I'm Ryan Waggoner. I build things. I blog about how to work harder and smarter to build the life you want. You should subscribe.
4 Comments

Who cares if you were born this way?

Posted in Misc, Personal, Posts by

Lady Gaga is blowing up the charts again with her new single, “Born This Way”, which “celebrates” a variety of different types of diversity, including race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. I’m going to sidestep the central controversy this song was written to exploit, and instead point out a stupid and dangerous idea that this song promotes:

What difference does it make if you were born this way or if you chose to be this way?

What annoys me about this song is that it overemphasizes the role of nature in diversity, and chooses to celebrate and praise a variety of forms of diversity that are (arguably) pre-determined at birth, like race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. (This also ignores a long list of very not-nice types of “diversity” that are likely just as predetermined at birth, like predisposition to addiction, schizophrenia, antisocial personality disorder, and pedophilia.)

Provided that you’re not harming someone else, why should we celebrate diversity in race any more than diversity in fashion styles? Do you only have the right to be proudly different in ways that you were born to be different?

The anthem of “born this way” strikes me more as a whiny excuse from someone trying to explain why they’re different: “Don’t blame me, mister, I was born this way!” This appeal to fatalism offers a haven for the victim, but a cowardly and ultimately fragile one. Cowardly because it attempts to shift the responsibility for identity to random chance instead of personal choice, and fragile because it might turn out that some of those supposedly predetermined traits aren’t quite as inescapable as we thought.

So rather than celebrating “black, white, or beige”, how about we celebrate diversity in all its (non-evil) forms? Except for hipsterism, of course. Hipsters should always be shunned.

4 Comments


0 Comments

Behavioral feedback loops

Posted in Goals, Posts by

We’ve all heard that horrible screech from a PA system that results when you get the microphone too close to the speakers. It’s called a feedback loop, and it happens when the current output of an event can impact the future iteration of that event. On a PA system, a sound from the speaker is picked up on the microphone, amplified by the system and output by the speaker, now louder. And the microphone picks it up again, sends to the system for amplification before being output by the speaker, and so on. The result is that horrible screech.

Audio feedback loops are perhaps the ones we’re most familiar with, but I was thinking the other day about how a number of things can be considered behavioral feedback loops. Basically, anything that each time you do it, it becomes easier (or harder) to do in the future.

Whether a feedback loop is a good thing or a bad thing is usually dependent on which side of the loop you’re on.

For example, compound interest can be thought of as a good feedback loop: each payout of interest adds to your balance and increases the amount of interest you’ll earn in the successive period. On the flipside, if you’re paying a loan and you don’t pay at least the interest each period (such as a negative amortization loan), then compound interest is definitely NOT your friend.

I think fitness is a feedback loop too: the more fit you are, the more enjoyable and rewarding working out is, and the easier it is to stay fit. Unfortunately, the reverse is also true: the more out of shape you are, the harder it is to work out and keep at it until you reach your desired fitness level.

A final example: confidence. The more confidence you exhibit in general, the greater your likelihood of success. And the more you succeed, the more your confidence will grow. On the flipside, a lack of confidence (aka desperation) will inhibit your success at every turn, only making it harder for you to build confidence.

Addictions are an example of feedback loops: you become more and more dependent on something each time you do it, which makes it harder and harder to resist doing in the future.

Feedback loops are powerful because they build on themselves, growing stronger and more powerful with each step, usually until you reach a plateau of some kind. If it’s a good plateau, we call it “maxing out”. If it’s a bad one, we call it “bottoming out”.

If you’re in a good feedback loop, then you have it easy: just keep going. But what if you’re caught in a bad feedback loop?

You have three choices:

1. Wait until you hit rock bottom – generally a bad option, because it’s often further down than you realize, and the damage can be permanent.

2. Mount a herculean effort – sometimes possible, but it depends on where you are in the feedback loop. Almost never a sustainable form of change.

3. Change the context – To stop an audio feedback loop, you have to change the system in some way: kill the power, cut the levels, etc. Often you have to do the same with a behavioral feedback loop: throw out all the junkfood in your house, cut up the credit cards, etc.

4. Get help – This might come in concert with the first three. In many cases, escaping a feedback loop will be difficult or impossible without external support, motivation, and encouragement.

What feedback loops have you noticed in your own life, and how have you used or defeated them?

0 Comments


9 Comments

Why I Don’t Answer My Phone

Posted in Misc, Personal, Posts by

If you call my phone right now, I probably won’t answer unless:

  1. We have a call scheduled for right now (and I try to avoid those)
  2. You’re my wife, immediate family, or cofounder
  3. You’re in my address book (which is family, friends, and a few clients)

If #1 or #2 applies, I try to pick up 100% of the time. If #3 applies, it’s more like 25%. If it’s not one of the above, the chance is about 0%.

