Balter's body of work is governed by a central tension: the compulsive builder who cannot stop constructing things — companies, essays, scenes, identities — and the grieving, restless consciousness that suspects construction is itself a deflection. He names this drive "The Machine," and the catalog bears out the diagnosis. From BzzAgent to Smarterer to Flipside Crypto, from tape covers on Dead tour to blockchain analytics, the founding stories accumulate not as triumphs but as episodes in a serial autobiography where the protagonist keeps mistaking motion for meaning and then, in the writing, catches himself at it. The Inc.com columns from the early 2010s read as the expected CEO-as-sage dispatches — humility imperatives, mentorship frameworks, marriage warnings — but the later personal essays represent a genuine formal evolution: the voice loosens into something digressive, self-interrupting, and tonally unstable in ways that feel earned rather than performed. The Smarterer series across seven installments is the most sustained effort, a business memoir that keeps undercutting its own authority with accidental PCP, dating a direct report, and the frank arithmetic of who got paid what. Balter writes toward confession but swerves into comedy; he approaches sentimentality and detonates it with parenthetical asides.
The deeper current is mortality and its attendants — the father with Parkinson's threads through "Let Go, Dad," "Hospice," and "So Long, Dad" with an accumulating rawness that the writer's admitted inability to cry only sharpens. Sleep phases catalogued beside a dying friend, a wife who doesn't like fruit observed with forensic tenderness while a hospital call comes in — Balter's grief writing works precisely because it refuses the grammar of grief, opting instead for inventory, digression, and deflective humor that eventually collapses under its own weight into something genuine. The Grateful Dead functions as both organizing mythology and emotional skeleton key: the cult near-miss at MSG, the bootleg tape economy, the Phish and Eggy pieces — these aren't nostalgia but a parallel theology of surrender and presence that stands in permanent opposition to the founder's need for control. The fabricated book review of his own "Invisible" essay is the most revealing gesture in the catalog: a writer who has spent years performing self-awareness finally writes a formal self-critique, hiding behind a pseudonymous reviewer to say what he cannot say straight — that recognition is not revelation, that visibility is the subject he circles without resolving. Balter is at his weakest when defaulting to listicle structures or startup vernacular, and at his strongest when the sentence itself becomes the site of negotiation between the man who builds and the man who watches the building happen.
Balterer's catalog reads like a man arguing with himself in public and daring you to look away. Across forty-one pieces, the dominant register is confessional bravado — a voice that insists on its own candor while stage-managing every revelation. The writer circles obsessively around a handful of gravitational centers: fatherhood and filial duty, the mythology of entrepreneurship, the Grateful Dead and its cultural penumbra, and the body's stubborn refusal to cooperate with the mind's preferred self-image. What links these seemingly disparate concerns is a fixation on control and its failures — the father who cannot cry for fourteen years and then writes about it with forensic precision, the founder who narrates acquisition deals as if they were heist films, the concertgoer who inventories the sensory data of a stranger collapsing on the floor. The parenthetical asides, the direct addresses to the reader, the constant throat-clearing disclaimers ("house rules," "rule of play," "for avoidance of doubt") — these are not stylistic tics so much as load-bearing architecture. They allow Balterer to approach vulnerability at an angle, to arrive at genuine feeling by pretending to dodge it.
The intellectual timeline reveals a writer who began with entrepreneurial narrative and gradually loosened toward something rawer and more personal, though the two modes never fully separate. The seven-part Smarterer series is the catalog's spine: a serialized founder's memoir that doubles as a study in how deals, relationships, and self-delusion intertwine. But the pieces that genuinely distinguish the work are the ones where commerce falls away and mortality moves in — the father's Parkinson's decline across "Let Go, Dad," "Hospice," and "So Long, Dad" constitutes an involuntary triptych, each installment less defended than the last, the jokes growing thinner as the oxygen does. The father who shouts "I am a carrot! I am a cucumber!" from the edge of death, and the son who recognizes this as a man trying to articulate that he feels like a vegetable — that is writing operating at a level the startup narratives, however entertaining, do not reach. It is also where Balterer's signature move, the deflection into humor, becomes most legible as a survival mechanism rather than a rhetorical strategy.
What keeps the catalog from cohering into something greater is a certain reluctance to let the reader sit in discomfort without a wink. The voice is unmistakable — rapid, digressive, allergic to solemnity, fond of em dashes and sentence fragments that mimic the cadence of a man thinking aloud at a bar. But the relentless knowingness can sand down the edges of pieces that deserve their sharpness. "When You Cry" opens with a confession of startling emotional honesty and almost immediately retreats into ironic distance. The fabricated book review of the writer's own essay, "Invisible," is the most structurally adventurous piece in the catalog, a hall-of-mirrors exercise in self-criticism that reveals how acutely Balterer understands his own tendencies — and how unwilling he remains to fully abandon them. The range is real: from weed memoirs to blockchain analytics, from Miranda July to airplane etiquette to hallucinogenic cult encounters. But the deepest current running beneath all of it is the tension between a man who builds compulsively — businesses, essays, weekly publishing schedules, what he calls "The Machine" — and one who suspects that all this building is an elaborate scaffolding around something he cannot bring himself to simply stand inside and feel.
