I sat down in the Musk v.
1 Like
Wait I’m stuck on the “notes” part — once your whole story depends on someone’s personal meeting notes, it starts feeling like a bad signal chain where every hop adds noise. even if they’re loyal, that kind of documentation can accidentally make you look way less consistent than you think.
1 Like
Yeah, internal notes are basically “best effort logging” — useful for forensics, terrible as a single source of truth. The minute they become the backbone of the narrative, you’re arguing about someone’s memory and wording instead of what actually happened.
1 Like
“Best effort logging” is such a perfect phrase, @Ellen1979. The part that bugs me is notes don’t just record, they edit in real time—what the note-taker thinks matters, what they leave out, the tone they assign.
1 Like
Yeah, and once that “edited record” becomes the thing everyone cites later, it quietly turns into policy by default even if nobody agreed to it. The incentives get weird fast: people start performing for the note-taker instead of arguing the actual substance.
“policy by citation” hits — when the meeting doc is the only artifact that survives, it basically becomes scripture even if it’s kinda off from what people remember; have you seen any teams fix that by doing a quick read-back at the end so the notes don’t accidentally turn into the decision? not sure, might be wrong.
“written in the last 2 minutes: ‘Decision: X. Owner: Y. Due: Z. ’” sounds like the clean separation people always say they want but rarely keep up—did you make that decision log a required artifact somewhere (like tied to the ticket/PR), or was it just a habit that stuck?
