I keep waiting for motivation to arrive as a clean signal, the moment I suddenly feel ready to write, train, clear the inbox, or start the thing I’ve been circling. Most of the time, that moment doesn’t announce itself. I open the file while I still don’t want to write. I put on the shoes before I want to run. I review one note before I feel like doing the review.

Here’s the part I’m trying to remember: action often creates the motivation I was waiting for.

This isn’t a new idea. Aristotle, Newton, James Clear, and BJ Fogg all circled some version of it, action begets action. One of the earliest studies to put it under a microscope came out of the University of Washington, where Jacobson, Martell, and Dimidjian were researching depression. They found that inaction feels like relief in the moment. But it backfires: the less you do, the worse you feel, and the worse you feel, the less you do. Inertia compounds in the wrong direction.

The common mistake is treating motivation like the starting gun. Once I feel motivated, I’ll write the draft. Once I feel energetic, I’ll train. Once the idea feels clear, I’ll open the note and turn it into something useful. That works on the lucky days. But it makes the habit depend on a state I don’t fully control, and the longer I wait for that state, the larger the task grows. Now I’m not just avoiding the work, I’m carrying the extra weight of having avoided it.

This is where the last two issues run out of road. A system can capture and review ideas, that’s what the Zettelkasten and the weekly review were for, but it can’t write the sentence for me. At some point, the bottleneck shifts from organization to initiation.

The loop, not the chain

James Clear wrote in Atomic Habits that habits fire most naturally when a cue triggers them. The trap is tying that cue to something outside your control, a mood, a burst of inspiration, the right song. Do that, and you’ve handed your motivation to the will of the universe. The fix is to tie the cue to the one thing you can control: starting.

Because action and motivation aren’t a one-way chain. They’re a loop. Action creates feedback, feedback changes emotion, and emotion makes the next action easier. The first step isn’t there to finish the work; it’s there to change the state of the system. Opening the file makes writing more likely than thinking about writing. Putting on the shoes makes running more likely than negotiating from the couch. As Mark Manson puts it in The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck, “Action isn’t just the effect of motivation; it’s also the cause of it.”

Other writers keep arriving at this from different directions. Hal Elrod notes in The Miracle Morning that successful people “don’t always like doing these things themselves; they just get on and do them.” BJ Fogg, in Tiny Habits, comes at the same loop from the other end: “One tiny action, one small bite, might feel insignificant at first, but it allows you to gain the momentum you need to ramp up to bigger challenges and faster progress.” Start before you feel like it, and the small action does the rest; the mood follows the motion, not the other way around.

It helps to stop treating motivation like an appointment with someone who has a full schedule, miss the slot, and you’ve blown the whole day. You can shrink the expectation instead. Not the full essay, one paragraph. Not the whole inbox, a few items. Not an hour, two to ten minutes. Progress is progress, and it can shrink or expand to fill the time you actually have. This is why tiny starts work better than they look. The two-minute rule isn’t magic. It’s a way of shrinking the first decision until resistance has less to grab onto.

What this looks like

For me, that’s changed how writing gets done. I used to struggle to find the time, meaning a clean hour to sit, read, and process a full research paper. Now writing is broken into smaller pieces: research, reading, thesis, outline, draft, and calls to action. None of them depend on the others being finished first. I can do a little research and write a few sentences of an outline in the same sitting. Scattered thoughts are allowed. They’re still action, and they still move the piece forward.

This issue is an example. I didn’t feel ready to write it. The first task wasn’t “write the essay”, it was to open the file and put one rough sentence under the section that felt least intimidating. Sometimes that sentence survives. Usually it doesn’t. But it breaks the blankness, and once there’s a sentence, I can react to it: sharpen it, move it, cut it, write the next one. The draft stops being an idea I’m avoiding and becomes an object I can adjust.

If you want to run the experiment, it’s simple:

1. Define the smallest visible start, small enough that refusing it feels silly.

2. Attach it to a cue you already hit: after coffee, after opening the laptop, after the kids are down, before checking the news.