Balterer's body of work reads like the memoir of a man who cannot stop building things — companies, essays, justifications — and who has come to understand, perhaps only recently, that the compulsion itself is the subject worth examining. Across forty-one pieces, published in a concentrated burst between late 2025 and early 2026, the writer returns obsessively to the tension between control and surrender: the father who won't use a cane, the entrepreneur who micromanages font choices, the insomniac parsing mortality into phases, the man who hasn't cried in fourteen years and describes willing himself toward tears with the mechanical focus of someone debugging code. There is a restless, almost feral energy to the prose — parenthetical asides that undercut the writer's own authority, self-deprecating pivots that function as preemptive strikes against sentimentality, sentences that lunge forward then pull back into wisecracks. The voice is unmistakable: a raconteur who deploys irreverence as structural load-bearing, who uses humor not to avoid depth but to negotiate safe passage toward it. The piece on crying and the pieces on his father's death trace a single arc — the writer circling the problem of male emotional constipation with increasing directness, moving from abstraction in "When You Cry" to the devastating specificity of a dying man shouting "I am a carrot" in "So Long, Dad." That the father predicted his own death on Rosh Hashanah lands with genuine force precisely because Balterer has spent so many words elsewhere resisting exactly this kind of unearned gravity.
The Smarterer series, spanning seven installments, represents both the most sustained narrative effort in the catalog and its most revealing structural choice. Balterer is drawn to the startup founding myth but refuses to play it straight — the co-founder who decamps for Burning Man, the intern who works for free in probable violation of Massachusetts labor law, the acquisition negotiated alongside a romantic entanglement with an employee. The business writing and the personal writing are not, it turns out, separate registers; they are the same register applied to different materials. Whether the subject is a blockchain analytics company, a driver named Maruf who embezzled twenty thousand dollars, or the physiology of a concertgoer collapsing at a Phish show, the method is identical: arrive at the scene with comic bravado, circle the perimeter with anecdote and digression, then drop — sometimes gracefully, sometimes with a thud — into something raw. The Grateful Dead and Phish function as more than biographical color; they are the writer's native liturgy, the framework through which chaos and improvisation are made legible. Tape trading, cult encounters on LSD, the Dead's post-Mydland darkness — these are not nostalgia pieces but attempts to locate the origins of a particular disposition toward risk, community, and the unreliable nature of plans.
What makes this catalog genuinely interesting, rather than merely energetic, is the late emergence of self-scrutiny. The invented book review of "Invisible" — a piece in which Balterer fabricates a critic named V. A. Delbert to pan his own work — is the most formally adventurous thing here, and also the most telling. It suggests a writer who has begun to suspect that his greatest subject might be the gap between performance and interiority, between the guy who commandeers the airplane bathroom and the one who sits by the pool unable to cry while his partner weeps. The Miranda July piece performs a similar function under the guise of a book review: all those preemptive disclaimers about manhood and spoilers are the scaffolding around a writer trying to engage with feminine interiority without the tools to do so comfortably. There are weaknesses — the comic tics can become tics in the clinical sense, repetitive and involuntary; the parenthetical self-interruptions occasionally drain momentum from passages that would land harder if left alone; and the writer's instinct to charm can crowd out the stillness these pieces sometimes desperately need. But the trajectory is clear. Balterer is moving, piece by piece, from a writer who tells stories about things he has done toward a writer reckoning with the person who needed to do them.
Balterer's catalog reads like a man arguing with his own sentimentality — and losing, beautifully, almost every time. Across forty-one pieces, the writer returns obsessively to the gap between the self who feels and the self who refuses to admit it. "When You Cry" opens with a declaration of anger at a partner's tears, then quietly confesses to fourteen years without weeping and a failed, willed attempt to produce some. "So Long, Dad" buries grief inside comedy — a dying man shouting "I am a carrot!" — as though the absurd were the only vessel sturdy enough to carry loss. The posture is tough, wisecracking, deflective, but the architecture of nearly every piece betrays the opposite: Balterer builds elaborate comic scaffolding precisely so he can stand at a height where vulnerability becomes unavoidable. The voice — restless, digressive, conspiratorial, prone to parenthetical asides that function as emotional trap doors — is remarkably consistent whether the subject is hospice care, blockchain analytics, or smoking PCP with a startup employee. This consistency is both the writer's signature and, at times, a limitation: the same tonal register that makes "The Three Phases of Sleep" devastating can make "Who Learned to Read the Water" feel like it's performing intimacy in a boardroom.
