Let me try something..

Anyone remember that scene from Old School where Will Ferrell steps up to debate ‘The Ragin’ Cajun”, James Carville?

Curious enough, something similar happens to me from time to time.  Some people say that I’m articulate and well spoken but I may just be well rehearsed.  When I’m discussing something that I’ve given a lot of thought to, I’ve already had those conversations numerous times in my own head.  Perhaps that’s why my mind wanders when I’m giving speeches.  Perhaps even more curious, it’s often this state of mind which tends earn me that ‘mic drop’ moment.

Anyways, I had one of those moments in the shower earlier and I thought it might be worth writing down.  The debate question is:

What’s the real issue in American politics today?

Going into blackout mode…

 

This isn’t a black versus white thing, this isn’t a rich versus poor thing, and this isn’t a left versus right thing. This is what happens when politics becomes more important than governance.  This is what happens when a duopoly of power prioritizes the short-term success of their party over the greater good of the people they’re supposed to serve.

The American people have democracy, but in a democracy where you’re asked to elect someone you don’t know to run a system you don’t understand, what exactly are you asking of your people?  In an election process that requires billion dollar campaigns, who do you expect to be influencing those candidates?  In a system with such obvious fundamental flaws,  why do we keep expecting different outcomes?

When we start to notice what’s happening though, rather that acknowledge our mistakes and work to solve our problems, we’re given someone to blame.  If you’re rich, blame the tax raising democrats.  If you’re poor, blame the heartless republicans.  If you’re middle America, blame the coastal elites.  If you’ve lost your job, blame the immigrants.  If you’re a liberal millennial, blame the white man.  It’s all utterly ridiculous because when someone understands how interconnected we all are, it’s very easy to see that we’re all in this together.

The American people want freedom.  That’s the freedom to be whoever we want to be and love whoever we want to love.  That’s also the freedom for businesses to compete without unnecessary regulations.  The American people want lower taxes, but don’t mind paying them as long as they’re spent well.  The American people want someone working 40 hours a week to earn a livable wage.  The American people want to stop invading other countries.  The American people want affordable access to health care.  The American people agree on almost all major issues, but through the spin cycle of politics and media, everyone’s divided without even really understanding why.

The universe always finds it’s equilibrium.  Just after Trump was elected, I said this may be a good thing.  Not because he’ll be any good at his job, but because he might just be catastrophically bad at it.  Just maybe he’ll lie more than any politician ever has.  Maybe he’ll flip flop all of his policies.  Maybe he’l have temper tantrums so frequently that people question if he’s mentally fit enough for office.  Maybe he’ll let his racist undertones influence policy.  Maybe all the shady stuff that he’s done in the past will come to boil over during his presidency and we can finally have a complete meltdown of the confidence in our government.

Maybe that’s when we stop paying attention to them, and start paying attention to each other.  Maybe that’s when we start to drive our own rhetoric around the values that got us here in the first place.  Maybe that’s when we’ll finally open our minds to what government could be.

 

Honest Modesty

There’s a fantastic quote from Bruce Lee, “If I tell you I am good, probably you will say I am boasting.  But if I tell you I’m not good, you’ll know I’m lying.”

By most people’s standards, Bruce Lee wasn’t just good, he was one of the best to ever do what he did.  But if he were to say that, then he risks being labelled as boastful.  Why?

The Rick side of me wants to say that those with insecurities about their own abilities would prefer that high achievers understate their skills and accomplishments to minimize feelings of inadequacy and inferiority.  They key word there being feel.

The more patient side of me thinks there’s another level to this.  Honesty is communication in it’s most accurate form.  When you’re being honest with others, you’re giving them the most accurate version of the information you have.  When you’re being honest with yourself, you’re looking at the most accurate version of yourself.  As working with accurate information is always more efficient than working with inaccurate information, honesty is key to an efficient life.

I also value modesty.  For me, modesty is a perpetual state of mind in which I remind myself that there’s always more room to grow and that what I’ve accomplished isn’t nearly as important as what I’m working towards.  Google’s definition of modesty is an unassuming or moderate estimation of one’s abilities.  I can work with that.