3. Stop negotiating once you reach the cue. Just do the tiny start.

4. Set a timer for two minutes. When it goes off, notice whether the resistance feels lower than when you began. If it does, keep going.

One caveat. This is for inertia, not depletion. Some days you’re genuinely tired, sick, or overloaded, and the right iteration is recovery, not a two-minute start. The point isn’t to override your body. It’s to stop letting a temporary lack of motivation masquerade as a permanent verdict on the work.

I’m not trying to eliminate resistance. I’m trying to stop treating resistance as a sign that I should wait. Most of the things I want to build, writing, training, learning, maintaining a system, don’t begin with a dramatic shift in mood. They begin with a small action that gives the next action somewhere to stand.

So try a one-two-minute start this week. Open the file. Put on the shoes. Process one note. Do the version so small it almost feels silly, then notice what happens after the action begins. Reply and tell me whether the action changed the motivation that followed.

Subscribe now

The real bottleneck is the weekly moment you decide what any of it means.

That is the part I keep coming back to after writing about the Zettelkasten trap in Issue #1. Capture is no longer the hard part. Quick capture, web clippers, Readwise sync, mobile inboxes, templates, tags, folders, and backlinks — we have built plenty of machinery to get ideas into the system.

But a knowledge system without review slowly becomes a graveyard.

The weekly review is the step that turns a pile of text into something my brain can actually use.

I think about a personal knowledge system in stages: capture, organize, retrieve, reflect, and output. Capture gets most of the attention because it feels good. I notice something useful, save it, and get the small satisfaction of having preserved it.

Review asks me to slow down and make decisions. Is this note still useful? Does it connect to something I already know? Does it belong in a project? Is it an idea I should write about, or just something I liked for five minutes and can safely let go? That is why review is easy to avoid. The inbox grows. The highlights pile up. The system looks full, but the thinking gets thinner.

A system I never revisit cannot support my thinking. It can only file things away that I may or may not find again later.

The reframe I am testing now is that review is not housekeeping.

It includes housekeeping, of course. I still need to clear inboxes, clean up titles, add tags, and link notes where it makes sense. Those are useful maintenance tasks. But if that is all the weekly review does, I am still mostly living in capture mode.

The deeper value of review is retrieval. When I open a note from six days ago and ask myself what it means, I am not just organizing it. I am practicing remembering it. Daniel Doyon describes active recall as challenging the mind to retrieve information instead of passively reviewing the same material. That is what a good weekly review can become: a small active recall session for the ideas I claimed were important enough to save.

Sonke Ahrens makes a similar point from another angle in How to Take Smart Notes: fleeting notes only become useful if I review them soon and turn them into something I can use later.

Taken together, that changes the purpose of the weekly review. It is not just the moment where I tidy the system. It is the moment where I test whether the system is still connected to my actual mind.

This is where spaced repetition starts to feel relevant. I am not trying to turn every note into a flashcard. That would be its own kind of trap. But I do want a rhythm where important ideas resurface before they go cold.

In practice, my review has two main inputs right now: Org-roam captures and Readwise highlights. Org-roam holds my quick captures, half-formed ideas, project thoughts, and older notes that still need to be split into more atomic pieces. Readwise is where outside ideas enter the system. Highlights come in with context, but they still need attention before they become useful.

The simple version of the review looks like this:

1. Open the inboxes.

2. Pick the notes and highlights that still feel alive.

3. Ask active recall questions before editing anything.

4. Link, tag, or rewrite only after I have tried to say the idea in my own words.

5. Move at least one idea toward output.

The questions matter more than the cleanup.

What is the core idea here, in my own words? What problem does this solve or address? Where could I apply this right now? What does it connect to that I already know? If I had to explain it to someone else, what would I say?

Those questions keep the review from becoming a filing session. They force me to retrieve the meaning of the note.