The intellectual range here is wider than it first appears, though it clusters around a few gravitational centers: the Grateful Dead and its ecosystem of bootleg tape culture, hallucinogens, and spiritual vagrancy; the serial drama of building and selling companies (BzzAgent, Smarterer, Flipside); the slow erosion of a father's body and autonomy; and the nature of compulsion itself — what the writer names, in "The Machine," as an internal engine that demands construction without offering explanation. The seven-part Smarterer series is the catalog's most ambitious structural undertaking, and it reveals something important about how Balterer thinks about narrative: not as arc but as accretion, each installment layering character, digression, and business mechanics until the sale itself feels less like a climax than an inevitability arrived at sideways. The Dead shows, the startups, the dying father — these are not separate subjects. They are all expressions of the same preoccupation: what it means to be inside an experience that is ending, and how one behaves at the threshold. Tour lots, hospital rooms, acquisition negotiations — each is a liminal space where Balterer stations himself to observe the precise moment something irreversible occurs.
What evolves across the timeline is not so much the voice — which arrives fully formed — but the willingness to let the mask slip longer. The earlier pieces lean harder on comic deflection and meta-commentary ("oh great an article about drugs. try threading this needle, pal"), while the later work, particularly the hospice sequence and the invented book review of the writer's own essay "Invisible," suggests a growing interest in examining the apparatus of self-presentation itself. That "Sunday Edition Review" — a fabricated critical takedown of the writer's own work, written under a pseudonymous byline — is the catalog's most revealing gesture, a man preemptively savaging himself with more precision than any external critic could manage. It is also, not coincidentally, the piece that most nakedly exposes the central contradiction: Balterer writes to be seen, writes about invisibility, writes about the fear of being seen writing about invisibility, and somewhere in that recursive loop, something genuine and unguarded keeps escaping.
Balterer's catalog reads like the work of a man who cannot stop building and cannot stop confessing — and who suspects, perhaps correctly, that these are the same impulse. Across forty-one pieces, the dominant register is a kind of antic intimacy: the writer opens with a provocation, frequently a declarative sentence that lands like a slap or a joke, then peels back into something rawer and more precarious than the opener promised. "When You Cry" begins with the admission of anger at a spouse's tears and tunnels into a fourteen-year drought of the writer's own weeping. "The Machine" personifies the compulsion to create as a hissing, clanging apparatus beyond its host's control. Even the Smarterer series, ostensibly a startup memoir told in seven installments, is less interested in the mechanics of exits and term sheets than in the texture of human friction — the co-founder who needed Burning Man first, the intern who said yes to everything including working for free, the romantic entanglement with an operator whose font preferences became a proxy war for deeper incompatibilities. Balterer is drawn again and again to the moment where competence meets helplessness: the entrepreneur who can orchestrate a $60M acquisition but cannot cry; the son who can manage three hundred guests at an event but cannot let his Parkinson's-afflicted father attend. The prose runs hot, parenthetical, self-interrupting — a voice that trusts digression more than thesis, and that deploys humor as both shield and scalpel.
What emerges over the chronological arc is something like a grief trilogy nested inside a business memoir nested inside a countercultural autobiography. The father pieces — "Let Go, Dad," "Hopsice," "So Long, Dad" — form the emotional spine of the catalog, moving from the discomfort of enforcing boundaries on an aging parent through the institutional indignities of hospitals and hospice to the surreal comedy of a dying man calling his own death date on Rosh Hashanah. These are the essays where the writer's habitual deflections — the asides, the profanity, the winking stage directions — earn their keep, because they dramatize the very mechanism by which a person survives proximity to loss. Alongside these run the Grateful Dead pieces, the weed piece, the cult piece, the hallucinogen-laced wallet misadventure, which collectively sketch a life lived in the orbit of American subcultural excess, from Dead tour tape trading to Phish floors to blockchain analytics. The recurring figure is the hustler-romantic: someone who sold hand-illustrated cassette covers on lot and later sold companies to Pluralsight, who sees no contradiction between the two because both required reading a room and believing in something not yet proven.
The most revealing gesture in the catalog may be piece thirty — the invented "Sunday Edition Review" of the writer's own essay "Invisible," in which a fictional critic named V. A. Delbert takes Balterer to task for mistaking recognition for revelation and for writing safely about safety. It is a startlingly self-aware move, the writer staging his own critical demolition, and it suggests he knows exactly where his tendencies shade into shtick. The parenthetical asides, the conspiratorial second-person address, the reliance on personality as structural principle rather than earned architecture — these are features, not bugs, but they can calcify into mannerism if left unexamined. When Balterer writes about his wife's cleanliness and fruit aversions in the same paragraph as his father's mucous plug and failing lungs, the juxtaposition achieves something no amount of cleverness could engineer: the grotesque ordinary fact of loving people whose bodies betray them. It is in those moments — unguarded, unamused, stripped of the showman's patter — that the writing finds its real frequency.
Balter writes like a man who cannot stop building things and cannot stop narrating the building — companies, essays, marriages, grief, all subjected to the same restless, compulsive energy he names "The Machine." Across this catalog, what emerges is a writer whose central obsession is not entrepreneurship or fatherhood or music or death but the act of self-examination conducted at arm's length, always gesturing toward vulnerability while maintaining an almost pugilistic control over the terms of disclosure. He tells you he hasn't cried in fourteen years, then tells you about the divorce that almost broke him; he announces house rules before reviewing Miranda July; he writes about his dying father through the frame of his wife's feelings about fruit. The digressions are the architecture. Balter's voice — discursive, conspiratorial, syntactically restless, laced with parenthetical hedges and self-interrupting bravado — is unmistakably his own, closer to the spoken rhythms of a Deadhead raconteur than to any essay tradition, and it produces both his best effects and his most persistent limitation: the sense that every confession arrives pre-negotiated, every wound displayed under carefully chosen lighting.