Unassuming and moderate are worth exploring here.  For me, unassuming means knowing your value, but also leaving your mind open for the things you don’t know.  For example, an unassuming fighter would know the techniques they’re best at, but wouldn’t assume to know how successful they would be against a hypothetical opponent.

In a universe with nearly infinite variables – most of which are unknown to us – any prediction of the future is an assumption.  Being unassuming is simply a more honest and accurate understanding of yourself and the universe you exist within.  Being moderate, in this case, could probably be defined as without bias.  Without a desire to understate or overstate one’s abilities, the middle ground would be a moderate estimation – again, the most honest and accurate understanding.

Perhaps there will always be people who would prefer that high achievers keep their achievements to themselves to minimize feelings of insecurity.  For the rest of us however, I think it’s important to understand that modesty isn’t a function of class, or making others feel better about themselves, it’s a function of honesty and accuracy.

If you’re great, be great, do great.

 

Random Inventions: The Nice Horn

I often observe behavior on the road and try to use that behavior to better understand the driver behind the wheel.  What does it say about a person when they’re weaving from lane to lane without signaling?  What does it say when they don’t notice that the light has turned green?  What does it say when they’re content cruising along at exactly the speed limit?  I find human behavior to be fascinating and seeing how we interact on the roads is certainly a unique glimpse.

It occurred to me a while back that despite how well coordinated drivers have to be with one another to avoid accidents and maintain order on the road, we’re not given much to communicate with.  For the most part, it’s just the horn.  The horn is not the most pleasant sound.  When most people use it in anger and frustration, most people probably perceive it as an aggressively unpleasant sound.  When our only mode of communication with one another on the road is aggressive unpleasantness, I wonder how that impacts how we drive.

So why not a secondary horn, with an audible sound that implies ‘thanks!’?  I know there’s the double tap of the standard horn, but still, why not a secondary horn?  No one blink screw you, two blinks for thanks, a genuinely happy sound that says I appreciate your conduct on the road.  Simple mechanics, simple market research effort to determine the sound, and a meaningful step towards more positive lines of communication with one another.  I’m looking at you Elon..

Analogies: Capitalism

a long time ago, someone designed a car.  It was beautifully engineered and truly revolutionary.  It was so well designed that it was pretty much built to last forever.

While the car was a something for the history books, the drivers were inconsistent.  Some understood the mechanics and drove respectfully.  Some showed less regard for the car and drove as it suited their agenda.

Along the way, drivers began allowing for more passengers.  Some for altruistic reasons, some because they paid, and some for the sake of personal relationships.

The car was built well enough to handle a few extra passengers, but as passengers increased and time wore on, key parts of the car started to wear down.  All the added weight was creating excessive pressure, leading to wear on parts that the car couldn’t function without.

Some of the older passengers are looking out the window saying the car looks just fine.  They can tell that the ride is bumpier but it’s hard to notice in a cushy seat.  They know that car was built to last and they know it’s gotten them this far.

Those who are more familiar see that the car is unsustainable.  If we maintain this rate of passengers, the car will fail.  If we want to reduce the amount of passengers, we can keep the car on the road.

Ironically, we’re so focused on the survival of old reliable, that we haven’t given any thought to the new models.  Technology changes everything.  As great as that car was, modern technology has changed how we get from point A to point B and it’s important to appreciate those changes.  There are ideas which we didn’t have the technology to pull off before but could be more viable today.

It’s dangerous assuming there’s no room for improvement.  Might be a good time to look at some options.  Even better, why don’t we look at what we need from our car, learn from our peers, and build something new and inspiring from the ground up.

 

 

 

Real Diversity

Google is a pretty big deal.  They hire cool people, they make cool stuff, and they’re arguably the world’s most valuable company.  I’ve been studying Google closely for over a decade and one of their most impressive assets has always been their organizational culture.

Recently, a Google engineer wrote a 10 page memo outlining his thoughts on diversity in tech.  Coverage of this memo made it to the front page of just about every major news feed and the  loudest commentary has been pretty one-sided… something to the effect of ‘how dare he?’

After I read the first article referencing the memo, I got the gist of what was going on.  A male employee said some things which suggested that men are better suited to work in tech than women.  Then I read a few of the comments after the article and got the gist of what was going on there too… men and women are equal in every way and to suggest otherwise is offensive, immoral, and shows a lack of empathy and understanding for the systematic oppression that white men have put on all other minorities since forever.