I am still not as disciplined about this as I want to be. My review rhythm is better than it was, but it is not automatic. I can still let Readwise highlights accumulate for too long. I can still defer the harder work of rewriting a messy note because tagging it feels like progress. The system is improving, but the habit is still catching up.

What has changed is that I can now tell the difference between a review that clears the inbox and a review that improves retrieval. Clearing the inbox leaves me with less visible clutter. Improving retrieval leaves me with an idea I can actually use.

The weekly review is not the glamorous part of a Second Brain. Nobody gets excited about opening an inbox and confronting a stack of half-processed thoughts. Nobody wants to dig through old notes to check if they still remember the content. But it is the moment that decides whether the system becomes a thinking tool or an organized archive.

Try this once this week: block 20 minutes, open your note inbox or Readwise highlights, and find one thing you forgot you captured. Before you tag it, move it, or clean it up, explain it in your own words. Then decide what it connects to and whether it deserves a next action.

That small act is the system working.

Reply with where your current system breaks down: capture, review, retrieval, or output.

800 notes and zero output. Sound familiar?

That was my Zettelkasten trap.

The problem with Zettelkasten and other PKM methods is just how easy they make capture feel. Read something interesting, clip the highlight, write a quick note, add a tag, maybe link it to another note. Each action makes the system feel stronger.

But after a while, I had to ask the uncomfortable question one writer put plainly: “I have 4,000 notes in my vault. Cool. What came out of them?”

I started seeing versions of that question everywhere: impressive vaults, elaborate graphs, careful tags, and very little to show for it. So it wasn’t just me.

A note system only becomes useful when it reliably turns captured ideas into retrieval, reflection, and output.

The common assumption is that if we capture enough, inspiration will eventually arrive. More notes means more raw material, more connections, and eventually more output.

That story makes sense. It also lets capture become the work.

Capture is the easiest part of knowledge work. It asks very little from us. We notice something, preserve it, and move on. Retrieval, reflection, and output are harder because they require decisions. What does this mean? What am I going to make from it?

The internet already beats most personal note systems as a reference library. AI has made that even more obvious. What they don’t have is my trail of attention: the ideas I found surprising, useful, frustrating, or personal over years of reading and working.

The reframe I’m working with now is simple: a note system is a pipeline, not a storage bin.

If the note is the final resting place of an idea, the system is mostly an archive. Archives are useful, but they are not working systems. A working system has movement. Something enters, is processed, revisited, and eventually becomes a decision, outline, draft, project, or conversation.

David Allen’s GTD describes a full loop: capture, clarify, organize, reflect, engage. Most PKM conversations spend a lot of time on capture and organization. Those are important, but they are not the whole loop.

For my own system, I think about the back half of the pipeline in three stages: retrieval, reflection, and output.

Retrieval asks whether I can find the right note at the right moment. Reflection is where raw notes become thinking again. Output is the honest metric: did the system help me write, decide, or plan?

My Zettelkasten had almost none of this.

I captured constantly and reviewed rarely. I had a lot of notes, but few projects pulling those notes forward. Retrieval was mostly theoretical. I had built a place for knowledge to accumulate without building enough pressure for that knowledge to become anything.

So the current iteration has not been “find a better capture method.” It has been adding the missing back half of the pipeline.

The first step was consolidation. Over the years, I had notes scattered across different systems and formats. Bringing them into one place made retrieval immediately more realistic. Once the notes lived together, I could use Emacs, consult, and ripgrep to search the whole collection. That alone changed the system for me.

The second step was reflection, and that is where the experiment got more interesting. One idea I took from Sonke Ahrens’ How to Take Smart Notes is that notes should become more atomic over time. My problem was that I had no reliable way to see which notes needed that treatment.

This is where I began using AI in the review process.

With help from Claude Code, I worked on getting my notes into a structure that AI could analyze by concept, not just by tag. I processed them using Voyage AI embeddings and added them to ChromaDB, which made the collection more searchable in Claude Code. From there, Claude could identify notes that were not yet atomic and suggest categories across the larger collection.

