← Back to context

Comment by item007

3 hours ago

That’s a great point — collaboration creates a natural “audience filter”, which reduces hoarding because you’re writing for someone, not just storing for yourself.

Kanban as a shared representation of “active work” also feels like the cleanest project-context signal: it’s explicit, lightweight, and already part of how the team coordinates.

Curious: in your experience with relay.md, what actually changes behavior the most?

1. social accountability (others will see messy notes)

2. having a shared kanban/project board

3. conventions/templates for how notes get promoted from “rough” to “reference”

Details in my HN profile/bio if you want more context on the “active projects as constraints” angle I’m exploring.

I think mostly social accountability.

My cofounder actually has a bunch of skills with claude code that surface context into our daily notes (from our meeting notes, transcripts, crm, gmail, etc), but it's sort of on him to show that it is useful... so while he is still "hoarding" outside of the shared context it is with an eye toward delivering actual value inside of it.

Feels pretty different from the fauxductivity traps of solo second brain stuff.

  • That makes a lot of sense. Social accountability is a surprisingly powerful “noise filter” — once other people will see the mess, you naturally promote only what’s legible and useful.

    And your cofounder’s setup is interesting because it’s not “PKM for PKM’s sake”, it’s context injection tied to an actual delivery surface (daily notes). That feels like the right wedge: the system earns its keep only if it helps someone ship something this week, not just accumulate.

    Curious: what’s the single best signal that his context surfacing is “working”? Fewer missed follow-ups, faster re-entry into threads, or just less time spent searching across Gmail/CRM/transcripts?