Oy.

Recently, a well-known tennis legend suggested that Serena Williams was the greatest female player of all time.  Then he was asked why not the greatest of all time instead of the greatest female player of all time?  To which he responded by saying that she wouldn’t do nearly as well on the men’s circuit.  I thought that was a fair and accurate understanding of the situation and by no means diminished Serena’s legacy.  I think it’s also fair and reasonable that in order to claim the title of greatest tennis player ever, you’d have to be willing to compete against the best tennis players – regardless of their gender.

This all seemed pretty straight forward to me.  Men and women have evolved differently over the millennia and while women became better equipped to care for the family, men became better equipped for the role of hunting and gathering.  The evolutionary advantages which men have acquired tend to make us better athletes thus providing an inherent advantage when competing in sports.  If that’s true, is possible that other evolutionary differences exist between men and women?

One of my biggest struggles with romantic relationships when I was younger was that I expected the other person in the relationships to see and understand the world like I did.  Eventually I was given that book about women being from Venus and men being from Mars.  While I didn’t read it, hearing a few passages was enough to help me understand that men and women are wired differently and that it was important to keep those differences in mind.  While I think the most significant differences come down to the people themselves, the most consistent pattern I’ve seen in the difference between men and women is that men tend to lean towards logic while women tend to lean towards emotion.  If that’s true, wouldn’t men – on average – be better suited towards jobs that relied heavily on logic skills?

In the pursuit of understanding, I asked two of the most intelligent feminists I know about evolutionary adaptation giving men the abilities to do certain tasks better than women.  One said that she didn’t want to get into it because it was too much emotional labor.  The other was offended by the idea and then said that she was too reactive to have the conversation. Ironically, in the second instance a nearby cardiologist chimed in saying that she agreed with the evolutionary perspective but pointed out that there were always exceptions (like women being better open-water long-distance swimmers because of their fat distribution).

Back to the Google memo.   If you were just going to read headlines and comments, you’d think that this kid was a contributor at Breitbart and that his ‘anti-diversity manifesto’ was right-wing propaganda that was designed to prop up white privilege and repress visible minorities in tech.  None of material referenced in this articles actually showed that perspective and knowing that Google typically doesn’t hire right-wing nut jobs, I sensed a disconnect.  So I tracked down the original memo and read the whole thing.

It’s not that bad.  In fact, it’s kinda good.  The opening line is, “I value diversity and inclusion, I am not denying that sexism exists, and don’t endorse using stereotypes.”  There are several more points throughout the memo that provide the necessary context to understand that James Damore values diversity, and wants to see diversity in the workplace, but thinks that a diversity of the mind is more important than a diversity of the body.

In the pursuit of that point, he suggests that there are several reasons why we’re likely to see lower numbers of women in tech.  He acknowledges that there is a systematic oppression of women in tech, but says that this might only be part of the issue and that part of it might be evolutionary.  He goes on to reference several studies which compare personality traits between men and women, suggesting  – on average – women have higher levels of anxiety and don’t cope with stress as well as their male counterparts.  Ironically, I had actually reviewed many of these studies a couple weeks prior as I was exploring evolutionary differences as a result of the Serena Williams conversation.

Science itself is an evolutionary process and from what I’ve read so far, the scientific community has a consensus that men and women are wired differently.  Where it becomes more grey is in how that develops into aptitude.  I suspect that with the ground that women have covered in the last 100 years and recognizing that the female population in post secondary education now eclipses men, the next 50 years will look much different than the last 50 years.  If we do it right, both men and women will have the opportunity to choose the profession that they’re best equipped for – but I don’t think that means that every job will have a equal representation of men and women.

I think that equality is a core concept to any prosperous society but I do think that the populist understanding of equality needs to evolve.  Equality is about equal opportunity, not equal outcome.  In the world of equal outcome, everyone receives a PB&J sandwich for lunch.  In the world of equal opportunity, everyone is given an opportunity to make the sandwich they want to eat.