I know what you’re thinking: “How rude! Who is he to decide that he’s just not going to take my call?”

I know it’s frustrating to call someone and have them not pick up. That’s why I’m writing this post, actually…maybe it will shed some light on why I think this rude, antisocial behavior is actually polite.

I spend most of my day writing. It might be sales copy, a blog post, emails, or code, but it’s all hard. Maybe not for some people, but it’s hard for me. So hard that I have to get into a particular mental state to be able to do it with any degree of quality. And that mental state is ever so delicate (read Paul Graham’s Maker’s Schedule, Manager’s Schedule for more). The cost of a 15-minute call that comes in the middle of that time and derails my mental state isn’t 15 minutes, it’s hours, maybe the whole day.

Everyone wants to be the only and most important thing in the world, but they can’t all be. We all have to shuffle and prioritize and decide who we’re going to take care of right now. Trying to please everyone all the time is a recipe for failure. Trying to pick up your phone for every call is a recipe for never getting anything done.

However, I do understand that there are emergencies, so I try to always check my voicemail, email, and text messages within a few minutes after a missed call, to ensure that I’m not dropping the ball. Typically it’s something that can wait, so I wait until I’ve gotten to a good stopping point, and deal with it then.

So while it might seem rude that I don’t answer my phone, it’s actually my best attempt to be respectful. I want to deliver the best I can for my readers, my clients, and my customers. And when we do get on the phone, I want to be able to give you my full attention, instead of being distracted and frustrated by the interruption.

So if you need to talk to me and I don’t pick up my phone, you can leave a voicemail, send me an SMS, or send an email. Just don’t call back later, because I probably won’t pick up then either.

You’re welcome :)

9 Comments


0 Comments

You are a creative genius (or could be)

Posted in Inspiration, Posts by

You might not think you’re creative. You might think that you don’t have that special spark that it takes to write moving music, paint beautiful pictures, or craft a great story.

You’re wrong.

Human beings were made to create new things. Have you ever had a dream that felt so real that you didn’t know you were dreaming? Or one so terrifyingly real that you breathed a huge sigh of relief when you woke up? Remembering dreams is hard, but if you think about a dream immediately after waking, when it’s freshest, you realize that it was a strange amalgam of reality and fantasy. Details and people were familiar as you saw them, but strange in retrospect. And the unfolding story was probably unusual or even bizarre.

Where did that dream come from? It never happened in real life, those events and places and people never existed, at least not in that unique combination. Who created that rich, interactive experience?

You.

Your brain has almost infinite creative capacity, and can create the rich interwoven tapestry of entire worlds in real-time, filling in every empty space with objects of mundanity, beauty, or terror. That’s what happens when you dream: your brain creates whole worlds on the fly, Inception-style.

So if some part of your brain has this rich creative capacity, why can’t you “be more creative”? Why can’t you paint a picture with beauty to match the canvas your brain fills instantly during your dreams?

Two things hold you back from being a creative genius:

First, you haven’t learned to be one. Creativity is something that we all have. But the ability to harness that creativity is a skill. And like any skill, it comes easier for some people than others. Some have a natural ability to draw or write, while others have to learn the skill through repeated effort. But the underlying creativity is there for all of us, simmering below the surface, in our subconscious.

This isn’t to say that everyone’s creativity is the same…our creative “muse” is limited in its capacity by access to the raw materials it has to work with, the experiences, emotions, and ideas that have informed our subconscious throughout our lives.

The second thing that holds you back is fear. Aside from the issue of the “technical” skills that limit the manifestation of our creative capacity, a more powerful repressive force is what we believe about ourselves.

We fear criticism and rejection from others, and from ourselves. We describe ourselves as “not creative” because then we are freed from the pain of any rejection of a creative work we produce. And make no mistake: most of us are our own worst critics. We discard our early shallow works so quickly and with such disgust that we never learn how to pull the deeper ones from our subconscious.

If you knew that your works of creation, no matter how rudimentary, would be met with geniune praise and enthusiasm from your peers (and yourself), how much more likely would you be to try?

0 Comments


1 Comment

Why writing is getting harder for me, and how I’m going to fix it

Posted in Blogging, Goals, Inspiration, News, Personal, Posts by

I’ve been having trouble writing these daily posts for the last couple months. The reasons range from boring and predictable (I’m busy) to slightly more interesting (having more readers has given me writer’s fright), but the process I’ve been going through while writing has been kind of interesting to me.

