The good thing about this approach is that when you review them (after a certain amount of time) you lose the personal attachment to the ideas.

It feels like you're being presenting Startup ideas from someone else, which allows you to be more objective and critical about their validity... hopefully leading to better judgement

Have to second this. I used to have so many 'started in excitement, but probably never going to work on it ever again' projects.

Then I started an 'Ideas' board on Trello, and forced myself to put ideas there instead of working on it immediately. I am not allowed to work on an idea unless it's been on the board for atleast two weeks.

This forces me to spend a lot more time thinking past the initial one-line idea, and refining it. Eventually, for about 90% of the ideas, by the end of the two week period, I've come to the conclusion to discard it.

So now, the 10% that I do end up working on, are much more likely to see sustained work being done on them.

This is interesting! To clarify: in the first two weeks, you don't allow yourself to work on the idea (eg start writing code), but you do allow yourself to research the idea. And you find that the initial research phase usually turns up compelling reasons not to undertake the project after all. Is this right?

How do you prevent the research phase of a new idea from distracting you from your current project?

I usually have a fixed block of time for working on side projects on weekends. The research phase usually happens through the week, whenever I have the time to think about it.

My problem generally is splitting the weekend time across too many projects, with newer ideas displacing older ones. Having much fewer ideas to work on in total, helps me spend more time on them.

Definitely! The other thing I'd recommend is something kanban-esque. E.g., you have max 1 thing you're working on, max 3 ideas that you think are your best things to do next, and then the rest in a big pile.

This has a few benefits for me. The top 3 unstarted ideas help defend the thing I'm working on. If I think of something new, I first have to ask myself if it's better than the top 3. Usually it isn't so it goes in the backlog.

Then if I'm starting to question the thing I'm working on, I can say, "Has something changed such that killing this and switching to one of the top 3 a better use of my time?" Having things to compare it with helps ground my thinkin.

Anyone trying to do this; should read this tweet thread https://twitter.com/intentionally/status/1234918066649272325

I like the idea though I moved to a pure text (and/or MarkDown) for all of my writings. Bear is not a bad tool if you'd like writing while on the move on your phone.

Do you later execute any of them? I feel I need the optimism that I only have when I do not see the details clearly yet to start something.

I'm just getting out of school (last round of finals coming up) and I've got several ideas bouncing around. I've also taken to putting them down in diary/journal (originally just started as aimlessly sticking hundreds of post it notes around my room). The one thing I've taken away from it is that design is work - and magically - when I sit down and work on the design and get more specific the better the design gets. It's a motivating feeling for me as I gain momentum. If it's written down I don't feel like I'm throwing a baby away every time I consider a different approach or project because it's already written/drawn and I can go back at any time, and usually when I go back I can take what is newly considered and recognize some commonality between them that leads to yet another new approach that is simpler and covers the value proposition of both approaches. All of this is objectively better than having the images and ideas flash into my head - because that doesn't stop. It gives me the freedom to iterate with new ideas rather than the same model 0 over and over again.

But again this process is all new to me. We'll see if anything comes out of it.

Yes. The last one I executed on was to do in depth fundamental analysis on all the ASX listed biotech/pharma companies (there are about 70 of them). Out of this process I found one very undervalued company that I took a large strategic investment in and joined the board to help turn it around. This has turned into a very good investment, although it has taken up a lot of my time.

Nice. What works for someone might not work for someone we can see again!

Sounds like a variant of rule 11 in the Done Manifesto[1]: "If you have an idea and publish it on the internet, that counts as a ghost of done."

You're just posting it to your future self but it still counts. You can then let it go out of your head and think about something else.

[1] https://medium.com/@bre/the-cult-of-done-manifesto-724ca1c2f...

I read that you're supposed to work on / research / carefully understand the problem that needs solving and stay away from a solution for a long as possible. The problem has to pass a number of tests before going the next step of how you will reach people and get them to pay for a solution (often called the "go to market" strategy). Only after you've nailed this are you supposed to consider how to implement a solution.

I've heard this too. However, building the solution can help you understand the problem. So I prefer to go for lightweight solutions/prototyping right away.

I have a semi-formal annual and quarterly review process to keep track of ideas and prioritise the projects that need attention.

Most of the time I'm working on code, but every so often I step back to set explicit goals and brainstorm possibilities.

Details are kept in a collection of kanban-like spreadsheets so there'a always an overview of what needs to be done at each level.

It's a workable way to minimised ADHD and keep me from getting distracted by new shinies.

Do you physically write them on paper or use an app?