Everyone is born a little different and it is a life built on that deviation which truly makes us unique to the world.  Because we are unique, each of us has the ability to provide something to the world that no one else can and it is the delivery of this gift to the world which I think makes us truly happy.  I know that’s a bit abstract and maybe even a bit fluffy so on a more grounded level, we’re all a little different, we all have a unique aptitude, and deploying that aptitude in a manner that helps us get closer to our maximum utility is likely what will make us happy and fulfilled.  If that’s true, isn’t true equality giving everyone the opportunity to reach their own, unique maximum utility?  If tech is biologically better suited for men, reaching a 50/50 quota of men/women will mean women who would otherwise be better suited and happier doing other activities will work in tech and men who would be best suited for tech will have to work in another field because those spots have been taken.

As hard as it can be to make this connection for some, it always comes down to an equation of efficiency.  The most efficient course of action is to encourage people to pursue careers in fields which will help them reach their maximum utility.  That’s a career which would see them happiest, most fulfilled, and creating their greatest contributions to society.  A perfect society is one in which everyone operates at their maximum utility and I think that’s the ideal of equality that people are pursuing – many just haven’t figured out how to get there yet.

The last thing I’ll touch on here which may be the most important part of this conversation is the lack of conversation.  I think that what I’ve written here would suggest that I agree with James Damore’s assessment of women in tech.  I don’t.  I think that he references some valid information, I think that he makes some coherent points, and I think that he’s legitimately looking to advocate for an ideological diversity over a visible diversity because at the end of the day, it’s what’s on the inside that matters.  I also think that there are too many unknown variables to draw direct conclusions between evolutionary biology and aptitude for jobs that didn’t exist 25 years ago.  The social, cultural, academic, and systemic variables are key in understanding this dynamic and they’re changing faster than we’re currently able to understand them.

If understanding them is a priority for us, we need to invest in the discussions that will flush out the real questions and invest in the sciences that will give us that data to answer those real questions.  I don’t agree with James Damore, but I absolutely agree with how he presented his thoughts and it is a remarkable failure when our ability to challenge these ideas devolves into comments like ‘this doesn’t even warrant a response’, or ‘how dare he?’.  It shows a lack of understanding of the topic at hand, a fear of opposing ideologies, and reluctance to engage with someone who doesn’t agree with your perspective.  James Damore was fired from one of the most important companies in the world because he intelligently argued a perspective not shared by the majority of his peers.  In the pursuit of diversity, Google just took a major step towards preventing the diversity of ideas.

 

Thought Vs. Emotion

I think that by most people’s standards, I’ve had a challenging life.  I also think that by most people’s standards, I brought most of it on myself – and I would agree.  I have a long history of taking things that should be easy, and finding ways of making them hard.  I’m not actually sure why I have this quality, but I am starting to understand the impact it has on my life.

Each time I put myself in a challenging situation, I had to figure it out.  It wasn’t that I lacked a support system, it’s just that my support system would usually suggest that if I got myself into it, I can get myself out of it.  Over the years, I developed a system that was effectively: Understand where you’re at, understand where you want to be, and find a way to close the gap.  I think the key word there is understand.  It was an exercise in problem solving in the arena of thought.

My father passed away in my mid-20s.  He and I were close – he meant a lot to me.  It was cancer and he lasted about 2 years between diagnosis and death.  Towards the end, I remember having a conversation with a friend about how it would impact me.  I had noticed a pattern over the years which suggested that each time I went through something like this, I became a less emotional person.  Despite all the other challenges I had overcome, I knew that losing my dad would impact me more than anything I had ever been through and I was concerned about how it would impact my emotional disposition – would I have any left?

In the month that my dad died, the first girl I thought I’d marry left me for her ex-boyfriend, I tore my shoulder, and the promotion which I had just moved cities for was rescinded.  After I wrapped up the responsibilities around my father’s estate, I decided it was important to give myself time to grieve to prevent any future imbalance.  The following week was a combination of work, family sized lasagnas, weed, and a few movies that legitimately made me bawl my eyes out (the dad scene in Warrior got me good).  By the end of that week, I figured that the best thing I could do for my father, for myself, and for those who counted on me was to rise above and move forward.  I accepted that my father may have died earlier than I would’ve liked, but I also recognized that he led the kind of life that most people would aspire to.  He had a family who loved him, he was a master of his craft, he built and sold a business, he was respected within his community, and he was the giant upon whose shoulders I would stand on.  I had to wrap my head around that death was part of the natural order in which we all existed, and that I should be proud of the life that my father lived.  I don’t know if it was easy or hard, but I did.