Writing is an inherently creative task, and like any creative task, the creative process varies from person to person. I know bloggers who sit down and write their daily posts in a near-stream-of-consciousness flow, spend a minute or two checking for any glaring errors, and then hit publish. And while their posts aren’t consistently amazing, they do often push out some pretty good content.

Other bloggers I know carefully crafts their posts over a period of days or even weeks, refusing to publish them until they’re nearly perfect.

My method is quite a bit more haphazard and inconsistent: my posts come to me in fits and spurts, each a unique “personality”. Some just pour out of me a few minutes after the idea has hit, while I’ll wrestle with others for weeks. I’ve got dozens of drafts in various stages of completion, because while the initial idea was intriguing, I just haven’t managed to piece together enough bits to consider it worth sharing.

This makes it difficult to write a daily blog post, because some days I have plenty of ideas and things to write about and I find the words flowing easily, while other days I have absolutely nothing. Most frustrating are the days in the middle, when I have a faint glimmer of an idea that wants to be expressed, but I just can’t make the words work.

Add to this the pressure of needing to produce something every day. Pressure generally isn’t conducive to a creative atmosphere for me. But I have a public commitment to post every day, so I have to post something. This often results in posts that I’m not thrilled with that could have been 10x as good if I could have waited a few days to publish them.

The obvious solution would be to wait until the post is better before publishing. I’ve gone this route in the past, and without a specific, consistent habit of regular publishing, I go months without writing anything. No, I need to keep the daily habit, but figure out how to increase the overall quality.

So here’s what I’ve come up with. For the rest of March, I’m going to write a blog post every weekday, just like I have been. But I’m also going to write one on Saturday, and one on Sunday. And while I’m at it, I’m going to write two posts every day instead of one. But I’m just going to continue to publish a post Monday through Friday, as I have been. Since there are 20 days left in March, that will give me 40 posts in total that I’ll have written by month’s end, but only 15 published. Which means I’ll 25 surplus posts in the hopper, or five weeks of daily posts.

“But Ryan, if you’re going to just start writing twice as much, won’t your quality go down??” Good question, and it’ll be challenging for the next few weeks, but here’s the key: I’ll then have a five-week buffer where I’ll have the opportunity to examine a post and make any changes necessary to take it from OK to great. It’s like the QA portion of the conveyor belt in a factory: I want to make sure I fix the duds before they get shipped out to customers. This way I’ll have some breathing room to do that.

And bonus: not having the psychological pressure of getting today’s post out today will hopefully improve the writing as well.

I generally like to tell people about things like this after I’ve done them, but I’ve been planning on doing this for a couple months now and it hasn’t gone anywhere, so I’m hoping that by telling thousands of people about it, I’ll be able to actually buckle down and do it.

So if you have anything you’d like me to write about, now’s the time let me know.

PS – And in keeping with my theory that I won’t be any different tomorrow, I’m starting right now.

1 Comment


4 Comments

What a bunch of marshmallow-loving 4-year-olds can teach us about winning at life

Posted in Education, Future, Goals, Inspiration, Posts by

768587822_4b4d70bab2_z.jpg
Image by oskay

How many times have you heard that you should “just do it”? How many times have you felt like you should just get over your various hangups and limitations and just get out there and kick ass? How many times have you tried? How many times have you failed?

Maybe for people who find it easy to accomplish things, “just do it” is somehow useful advice, because they’ve been holding back because of doubt, rather than a lack of willpower. Or maybe it’s the kind of hackneyed, useless advice that’s never really worth much to anyone, because the only people who can apply it are those who don’t need it.

Regardless, it doesn’t seem very helpful to me.

Surely even the superhumans among us who have discipline like steel would agree that it’s more complicated than “just do it”, that there is an element of strategy involved in self-improvement and accomplishment. After all, who would propose that it would be a good idea for a chronic over-eater to get a job in a donut shop? Who would suggest that a recovering alcoholic get a job as a bartender?

But do these tricks and strategies really make any difference in the long run for normal people? Or are we just avoiding the terrible truth that we’re simply lazy and weak?

Let me tell you about one of the most fascinating and terrifying research studies I’ve ever heard of. In the late 1960s, a psychologist at Stanford named Walter Mischel designed a series of experiments to understand delayed gratification in children. Almost 700 children participated in the experiments over a period of several years, which consisted of leaving a child alone in a room with a marshmallow or cookie or some other kind of treat, with the instructions that they could have the single treat now, or they could wait a few minutes and have several.

