do it. If you don&#8217;t, don&#8217;t. Keep expectations in check, stay authentic to yourself, and always make sure you are still having fun.    </p>
<h3 class="modern-footnotes-list-heading ">Notes:</h3><div>1&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Hate that term!</div><div>2&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;“Diarrhea” is shit word to spell, excuse the pun</div>]]></content>
		
					<link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com/social-media-value/#comments" thr:count="0" />
			<link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://ofrelevance.com/social-media-value/feed/atom/" thr:count="0" />
			<thr:total>0</thr:total>
			</entry>
		<entry>
		<author>
			<name>Eve Dmochowska</name>
					</author>

		<title type="html"><![CDATA[Permission granted]]></title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com/permission-granted/" />

		<id>https://ofrelevance.com/?p=147</id>
		<updated>2025-09-29T19:19:29Z</updated>
		<published>2025-03-10T12:47:39Z</published>
		<category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="Chit chat" /><category scheme="https://ofrelevance.com" term="writing" />
		<summary type="html"><![CDATA[I turned 52 a couple of days ago, and decided to give myself the gift of “permission to write”. I’m not new to writing, but aside from a <a href="https://sneakersandheels.com">weekly newsletter</a> for a very niche audience, most of the “writing” I do these days falls under the umbrella of “<em>must write about this!</em>” thinking, with very little actual output. ]]></summary>

					<content type="html" xml:base="https://ofrelevance.com/permission-granted/"><![CDATA[<p>I turned 52 a couple of days ago, and decided to give myself the gift of “permission to write”. I’m not new to writing, but aside from a <a href="https://sneakersandheels.com">weekly newsletter</a> for a very niche audience, most of the “writing” I do these days falls under the umbrella of “<em>must write about this!</em>” thinking, with very little actual output. </p>
<p>That’s frustrating. </p>
<p>There are pent up words that want to come out, but there is a moat of perfection that thwarts them. So that’s where the gift of permission comes in, conquering expectations. I am now allowed to write stuff that is not fully formulated, not fully thought out, not perfect. The world already has <a href="https://paulgraham.com">Paul Graham</a>. My job is to <em>just write</em>. </p>
<p>It’s words that have to be conquered, not worlds. </p>
]]></content>
		
					<link rel="replies" type="text/html" href="https://ofrelevance.com/permission-granted/#comments" thr:count="0" />
			<link rel="replies" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://ofrelevance.com/permission-granted/feed/atom/" thr:count="0" />
			<thr:total>0</thr:total>
			</entry>
	</feed>