I spent the next 6 months identifying where I was in my life, where I wanted to be, and worked on closing the gap.  By the end of that year, I was headed back home for a new career in wealth management for one of the world’s top global banks.  The loss of my father was never a source of depression for me, instead, I chose to use his memory as a source of inspiration and drive.  Even to this day, everything that I do is in some way for him.

I was often complimented on how well I handled the passing of my father.  I was called very well adjusted.  However, my concerns about becoming a less emotional person seemed to be valid.  The girls I dated since likely saw the same thing.  One said that I was driven, but not passionate.  Another said that I was empty inside.  My favorite though, and perhaps the girl who understood me best, called me her benevolent robot king.  I was a high functioning human being in most respects, but I did it without what most people would call emotion.  I don’t have the wisdom necessary to make any conclusions, but I’m starting to think that there some validity to operating without emotion.

This is where I think it’s important to define the term emotion.  Google’s definition suggests that emotion is a natural instinctive state of mind deriving from one’s circumstances, mood and relationships with others.  For me, the key word is instinctive and I think there’s a key difference between instinct and thought.  I’m sitting here trying to think of exactly what that is and I don’t think I can define it just yet.  When I try, I think of instinct like firmware and thought like software.  The firmware came with the hardware and can be tough to update.  Software however can be updated often depending on the applications you want to run and the tasks you’re looking to accomplish.

Before modern cognition, instincts were paramount to survival.  In modern society, our instinctual drives often seem counter-productive.  Easy examples include men cheating on their spouses because of their instinctual drive to procreate with multiple partners or women searching for men with the physique and resources to protect and provide for them.  If we were to understand these types of behaviors as instinctual and left over evolutionary characteristics from a past era, I think we’d understand each other a little better.  Unfortunately, this is where ’emotions and feelings’ come into play.

In many of my relationships, I was told that I had to respect their emotions or respect their feelings.  I understood that I should respect the person and that their emotional state is part of who they are, but I didn’t understand why I should inherently respect their emotions.  Perhaps my favorite example is when a girlfriend spent the day angry at me because I had cheated on her in a dream – for the record, I’ve never cheated.  I understood and appreciated that she had sensory input that triggered instinctual fears of losing a mate but what I didn’t understand is why it was acceptable for her to ‘feel’ upset with me let alone why that state of mind should be respected.

The more rational I became, the more challenging I was for someone who was emotional.  I was still nice, I still wanted to be a good person and I was still working hard to make a positive impact in the world, but thought and emotion were often two different perspectives in the world and one often struggled to understand the other.  What I’m going to say next might ruffle some feathers, and I could be wrong, but it’s my current evolution of thought on the matter.  I think that thought is a higher form of cognition than emotion.  I’m not prepared to say that one is better than the other, or that one leads to a happier life, but I am prepared to say that on average, thinking things through is a more successful approach than feeling things out.

When I think of humanity’s greatest thinkers and what they’ve accomplished, I’m inspired.  When I think of humanity’s greatest feelers and what they’ve accomplished, I draw a blank.  When I think of humanity’s worst, I think of people who let hate and prejudice get the better of them.  Hate is an emotional state while prejudice is a lack of thought.  However, I cannot accurate say that all good things come from thought while all bad things come from emotion because without emotion, where’s the love?

This would surprise many, but as rational and robotic as I am, I still cry on a regular basis.  I’d say about once a month, I see something beautiful or something sad that touches me and gets me misty eyed at the very least.  It was the kind of thing that I would fight when I was younger but I embrace now.  Fear doesn’t really register with me the way that it does with other people, but I do have a very real concern about losing that connection because there is something that feels very human about it.  Something that I respect and appreciate about emotion is that the best moments in my life were emotional.  Happiness is an emotional state of mind.