The researchers took footage of these children trying to resist temptation, and the various degrees of anguish displayed while they tried to avoid giving in. As you might expect, many of the children weren’t able to wait more than a few minutes before grabbing the treat; some weren’t able to wait more than a few seconds after the adult left the room before they gave in to temptation. But there were kids who displayed a penchant for restraint, waiting as long as 15 minutes until the adult returned to give them the reward of several cookies.

There are two interesting things about this study.

The first is that the kids who displayed the greatest self-restraint didn’t just sit there and stare at the cookie for 15 minutes. They employed some mental “tricks” to distract themselves from the temptation, tricks which seem to have been effective. Even something as simple as just not looking at the treat seems to have been effective. This skill of understanding how the mind works is called metacognition, and no one explicitly taught it to these kids. They just had it.

The second interesting thing about this study is that this wasn’t the end of it. Milschel (the psychologist) had recruited kids his daughter went to school with, and over the years he periodically asked her how the kids were doing as they grew up. He began to notice some patterns emerging.

Milschel was curious, so he put together a series of surveys and sent them to all the students who participated in the study, asking for info on what they’re doing, their grades, their SAT scores, etc. And he continued doing this over the next thirty years, tracking these people through their teenage and young adult years, right up to the present.

And here’s what he found: the kids who displayed self-restraint all those years ago tended to do better at…everything. They had better grades, fewer behavioral problems, better focus, better friendships, went to better colleges, had better careers, better marriages, a higher socio-economic status, better health, fewer addictions, etc. A kid who was able to wait the full 15 minutes (ten years ago!) had an SAT score, on average, 210 points higher than a kid who could only wait a minute. 210 points.

Let me tell you why this is terrifying: it implies two very, very important points:

1. Self-control supersedes raw intelligence

A related study has shown that ability to delay gratification is a better predictor of academic success than IQ. And that makes sense, because no matter how smart you are, you still have to put in some amount of work to learn the things you need to learn. But that’s not the terrifying part:

2. Self-control may be ingrained in our personality, even genetic in origin

That self-control supersedes raw intelligence is only terrifying to a super-genius, but that self-control may be outside of our control is more sobering. There’s an aspect of fatalism that these experiments reveal that really makes me uncomfortable. The behavior and self-control (or lack thereof) of these kids at the age of four had a strong correlation with their path through life, including their grades, careers, income level, health, even relationships.

So what if, like me, you’re not one of those people who would have done well in this test at the age of four? Is there any hope for us?

Honestly, it’s probably too early to tell how big of a disadvantage we’re at. But there are some bright spots that may provide some solace:

1. The variance isn’t given – The results of this study that I’ve read give the average performance of the subjects, but not the variance. So it could be that the kids who lacked self-restraint did worse as a whole, but there were individuals in that group who did much better. If so, maybe you can be one of those individuals.

2. Maybe we’re tracking the wrong things − It could be that these survey results are tracking all the wrong variables, and that the people who did not display delayed gratification are actually happier, despite being poorer, less educated, unhealthier, and more likely to abuse drugs. However, I think it very unlikely that this is the case. If it was just tracking income, then that might be a possibility, but tracking relationship status, health factors, and propensity to abuse drugs makes me think that there’s probably a pretty strong correlation between the survey results and overall happiness. But you never know.

3. This link between delayed gratification and performance at life wasn’t known to the subjects, but it is known to us. Now that we’ve observed this principle, perhaps we can change the outcome. Maybe impulsivity and self-control are things that we can learn to control: there’s evidence to suggest that willpower is a resource that can be depleted, just like a muscle. If that’s true, then perhaps like a muscle, strategic exercise of willpower over time can strengthen it. Just like the successful kids employed some mental tricks (metacognition) to overcome temptation, maybe we can learn more about how our minds work and surpass our baser instincts.

Who knows why some of us have trouble avoiding junk food, oversleeping, or saving for retirement? It might be the way we were raised or it could be simple genetics. Regardless, there seems to be some hope: Milschel has had success in teaching children some simple tricks to learn how to avoid giving in to temptation. And they work; after just a few minutes of coaching, the kids display a greatly improved ability to delay gratification.

So don’t give up; just keep learning how your mind works and devising strategies to trick it into submission. Maybe someday we’ll be able to match those amazing four-year-olds who could sit in a small room, alone, with a delicious marshmallow in front of them, and not budge.

Don’t look at that marshmallow!

4 Comments


2 Comments

The change I made last month (and what’s next)

Posted in Goals, Personal, Posts by

Last month, I gave up eating any candy for 30 days (well, 28 days, actually). I have good news and bad. The bad news is that I forgot one night and had a small piece of chocolate. The good news is that I don’t really like chocolate and that’s the only candy I had all month, so I’m going to call it a success. I’ve decided to continue with the change and avoid candy from now on (though full disclosure: I had some this past weekend), BUT I’m going to allow for chocolate once a week. I do enjoy something sweet, but chocolate has never been something I crave.