The work evolves from the functional self-help register of the early Inc. piece toward something genuinely stranger and more personal on Balterer, where the Smarterer serial and the father pieces represent twin spines of the project — one tracking the alchemy and absurdity of startup life with novelistic detail (the accidental PCP, the co-founder at Burning Man, the earnout math), the other tracking mortality with increasing directness as the father declines from stubborn patriarch to hospice patient to eulogized absence. The Grateful Dead and Phish threads are not decoration; they are Balter's native cosmology, the place where chaos, communion, and tape-trading fastidiousness converge, and they inform his prose's tolerance for improvisation within structure. The invented book review of his own "Invisible" essay is the catalog's most revealing gesture — a writer so compelled to preempt criticism that he fabricates the critic, essentially arguing with himself in public. The contradictions that define the body of work are productive ones: sentimentality held in check by wisecracks, emotional exposure undermined by disclaimers, a compulsion to connect warring with a terror of being seen trying. What Balter is building, piece by weekly piece, is not a blog but something closer to a serial autobiography in which the narrator keeps insisting he's fine while the evidence accumulates otherwise.
Balter's catalog cleaves into two distinct lives. The early Inc. columns (2011–2013) are competent entrepreneurial counsel — humility, mentorship, competitor strategy — delivered with the authority of a founder who built and sold companies but hadn't yet figured out what he actually wanted to say. They read as transactional, even when confessional, as in the divorce piece where personal wreckage is tidied into lessons. Then something breaks open. The Balterer essays, arriving roughly a decade later, abandon the listicle entirely and reveal a writer who has discovered that voice — digressive, self-interrupting, tonally restless — is itself a form of argument. The seven-part Smarterer series is the fulcrum: ostensibly a startup origin story, it keeps dissolving into accidentally smoking PCP, workplace romance, the petty warfare of font preferences, a wedding where someone insults the company name within earshot. Balter treats entrepreneurship not as a hero's journey but as an accumulation of absurd, compromising, deeply human incidents that resist the clean arc venture capital prefers.
What defines the later work is a compulsive need to circle mortality, embodiment, and the machinery of compulsion while maintaining an almost aggressive comic deflection. The father's decline across "Let Go, Dad," "Hospice," and "So Long, Dad" — where the dying man calls himself a vegetable and then predicts his own death on Rosh Hashanah — is handled with tenderness that never settles into sentimentality because Balter keeps cutting the gravity with structural irreverence: his wife's fruit aversions, hospital bureaucracy, the sheer indignity of mucus plugs. "When You Cry" and "The Machine" expose the writer's two governing contradictions — an emotional constipation that coexists with relentless creative drive, a man who cannot weep but cannot stop building. The Grateful Dead threads (tape dubs, cosmic wallets, Phish floors) aren't nostalgia but epistemology: Balter learned narrative from setlists and bootleg lineage, from the way a show unfolds without a fixed script, and his prose replicates that loose architecture. The invented book review of his own "Invisible" essay is the most telling gesture in the catalog — a writer preemptively critiquing himself before anyone else can, performing self-awareness as both shield and confession, which is finally what all of Balter's work does: it builds the thing and disassembles it simultaneously, daring you to decide which act is the real one.
The piece announces itself as a universal prescription — "no matter who you are" — which is both its ambition and its potential weakness. Listicle structures in leadership writing tend to flatten complexity, reducing the messy, contingent work of managing people into discrete, actionable items. The framing here leans heavily on the promise of immediacy ("today"), positioning leadership improvement as something achievable through quick behavioral tweaks rather than deep structural or relational change. This tension between accessibility and depth is the central challenge of the form, and the title telegraphs a piece that has chosen accessibility decisively.
What's worth interrogating is the implied audience: the leader who already considers themselves competent but wants to "step it up." This is a particular rhetorical posture — flattering the reader's self-image while gently suggesting room for growth. It's a well-worn move in business writing, but it raises a question the piece may not fully confront: whether the leaders most in need of stepping up are the ones least likely to recognize it. The universality the excerpt promises — applicable to any company, any leader — risks producing advice so broadly applicable it becomes untethered from the specific, situated realities where leadership actually happens. The piece would be most interesting where it resists its own format, where a specific anecdote or counterintuitive insight disrupts the listicle's orderly march.
Read the original →"Learn to weave the right web" is a striking metaphor choice for mentorship, suggesting something more deliberate and architectural than the usual advice-column framing of mentor relationships as organic, warm, almost parental bonds. The piece appears to push against the sentimentalized version of mentorship — the wise elder dispensing wisdom over coffee — and toward something more strategic and intentional. The five-step structure signals pragmatism, but the title's insistence that mentorship "mean something" introduces an almost existential demand: not just effectiveness, but significance.