Where I’ll leave this for today is a theory that I’m working on.  We only have one body, we only have one central nervous system, and we only have one brain.  On that basis, emotion and thought have to be connected.  Emotion seems to have a stronger connection to the body and the subconscious while thought seems to have a stronger connection to the outside world.  I think that in earlier stages of evolution, instinctual drives and internal monitors were more closely associated with survival but as we’ve created the world we live in today, it’s become increasingly important to understand the outside world.  Trying to understand the outside world with an instinctual or emotional perspective can be limiting so thought has become more important.  As the outside world progresses, we continue to develop physical and intellectual tools to help understand what’s happening internally.  Currently, I’m trying to understand what will happen to emotion if we continue along this path.  I don’t think that the emotional state will disappear completely, but I do think that it’s importance will diminish as our understanding of how it fits into general cognition evolves.  How Vulcan…

 

Redemption of a Marijuana Addict

Not long ago, I wrote a piece on my addiction to marijuana.  It wasn’t that I couldn’t stop when I wanted to – because I had several times before – it was that I didn’t want to.

I spent the last 4 years of my life managing portfolios for high net-worth individuals at one of the world’s most recognized banks.  I’m no stranger to long hours and high pressure environments – that’s my comfort zone.  This was different though and it took me a while to figure out why.  In a nutshell, the industry is marketed as advice but it’s structured entirely as sales.  Your only performance criteria is bringing in new money, but if you were honest about that with your clients, you wouldn’t have any clients.  Trying to do right by my clients while appeasing management was a daily battle and one which I was losing because I wouldn’t compromise my commitment to my clients.  This was my own personal hell – being completely invested in something that required me to compromise my integrity and my character to achieve success.

By most people’s standards, I don’t really stress out about things.  I’m usually Mr. Cool Calm and Collected but I think part of that is how I manage myself.  The gym is a great outlet – so was smoking a ton of weed.  I never smoked before or at work because of my professional standards, but I smoked just about every night before bed.  I did take a few breaks, including a 6 month break to prove to myself that I could stop when I wanted to – but had decided that I’d rather smoke weed.  It made life more enjoyable.. or maybe more tolerable.

In the last stage of my career at the bank, I moved to join a senior team to insulate me from management and remove my sales targets.  To ensure that I could respond with my best effort, I took another hiatus from weed.  Management wasn’t having any of it and fired me in the first week of January.  The first thing I did after leaving the office was sign up at the local dispensary and  I spent most of the next month stoned.  The following month, I broke my arm.  Rather than take the opiates they prescribed to me, I spent the next couple months stoned *all* of the time.  At my peak, I was smoking an ounce per week.

I smoked so much that it seemed like I had disassociated from everyone else’s reality and only existed within my own.  With a logical mind, a knack for research, and a priority of having the most accurate view of my world – I was able to understand why I had failed so spectacularly.  Global banks are massive corporate entities which operate in heavily regulated environments.  They’re structured for the purpose of stability – maintaining the status quo.  At the very core of my being, it’s in my nature to challenge the status quo.  That was a very important insight that helped me understand that if I was going to achieve the levels of success that I wanted for myself – my maximum utility – I needed to seek out a different environment.

I moved back home and started looking into tech, venture capital, and cannabis.  Tech looked like it would take some time to find the right opportunity but there were opportunities.  Venture capital gave me some very interesting advice.  They said that all the qualities that made me a pain in the ass for the big banks were the same qualities that made me a great leader and an effective CEO for a much smaller company – then they said go be a CEO.  When I looked into cannabis, I went to my favourite dispensary and spoke with the owners about making some introductions.  They said they’d be happy to but then we started getting into their expansion plans.

Last year, they were awarded top dispensary in the city and top dispensary in the country.  It wasn’t hard to understand why, they had the finest herb, a brilliantly designed shop, and a caliber of staff which made the experience far more like a casual wine tasting than buying a drink at a bar.  Their reputation had plenty of people approaching them offering to invest to help them expand and this was all foreign territory for them.  I offered to help in any way I could and they appreciated it.  A couple weeks later, I built a business plan for their expansion.  A week after that, they asked me to lead their capital raise.  A week after that, I introduced them to the top cannabis VC in town and a week after that, we were competing for a slot at the Arcview Investor Forum (think sharktank for week).

