I could need some he
[2021-12-25 03:00:52 AM] : I could need some help with one of the task from part two. I'm working on "Exercise: Practice the process of "Review and Reverse"" https://courses.30x500.com/courses/43418/lectures/625211. And have selected the following pain
"$29 for a PDF … but I wanted a [physical] book." to obliterate.
My steps were the following:
Negation: I only paid $29 for this pdf and I don't need a physical book.
Obliteration: For only 29$ you can buy this awesome digital book about X
This has multiple issues I found when doing the analysis:
• It is not really a dream it reads more like a CTA
• It contains the product or solution
My next try was this:
The book about X is a perfect solution I have to my issue about Y
Which is still not better, as it still contains the product. But now I'm at a loss. I think the whole problem is that the initial pain is not crispy enough but I just don't see anything in the data to make it more crisp.
Would be grateful for some additional pointers or angles I could think about.
1 Reply
[2021-12-25 07:54:09 AM] : maybe select a different pain? as someone who much prefers paper books, it seems like you're fighting someone's worldview, which is hard
[2021-12-25 08:39:09 AM] : That was one of the conclusions I had as well – ok not that I'm fighting somebodies worldview but that this pain is not really convertible with the data I have.
But then as this is one of the exercises I have the feeling that this sounds like a too simple answer. And I assume here, that there are not deliberate false paths in the tasks. Hence the reason I've asked the question.
[2021-12-27 11:06:10 AM] : i agree about the worldview, it’d be tough to convince someone who prefers physical books.
reading between the lines a bit, there are some potential hidden pains:
• physical books are getting harder to find
• digital books are worth less than physical ones (<- worldview)
• i didn’t get what i was expecting
Another way to look at it might be to talk about the benefits of the digital book (you can copy/paste! it’s right on the screen where you’re writing the code! saves trees! etc) more as a filter, to make it clear to the reader that this is NOT paper
[2021-12-27 01:20:08 PM] : Oh, that are good angles dceddia. I'm need to get used to this new thing. I'm constantly fearing that I'm starting to invent to much new stuff. But in the end a bit of invention needs to be done here. As we need to paint a world without the pain.
[2021-12-27 01:21:28 PM] : yeah, this took me a while to realize too - crispy is “specific, concrete, vivid” but it doesn’t have to be a direct quote
[2021-12-27 01:23:51 PM] : ideally you’d use the words they use, but it can be a sprinkling of words and it doesn’t have to be verbatim to be impactful
[2021-12-27 01:28:34 PM] : Will take another at it tomorrow. Today I was trying it on my own data for the first time. I had the feeling it did go a bit better. But I did not yet evaluate my results :wink:
[2021-12-28 01:14:29 AM] : So I looked at this topic once again. I've come up now with this version:
Reference each of the examples directly while working on them on your computer. And the best: No trees will be hurt![2021-12-28 01:15:51 AM] : If first hat this version:
Imagine a book from which you can directly copy the samples. And no trees get hurt when you read it.But I was unsure if "a book" still counts as having the product in it. Or if I'm now too narrow in applying the rules :wink: Thanks for all the help.