The tension between the instrumental ("five steps") and the meaningful ("so that it means something") is where this piece likely finds its energy. Mentorship writing often collapses into one mode or the other — either a how-to manual stripped of emotional stakes, or a misty-eyed tribute to a transformative figure. The excerpt suggests the writer is trying to hold both registers at once, acknowledging that great mentoring requires craft and architecture, not just good intentions and availability. The web metaphor is double-edged, carrying connotations of entrapment alongside connection, and one wonders whether the piece explores that darker valence or lets it pass. At its best, this kind of writing reframes a familiar relationship as something that demands as much rigor as any other professional discipline.
Read the original →This piece succeeds in doing something rare in business writing: it leads with failure rather than triumph. Dave Balter's story is presented not as a victory lap following a $60 million acquisition but as a cautionary narrative in which ego nearly destroyed the enterprise before the happy ending arrived. The structure — arrogance as near-ruin, humility as salvation — follows a conversion narrative arc that gives the piece a moral urgency most CEO profiles lack. The word "imperative" in the title is doing real work, elevating humility from a soft virtue to a strategic necessity.
What makes the framing compelling is its specificity: Balter is not theorizing about humility in the abstract but "imploring" from personal experience, which gives the argument testimonial weight. The piece positions itself against the dominant mythology of entrepreneurship, which tends to valorize the very arrogance it critiques — the visionary founder who bends reality through sheer force of will. By naming arrogance as the antagonist in a success story, the writer is attempting to revise a deeply entrenched cultural script. The risk is that the acquisition's reported price tag undermines the humility thesis — it's easier to preach modesty after a $60 million exit — but the tension between those two facts may be precisely what makes the piece worth reading. The most interesting question hovering at the edges is whether humility can be adopted strategically without ceasing to be humility at all.
Read the original →The piece opens with a paradox that most competitive strategy writing avoids: the enemy might also be the ally. The title's invocation of Sun Tzu ("Know Thy Enemy") immediately sets up a martial framework, only to subvert it with the instruction to "befriend" those same rivals. This tonal pivot — from combative to collaborative — mirrors a genuine shift in how startups increasingly relate to their competitive landscapes, particularly in nascent industries where growing the market matters more than capturing share within it.
The excerpt sketches three possible outcomes of competitor relationships — partnering on a pitch, acquisition in either direction, or collective industry growth — and each represents a fundamentally different power dynamic. What's notable is the piece's refusal to privilege one over the others, presenting them as equally valid endpoints of the same relational investment. This is more nuanced than the typical "crush the competition" rhetoric, but it also raises uncomfortable questions the piece may or may not address: at what point does befriending a rival become intelligence gathering? How does one maintain genuine collaboration when acquisition is always a latent possibility? The most interesting version of this argument would sit with that discomfort rather than resolving it into a clean strategic framework. The coexistence of scrutiny and friendship is inherently unstable, and the best business writing treats that instability as a feature rather than a problem to be solved.
Read the original →The title alone performs a fascinating rhetorical maneuver: it frames marital survival as an entrepreneurial possibility rather than a given, implicitly acknowledging that the default trajectory for founder-marriages is dissolution. The parenthetical in the excerpt — "In other words: Don't do what I did" — lands as a confessional pivot that reframes the entire piece from advice column to cautionary memoir. This is a writer leveraging personal failure as authority, a move that carries real risk in the business-writing space where expertise is typically performed through success narratives. The piece seems to understand that vulnerability, deployed strategically, can be more persuasive than any case study.
What's most interesting here is the structural analogy the piece appears to construct: marriage as company, spouse as stakeholder, attention as capital. The directive to "tend to your marriage as carefully as you care for your company" is deceptively simple, but it contains an uncomfortable implication — that entrepreneurs already know how to nurture something with devotion and discipline, they simply choose not to direct that energy homeward. The piece doesn't seem to let the reader off the hook with work-life balance platitudes; instead, it forces a confrontation with priorities by using the language of business intentionality. The Inc.com context matters too: this is a writer speaking to an audience that valorizes the all-consuming founder mythology, and the piece appears to push back against that mythology from inside the temple.
The brevity of the excerpt suggests a piece that values directness over elaborate argumentation, which suits its subject. There's something structurally honest about a writer who has been through a divorce refusing to dress the lesson up in excessive qualification. The first-person admission of failure, positioned against second-person instruction ("You can be..."), creates a quietly powerful dynamic — the writer becomes both the cautionary tale and the guide who emerged from it. Whether the full piece sustains this tension or drifts into listicle territory would determine its ultimate success, but the framing alone suggests a writer who understands that the most useful entrepreneurial advice sometimes has nothing to do with business at all.
Read the original →"Tour is Adventure" announces itself through a title that deliberately strips away the article, lending the declaration a proverbial, almost aphoristic quality — as if touring were not merely an adventure but a category of experience unto itself. The framing across guitar, Italy, music, travel, and tour suggests a piece that lives at the intersection of travelogue and music memoir, a genre that can easily slide into romantic self-mythologizing. What makes the title compelling is its insistence on equivalence rather than comparison: not "a tour is an adventure" but the bolder, grammatically bare claim that collapses the two concepts into one. This signals a writer interested in how the identity of a musician on the road becomes inseparable from the landscape traversed — Italy here functioning not just as backdrop but as a kind of instrument played alongside the guitar.