When we first discussed the game plan, we were going to start the raise towards the end of the summer.  It was going to give us time to clean up the books, do a legal restructure, roll out some strategic marketing, and refine our vision for what came next.  Unfortunately for us, our deadline for qualifying for the Arcview forum was 45 days.  I told them no problem – long hours and high pressure was my jam and I’d be happy to lead the charge.  They accepted and we were off to the races.

For the few weeks leading up to this, I had a few moments where I told myself that it was time to take another break but smoking weed was way too effective at alleviating my boredom and far too useful in helping me sleep.  When I took this project on however, it was no longer about me.  I had committed myself to something that deserved my best effort, to people who deserved my best effort, and to something which I was legitimately passionate about doing.  I told the founders that they were going to get the best out of me if I was sober and so I was making a commitment that I wouldn’t blaze until we raise.  The founders were a mix of amused, confused, and happy that I was so committed.

Just about every day started at 6am and ended at midnight.  Weekends were irrelevant.  Any time I spent not working on this project was time I spent maintaining the level of balance necessary to get the most out of the hours I was putting in.  My commutes were filled with calls.  My meals out were with key contacts.  My meals in were spent watching material relevant to this project.  I was consumed – and couldn’t be happier.

I’ve never been this engaged.  I’ve never been this excited to be a part of something either.  This is the first time in my life that I’ve been able to apply my mind like this and I feel like I’m in my element.  This is my jam.  The harder I work, the more I want to work at it.  The more we push forward, the more obstacles and barriers seem to dissolve in front of us.  The best part?  The core values behind the business have very little to do with cannabis – it has everything to do with social freedoms.  To borrow a line from Starbucks, ‘we’re in the business of social freedom, we just happen to sell cannabis’.  That’s something I can get behind all day long and I seem to have a bottomless pit of energy and passion for it.

The craziest part? I kinda forgot about weed and I think there’s a super important lesson there.  If I look throughout my life at the times when I was smoking most, there’s a pattern.  They were also the times where I was the least satisfied with my life.  It’s easy to say that I was using it to unwind, or de-stress, but I can’t help but think that those are euphemisms for an escape.  When I was stoned, I was no longer concerned with my daily struggles.  It put my mind elsewhere – sometimes nowhere.  Now that I get to spend my waking hours pouring everything I have and everything I know into a totally worthy cause, being stoned isn’t nearly as appealing.

Before we made our submission, I had some of the city’s top VCs and CEOs review the pitch materials before our submission.  The response was unanimous and tremendously positive.  One of the top investors at Arcview was local and was beyond impressed.  The ‘chief mentor’ at Arcview said that this was so well done that he expected Arcview investors to reach out to us directly in such a high volume that we’d complete the raise before we even reached the forum.  We were pumped.

Last week, we submitted our pitch package to the Arcview Group and while we scored the highest score of any submission that round – we scored just below their cut-off for the investor forum next month.  This was a remarkably frustrating experience.  Those who were supposed to qualify us were supposed to read through our executive summary and team bio, go through our pitch deck, and then watch the pitch video for which we were available for a live Q&A after.  The video was played through GoToMeeting – meaning that it was too choppy to watch.  The questions being asked in the live Q&A made it evident that they hadn’t even looked at the rest of our materials.  It was remarkably frustrating.

That night, I had a friend and his wife over for dinner.  He brought a joint.  I said no at first, but then I rationalized it.  I poured myself into this process and put forward something that I was incredibly proud of.  While it didn’t receive the result I wanted, I still qualified it as a success.  The joint was part stress-relief and part reward for an effort I was genuinely proud of – and I’m happy that I did.

I went from a state of frustration to a state of relaxation.  Without the preoccupation of the day’s failure, I was able to be more present and enjoy the company of my friends.  Colours were brighter, the food was better, and the music was especially good – I felt elevated.

I had been such a heavy user of cannabis for so long that I had burnt out my cannabinoid receptors to the point where no matter how much weed I smoked, it simply brought be back to a baseline of haziness.  I had abused the drug rather than used it.  I can’t stress enough, how important of a lesson that was for me.  For me, this wasn’t a lesson in yes you should or no you shouldn’t, it was a lesson in balance.  I doubt this journey is over, but these last few months have been a remarkable learning experience… and I’m just getting started.