I’m so sorry it landed slimy over there, and thanks for letting me know <3 Yes, it was not my intention at all, but I also realize my intention wasn’t clear. I know you to be reliable to bring your leadership breakthroughs in this program to your life and your personal relationship and project breakthroughs to this work – what you share with me always reminds me how they’re mutually reinforcing. So it was a nod to the opportunity of you (and all of us in our partnerships) practicing trust and partnership with Charlie too. Let me know what you need if anything beyond the apology and clarity of intention.
I agree that being our word to the participants is paramount and totally where our commitment lies – I fully support that, and I was mostly referencing Sabrina’s comments to places that still say 18/19 kicking around in the binder (since you and I talked about that) and her request for support. Let’s create the both/and. Let’s be responsive and quick with especially the things that are participant-facing – and – will you call me into it?
And future forward, let’s have the conversation about all the things you have to give me that seems like I will be annoyed or taken out by? I totally have a history of saying yes before owning my games, but I don’t want to simply create the opposite of that because that’s just different content inside of the same scarcity context.
The support I need is a second pair of eyes – or maybe a “for real?” check in when I say yes or tell you “by today” – I am so committed to creating room for all my games, and my commitment is to tell you, but we know my sneaky SM will show up too. I’m so grateful for this loudspeaker and team conversation.