The tagging of both "guitar" and "music" as separate concerns hints at a piece that distinguishes between the physicality of an instrument and the abstraction of the art it produces, which is a subtler move than it first appears. If the essay delivers on this implicit promise, it's working in territory familiar to writers like Patti Smith in "M Train" or Geoff Dyer's restless travel-thought hybrids — pieces where the sensory details of place become entangled with creative practice. Published on a personal Medium channel, the piece occupies that liminal space between blog post and literary essay, and its success likely depends on whether it trusts the specific, granular moments of touring — the van, the venue, the particular quality of Italian light on a fretboard — over the temptation to generalize about what it all means. The stripped-down title suggests the writer leans toward economy, which is a good instinct for material that could easily sprawl into sentimental excess.
Read the original →The earliest entry in what becomes an extended epistolary project, "2 18 22 Note to Flipside" establishes the conceit of writing toward an unnamed other side — a mirror world, an afterlife, a dissociated self. The title's stripped-down date format, lacking slashes or hyphens, reads like shorthand from someone writing in urgency rather than for posterity. There's something compelling about the choice to make these communiqués public on Medium, a platform designed for polished personal essays, yet the "Note to Flipside" series insists on a rawer, more diaristic register. The tension between private address and public platform becomes part of the meaning.
As a series opener, this piece carries the burden of establishing the relationship between writer and recipient without fully explaining it. That withholding is a risk — it can read as exclusionary or as genuinely invitational, asking the reader to become a co-conspirator in decoding the address. The date anchoring February 2022 situates the work in a specific moment of collective disorientation, and the "Flipside" framing suggests the writer is reaching across some divide that may be temporal, spiritual, or psychological. Whether the series ultimately earns its recurring structure depends on what accumulates across entries, but the opening gesture — naming the void and writing toward it — is a structurally honest one.
Read the original →"5 13 22 Note to Flipside Re Terra" introduces a critical specification into the series: the "Re Terra" suffix signals that this particular transmission concerns itself with Earth, with ground, with the terrestrial. The implication is striking — if this note must specify that it's about Terra, then the other notes may not be. The writer is constructing a cosmology in which the earthly is one category among several, and that quiet worldbuilding through titling alone is a sophisticated move. It reframes the entire Flipside project as something more expansive than diary entries; these are dispatches from a consciousness that doesn't take the physical world as default.
The piece arrives in mid-May 2022, three months after the first note, and the accumulation of time between entries suggests these are written when something specific compels the address. The "Re:" construction borrows from email subject lines, layering corporate communication syntax onto what is essentially metaphysical correspondence. This collision of registers — bureaucratic and transcendent — creates an inadvertent poetry. Whether the content delivers on the ambition of the framing is the central question, but the architecture of the series is becoming increasingly legible as a project about the insufficiency of ordinary language to reach the places the writer needs to reach.
Read the original →By "Note to Flipside Sat 6 25 22," the series has found a rhythm, and the inclusion of the day of the week — Saturday — adds a domestic specificity that slightly alters the tone. The earlier notes felt dispatched from outside time; this one is grounded in the texture of a weekend, with all the stillness and unstructured thought that implies. It's a small detail in the title, but it humanizes the project, pulling it back from the cosmic toward the quotidian. The best epistolary work lives in that tension between the everyday and the urgent, and this entry's titling suggests the writer is becoming more comfortable letting ordinary time bleed into the transmission.
Four months into the Flipside project, the question of audience becomes more pressing. Who is the Flipside? A lost person, a future self, an alternate reality? The series resists answering, and that sustained ambiguity is both its strength and its vulnerability. Strength, because it allows each reader to locate their own loss or longing in the address. Vulnerability, because without some escalation or deepening, the recurring structure risks becoming ritual without revelation. The Saturday datestamp hints at a writer who is settling in, making this practice habitual — and habit can be either the enemy of discovery or the condition that makes it possible.
Read the original →"Note to Flipside 10 14 22" subtly reorders the title format, placing "Note to Flipside" before the date rather than after. Whether this is a conscious shift or an incidental one, it changes the emphasis: the address comes first now, the timestamp second. The Flipside has become the primary organizing principle rather than the calendar. This small inversion suggests a writer whose relationship to the project has evolved — the practice has become more important than its placement in chronological time. Eight months in, the series has accrued enough weight that each new entry carries the freight of all the previous ones.
The October date positions this entry in a season traditionally associated with thinning veils between worlds, and while the writer may not be consciously invoking that symbolism, the Flipside project is essentially built on the premise that such veils exist and can be spoken through. The regularity of entries — roughly monthly at this point — suggests the writer has found a sustainable cadence, which raises an interesting craft question: does a project like this benefit from regularity, or does it need the unpredictability of earlier entries, when months could pass between transmissions? The move toward consistency may represent deepening commitment, but it also risks domesticating what began as something wilder.