The categorization has been especially valuable. These notes came from roughly ten years of different systems, so many of the connections were buried under old formats and inconsistent habits. I could have found some of them manually, eventually. But not enough to make the system feel alive again.

That does not mean the system is solved. It means the next bottleneck is clearer. I can retrieve more than I used to. I can identify notes that need work. I can see categories and connections that were previously hidden. Now the question is whether I can turn that into a steady output rhythm.

That is the real test.

If you suspect your PKM has become sophisticated procrastination, try a simple litmus test: in the last 30 days, what concrete output can you point to that directly came from your notes? Then ask the follow-up: what recurring ritual turns those notes into next actions, outlines, drafts, or decisions?

If you can’t answer both, you may not have a note-taking system yet. You may have a capture system with good branding.

The good news is that the fix probably is not another tool switch. Start smaller. Add one weekly review. Pick one project. Pull the relevant notes into a folder or outline. Produce one small artifact from them.

Then notice where the pipeline breaks.

That is where the next iteration starts.

Reply with the place your note system most often stops helping and starts becoming maintenance.

Subscribe now

You’ve been here before. Someone posts a video or writes up their “perfect productivity system,” and something clicks. You spend a Saturday evening building it out, tweaking it to fit your life, maybe even improving on a few things. You go to bed thinking this is the one. You wake up on Monday, genuinely excited to put it to work.

And it works. For a while.

A few weeks in, the energy fades. The system is still there, technically. But you are not really using it the way you imagined. The tasks pile up, the reviews get skipped, and eventually you feel just as stuck as you did before you built the thing.

Most of us have no idea what productivity actually looks like in practice.

We picture it as a state of flow: tasks evaporating, inbox empty, the day humming along without friction. So we build toward that vision. We architect task managers, wire up automations, and design the perfect weekly review. We spend a Saturday getting our Obsidian vault just right. And then Monday arrives, and we go back to operating exactly as we did before.

Here is the uncomfortable observation: we enjoy building the system more than we enjoy using it. The build has a feedback loop. Clear progress, creative problem-solving, the satisfying click of a new workflow snapping into place. The use of the system? That is just Tuesday.

But I do not think this is a character flaw. I think it is a signal.

That energy you feel during the build, the curiosity, the momentum, the sense that you are solving something, that is what productive thinking actually feels like. You just aimed it at the wrong target.

The reframe: stop treating productivity as a state to achieve and start treating it as a problem to solve.

Before you try to fix your system, it is worth asking a more honest question: are you inspired by the work itself, or are you just checking off tasks?

If it is the latter, that is okay. A lot of work exists to pay the bills, and it does not need to ignite you. A simple system that keeps you on track is enough. Reserve your creative energy for the things that actually light you up, a side project, a creative outlet, something outside of the day job. Not every part of life needs an elaborate productivity architecture.

But if your work genuinely inspires you and your system still feels like a drag, the problem is probably your approach. You might be running a “get as much done as possible” mindset when what the work actually needs is an “identify and solve the right problem” mindset. Those are not the same thing. Trying to crank through more tasks is not the same as doing the work that matters.

When you sit down to *solve a problem*, you have something specific to push against. That gives you the same building energy you had on that Saturday afternoon, except now it is pointed at the actual work.

The questions worth asking are not complicated:

• Instead of “am I being productive?” ask “what problem am I solving right now?”

• When you hit a wall, instead of assuming it's laziness, ask whether the problem is clearly defined enough to act on.

Think back to how you approached building that system. When something was not working, you researched. When you hit a flow state, you are probably adding your own creative spin to it, solving your specific problem rather than copying someone else’s. Every task on your list can be approached the same way. It is a solution waiting to be built.

The best productivity system is not the most sophisticated one. It is the one that costs the least energy to maintain and gets you back to doing real work as fast as possible.