Read the original →In an era when organizational science is being reshaped by network theory, behavioral economics, and data-driven management tools, a piece called "10 Ways Any Leader Can Step It Up Today" feels like it was beamed in from a pre-analytics age. There's no engagement with how distributed teams, algorithmic decision-making, or platform dynamics have fundamentally altered what leadership even means. The framework is purely individual — leader as heroic optimizer — when the more interesting story is how leadership itself is becoming a systems problem. Where's the feedback loop? Where's the data? Without those, you're left with a listicle that could have run in 1995 or 2025 and landed identically, which is not a compliment when the landscape has shifted this dramatically.
One imagines the writer composing this list at a standing desk, coffee cooling beside a motivational poster featuring an eagle in mid-ascent, and the resulting piece has about that much specificity — which is to say, almost none. "Ten Ways Any Leader Can Step It Up Today" promises universality, and delivers it in the way that a fortune cookie delivers wisdom: technically true, unmoored from any particular human being's lived experience, and forgotten by the time the check arrives. There is no scene here, no character caught in the revealing act of leading badly or well, no moment where the reader might recognize the quiet terror of being responsible for other people's livelihoods. It is advice literature at its most frictionless, which is another way of saying it offers nothing for the reader to hold onto.
The listicle as leadership gospel is a genre unto itself, and "10 Ways Any Leader Can Step It Up Today" is a faithful practitioner of its conventions: broad enough to apply to anyone, specific enough to apply to no one, and sufficiently untethered from research or structural analysis that it functions more as affirmation than argument. What's missing is the harder question beneath the premise — why, exactly, leadership advice has become a perpetual-motion industry, endlessly producing content that never seems to resolve the problems it diagnoses. A more ambitious version of this piece might interrogate the managerial class's appetite for self-improvement as a substitute for systemic change, or examine whether the democratization of leadership advice has actually produced better leaders. Instead, it offers ten steps and the comforting assurance that improvement is always just a behavioral tweak away.
There is a worthwhile idea buried in "Mentor So That It Means Something" — that mentorship, done carelessly, can be more performance than practice, more résumé line than relational commitment. The framing around web-weaving hints at a networked understanding of how knowledge and influence actually propagate through organizations and industries. But the piece doesn't push far enough into the structural implications. Mentorship in America is deeply entangled with questions of access, class, and professional gatekeeping; who gets mentored, and by whom, often determines who gets to lead. A five-step framework, however well-intentioned, sidesteps these dynamics entirely, leaving the reader with practical guidance that is useful in the narrow sense but intellectually unsatisfying in the broader one.
The metaphor of web-weaving is the most promising signal in "Mentor So That It Means Something," because it gestures toward mentorship as a network phenomenon rather than a one-to-one transaction. In theory, this is exactly the kind of reframing that could yield real insight — mentorship as a protocol for knowledge distribution, a way of strengthening weak ties across an organization's social graph. In practice, the piece doesn't follow the metaphor to its logical destination. There's no discussion of how platforms, remote work, or AI-augmented coaching are reshaping the mentor-mentee dynamic, no data on which mentorship structures actually produce measurable outcomes. The five-step format keeps things actionable but also keeps them small, when the more interesting story is how mentorship scales — or doesn't.
"Mentor So That It Means Something" possesses, at least, the germ of an interesting observation: that mentorship is not merely the transfer of expertise from one person to another but something more structural, a kind of web-weaving, to borrow the author's metaphor. The trouble is that the piece never quite escapes the gravitational pull of the business advice genre long enough to show us what that web actually looks like — who is caught in it, who benefits, who is left dangling at its edges. The best writing about mentorship tends to dwell in the discomfort of the relationship, the moments when the mentor's certainty becomes the mentee's constraint, or when the protégé outgrows the very person who shaped them. Here, the relationship is rendered as a five-step process, tidy and instrumental, and one wishes for a single scene that might complicate that tidiness.
"The Humility Imperative" is the rare Inc.com piece that earns its thesis through narrative rather than assertion. Dave Balter's near-destruction of BzzAgent is a case study in a phenomenon that deserves more serious cultural attention: the way American entrepreneurial mythology actively rewards arrogance, treating hubris as a feature rather than a bug until the moment it becomes catastrophic. Balter's story — ego unchecked through multiple ventures until it nearly obliterated his fourth — implicitly raises questions about the feedback mechanisms in startup culture. Why did it take four companies for the lesson to land? What structural incentives encourage founders to mistake confidence for competence? The piece doesn't fully explore these systemic questions, but it provides enough raw material for the reader to begin asking them, and Balter's willingness to implicate himself gives the argument a credibility that prescriptive leadership advice rarely achieves.