Stop chasing the state. Chase the problem.

One iteration at a time.

Subscribe now

My daughter is four. She ran almost an entire 5K last weekend.

Our local school district hosts a Girls on the Run 5K each spring. My wife has been involved with the organization for years — she coached when she was teaching, and we’ve done the race together since before our daughter was born. When she was one, we pushed her in a stroller—last year involved a fair amount of carrying. This year, she ran it with her Nana, mostly hand in hand, stopping when she needed to, pushing herself when she didn’t. My wife and I walked alongside them.

Watching it, I had one of those obvious-in-retrospect realizations: she runs because we run. She’s been at these events her whole life. She sees me lace up and go into the garage to run on the treadmill or outside. She doesn’t think of fitness as a chore — it’s just something the people around her do. That’s not magic. That’s proximity and repetition, which is exactly how habits work.

The harder question that followed me home: Do I actually model what I want her to grow up believing? I’d say yes, mostly. We’re consistent. We prioritize movement. But “mostly” is doing some work there. I have seasons when I let things slide — when consistency drifts, when priorities shift. And I’ve started thinking more about what she’s absorbing in those stretches, too.

This isn’t guilt. It’s information. The kids-learn-from-what-they-see thing isn’t a pressure campaign; it’s just true, and it’s motivating in a way that “be healthy for yourself” sometimes isn’t. I have a very small, very concrete reason to keep showing up. Someone I care about is watching and learning.

I don’t know exactly what the next iteration looks like. Maybe it’s more visible, more “want to come on a walk?” moments instead of just going alone. More runs where she’s on her bike alongside. Letting her see the process, not just the output.

She’s four. She ran a 5K. I think I can keep up my end.

Subscribe now

Last weekend, I decided to do a bit of data cleanup and backup optimization. It has been a project I have wanted to do for a while, but it has always seemed so daunting. After completing it, I can say it was quite a bit of work, but completely worth it. All said and done, I probably spent around 12 hours doing the work. Here are the things I did.

1. Collect and consolidate notes from many locations.

2. Clean up the storage server and NAS.

3. Set up Gitea repos for “projects”.

4. Configure backups to Backblaze B2.

5. Setup Private Cloud for my Supernote e-ink tablet.

If it isn’t obvious, I really like to self-host my content and prefer not to use cloud storage when feasible. I would say this principle probably makes tasks like these more complicated, but in my mind, it is completely worth it.

Collect and Consolidate

Over the years, I have started and moved to several different note systems, including a few Obsidian vaults. As I changed structures, it became a considerable task to migrate my notes from one structure to another. So I would start from scratch.

This weekend, with a bit of assistance from Claude Code, I decided to tackle the beast and get all my old notes into my current system. I have kept my notes in plain text, so this is fairly straightforward. I gave Claude Code a prompt with my current file structure and old note systems. After a few follow-ups, the final product fit perfectly into my current note structure. Some follow-up tasks I might do later include cleaning up the large number of Readwise highlight notes from this consolidation. I have all my highlights in a single file that has been working well, so I don’t need the individual files.

Clean up storage servers.

Over the years, I have also accumulated files and backups on my storage servers. I have an Unraid media server with a file share. I also have a Synology NAS. I think my problem with these two was that I didn’t have a strategy for organization, so I just collected everything. I even had some Python projects with venv folders. If you don’t know anything about programming and Python, this is very inefficient. I was storing files that I could access at any time with an internet connection. I finally went through and cleaned up all those files and projects.

Gitea repos

I have my own git server using Gitea. Remember those coding projects? I moved them into my git server, which will be much better for tracking changes and encouraging me to work on them more. Why not put them in GitHub? I will refer you back to the top of this article, where I discussed my principles about data ownership.

Set up Backblaze B2 backups.

With all my files optimally organized, it would be a shame to lose them to a corrupted hard drive, a power surge, data theft, etc. So I took the time to set up some proper off-site backups. Truth be told, I’ve had Backblaze for a while now. I just never got around to setting up my backups. Don’t worry I have the pay as you go plan so I wasn’t paying anything while it was unused.