Dave Balter's story about ego and BzzAgent is an interesting data point in a larger pattern: the founder-as-single-point-of-failure problem that plagues startups at scale. BzzAgent, a word-of-mouth marketing company that essentially tried to systematize social influence before social media made that trivially easy, is itself a fascinating artifact of a particular technological moment. The piece would benefit enormously from examining how Balter's arrogance interacted with the company's actual systems — did his ego distort decision-making processes, suppress dissenting signals, or create information bottlenecks? The humility imperative, framed as a systems problem rather than a personal virtue, could yield real insight into organizational resilience. As it stands, the piece is a compelling founder confession that stops just short of the more rigorous analysis that would make it genuinely instructive for how we design companies that can survive their creators' worst impulses.
Dave Balter's account of how his own arrogance nearly torpedoed BzzAgent before its acquisition by Tesco's Dunnhumby has the essential ingredient that most business writing lacks: a person willing to be seen in an unflattering light. There is something genuinely compelling about an entrepreneur who, having just pocketed a reported sixty million dollars, turns around to warn others against the very instincts that nearly cost him everything. The piece benefits from the specificity of Balter's story — this is not abstract advice but a narrative with stakes, a company that nearly failed, an ego that nearly consumed it. One wishes the writing itself matched the honesty of the confession, that the prose lingered longer in the discomfort rather than rushing toward the redemptive lesson, but the human detail is there, and it elevates the piece well above the genre's usual platitudes.
"Know Thy Enemy, Befriend Rivals" offers a counterintuitive proposition — that competitors are best understood not from a distance but up close, perhaps over lunch — and there is a certain worldly charm to the idea, the suggestion that business, like diplomacy, proceeds best when conducted between people who have taken the trouble to know each other. But the piece, as excerpted, reads more like strategic counsel than storytelling, and one longs for the particular: the lunch that changed a rivalry, the handshake that preceded an acquisition, the specific moment when an entrepreneur looked across the table at a competitor and saw, instead of a threat, a future partner. Without those details, the advice floats in the generic, sensible but unanchored, the kind of thing one nods at and promptly forgets.
The premise of "Know Thy Enemy, Befriend Rivals" touches on a genuinely interesting tension in capitalist ideology: the gap between the rhetoric of ruthless competition and the reality that industries are often grown through collaboration, consolidation, and mutual accommodation. The suggestion that startups should scrutinize and befriend their competitors simultaneously invokes a model of competition that is more ecological than gladiatorial — companies as organisms in a shared ecosystem rather than combatants in a zero-sum arena. This is a more sophisticated framework than it first appears, and the piece deserves credit for gesturing toward it. What it lacks is the intellectual follow-through: a deeper exploration of when cooperation becomes collusion, how power asymmetries between competitors distort these friendly relationships, and what the history of industry consolidation tells us about who actually benefits when rivals become friends.
"Know Thy Enemy, Befriend Rivals" is, at its core, a piece about coopetition — the strategic interplay between competition and collaboration that defines some of the most interesting dynamics in tech and beyond. The advice to scrutinize competitors while building relationships with them maps neatly onto how ecosystems actually function in networked markets, where today's rival is tomorrow's acquisition target, integration partner, or co-developer of an industry standard. Think Bluetooth, think USB-C, think any moment when competitors realized the addressable market grew faster through cooperation than through warfare. The piece could go further by examining the game-theoretic underpinnings of these decisions — when does befriending a rival create value, and when does it simply create a more informed adversary? — but the core insight is sound and increasingly relevant in an era where platform dynamics make pure competition an increasingly incomplete strategy.
There is a genuinely important argument buried in this piece about how American entrepreneurial culture has sanctified overwork to the point where personal relationships become collateral damage — a theme that connects to broader questions about what we sacrifice at the altar of productivity and self-optimization. The confessional framing gives it an authenticity that pure policy analysis would lack. Yet the piece doesn't quite follow its own thread far enough: it stays in the lane of personal advice rather than interrogating the structural incentives — investor expectations, hustle-culture mythology, the gendered dynamics of whose career gets to consume the household — that make entrepreneurial marriages particularly fragile. It gestures toward a bigger argument without making it.
Entrepreneurship's toll on founders' personal lives is a well-documented pattern at this point — burnout, relationship collapse, the whole system of venture-backed intensity that treats humans as throughput. This piece acknowledges the failure mode from personal experience, which is valuable as a data point, but it doesn't map the system. There's no exploration of how startup culture's always-on communication tools, the Slack-and-calendar architecture of founder life, or the network effects of being embedded in a founder community reshape intimate relationships. It's a cautionary tale when what's really needed is a diagnostic — something that examines why the default settings of entrepreneurial life are so corrosive and what redesigning those defaults might look like.
The premise here — that entrepreneurship devours marriages, and that this author knows because his was devoured — is not without its poignant kernel, the confession of a man who tended his cap table more carefully than his kitchen table. But the execution, packaged in the brisk imperatives of a business magazine listicle, never lingers long enough on any human detail to let the reader feel the particular weight of what was lost. One wants the scene, the overheard conversation, the moment the marriage shifted from partnership to afterthought; instead, one gets advice. Inc.com's readership may find utility in the counsel, but the essay reads as a TED Talk delivered in the wreckage of something that deserved a quieter, more searching accounting.
Build your own literary profile. One link for everything you've ever written.
Create Your Profile