Private Cloud for Supernote

To top off the weekend, I did one more technical project. I have a Supernote e-ink tablet that I use to take notes on non-fiction reading. The tablet has long had the ability to sync files to the Supernote cloud, Google Drive, and Dropbox. The devs over at Supernote added the option to run a self-hosted sync server. They even have options for running the server on a Synology NAS. This was one of the hardest projects this weekend. There were many setup steps. I also ran into some errors I had to research, which ended up being specific to my network. In the end, I got it working.

Overall, I had a good technical weekend. I find myself in a state of flow working on these tasks. Even when I run into steps that require a bunch of troubleshooting, I still find joy in the work.

When it comes to staying healthy and maintaining our bodies, we talk about sleep, exercise, and diet quite a bit. These areas are easy to measure with metrics. Another important area that I don’t feel we talk about enough is back health. Back health doesn’t have measurements or metrics that we can easily measure at home.

First, let me add some context. I am 37 years old. I work as an Assistant Director for an organization that provides IT services to libraries throughout Colorado. I spend more than 40 hours a week at a desk. Over the last few years, I have started to notice progressively prominent back issues, and I began the long journey toward finding relief. The solution, I’m sorry to say, has not been one single thing but rather multiple iterative changes and additions over the course of years.

Subscribe now

So let’s get into the issues and why I think they exist. Most of my problems are in the upper back (shoulder blade area) and neck. I would also wake up with lower back stiffness. My job is a heavy contributor to these issues. Our bodies are simply not built for sitting at a computer desk all day. Phone use is another cause. Sleep position can also play a role.

What have I actually done about it? Here are the things I’ve tried that have had a lasting impact. I should note that I am not a doctor, so none of this should be taken as medical advice.

A split keyboard has been a game-changer for my posture while working. It lets me put my shoulders and arms in a more natural position. With a regular keyboard, my arms come together to form a “V” shape, which I noticed was contributing to both my shoulder and neck pain. I also use a standing desk to break up my posture throughout the day.

For sleep, we bought an adjustable bed. Sleeping completely flat tends to put the spine in a non-neutral position. There is a reason hospitals use beds that can lift both the head and feet. I found that I like sleeping with my feet and legs slightly elevated. It reduces compression on my lower back, and I wake up without the stiffness I used to deal with.

The next few are quick wins from home. I regularly use a foam roller on my upper back. I go through three arm positions while rolling: arms crossed, arms neutral at my sides, and arms extended overhead. I have also found that a lacrosse ball provides deep tissue relief in my shoulder blades. I put the ball between my back and the wall so I can control the pressure.

The most recent addition has been seeing a chiropractor regularly. You might ask, “Why not just do that from the start?” Personally, I believe in trying to address the root causes first, meaning fixing the behaviors that led to the pain. A chiropractor does not replace the other things I am doing. It is an addition, not a substitute. Through my chiropractor, I also gained years of knowledge I would never have found on my own. I now have metrics that I can use for tracking improvement. For example, I never would have thought about the impact of phone use on my neck. When we look down at our phones, we are gradually shifting the position of our head relative to our spine. Having your head just one inch further forward than it should be can add the equivalent weight of a bowling ball pulling on your back and neck. I have become much more mindful about keeping my head and shoulders back. My chiropractor also pointed out that my upper and lower body muscle balance was off (apparently, I skipped too many leg days). So I have put a much stronger focus on lower-body workouts.

Back health is one of those things that sneaks up on you. You do not notice the slow drift until something starts to hurt. There is rarely one fix, and that can be frustrating to hear. But the good news is that small, consistent changes really do add up over time. If any part of my experience sounds familiar, I hope this gives you somewhere to start. And if your back is already bothering you, please do talk to a doctor or chiropractor sooner than I did.

Leave a comment