Since the February change was pretty successful, I was pondering changes to make for March and one of my bad habits stood out far above the rest: movies and TV shows. I tend to watch stuff out of boredom, and it ends up robbing me of my concentration. I’ve actually cut way back from what I used to watch, but just like candy, it’s something that I have trouble stopping once I get started.

So I’m going to cut it out completely.

It just so happens that Lent starts tomorrow on March 9th, so I’ve decided to give up all movies and TV shows for Lent, which runs from March 9th to April 23rd. We’ll see how it goes.

If you made a change last month, post and tell us how it went. And if you’re making a change for March (or Lent), let us know in the comments.

2 Comments


2 Comments

How we paid 50 strangers $5 to pick our startup name

Posted in Entrepreneurship, Misc, Posts, Social Media, Technology by

The startup I cofounded with Ben Rasmusen recently underwent a name change from 21times to DailyPath. We had chosen 21times as a placeholder, and weren’t entirely thrilled with it. Then when we couldn’t secure the 21times.com domain name, we started looking at alternatives. We spent some time looking for names that a) we liked and b) were available. Lots of names met criteria (a), but almost none met criteria (b). We finally ended up with a shortlist of about 6 names that either we could buy or were unregistered.

But how to choose? Before spending hundreds of dollars to buy a domain name and then investing in a logo and other design assets, we wanted to be sure we had the right name.

One of the things we’ve learned over the years is the importance of customer development. As this new startup has a broad consumer audience, what we really wanted to know was which name the typical consumer liked the most. Posting to our Twitter and Facebook streams yielded little response, so we started looking for some way to get our list of potential names in front of a bunch of strangers, hopefully without spending a fortune.

Enter Mechanical Turk. In case you’re not familiar, Mechanical Turk is a marketplace on Amazon for short, tiny tasks that only a human can do. If you’re a startup, you might use it to have people tag photos on your platform, or identify inappropriate posts. Things like that. You can price each task however you want, down to a few cents.

Worth a try, so I setup a survey on Mechanical Turk and set the “reward” for each answer to ten cents. However, I didn’t want people to just click a random answer just to get the ten cents, so I also included some questions about their demographic (age, gender, income, education), and some open-ended questions about why they liked or disliked the name, as well as questions about what kinds of things they’d like to learn if they had the opportunity. I did the initial run for 50 different people to respond, and published the survey.

I honestly didn’t think I’d be able to get 50 responses. I mean, it’s a freaking dime. But I was wrong: after only a few hours, we had all 50 responses. And some people took the time to write multiple paragraphs about which names they liked and why. Completely bizarre. DailyPath was the clear winner, with more than twice as many favorable responses as the next contender.

Best of all, the total cost was $5. Not the last time I’ll be using Mechanical Turk. If you have a question that you’d like 50 people to answer and you have $5, give Mechanical Turk a try.

2 Comments


0 Comments

Take nothing for granted

Posted in Education, Entrepreneurship, Future, Goals, Inspiration, Posts, Science by

The NY Times ran an article this week about Natalie Portman and her talents as a high schooler. Not her acting talents, mind you (though she had plenty of that), but her skills in…science. Yes, that’s right. Even after being cast in multiple roles opposite actors like Julia Roberts, Uma Thurmon, and Jack Nicholson, she still maintained an A- average through high school and was a semi-finalist in the Intel Science Talent Search, a prestigious national science competition whose winners have gone on to various awards and honors, including earning seven Nobel Prizes. After graduating high school (and playing Queen Amidala in the Star Wars prequel trilogy), she went on to Harvard to earn a degree in neurobiology.

One of the quotes that stood out to me was this one from a teacher of Ms. Portman:

“I’ve taught at Harvard, Dartmouth and Vassar, and I’ve had the privilege of teaching a lot of very bright kids…there are very few who are as inherently bright as Natalie is, who have as much intellectual horsepower, who work as hard as she did. She didn’t take a single thing for granted.”

She didn’t take a single thing for granted. Here’s someone who had the start of a fantastic career and a clear road to stardom. The most natural thing to do with her academics would be to just coast. Or hire a private tutor to complete high school, like many underage celebrities do. But she didn’t do that. She pushed forward and accomplished as much as she could. She even published in a peer-reviewed journal while at Harvard (giving her an Erdős–Bacon number of 7).

She’s not alone though; many celebrities are incredibly smart, driven people off the screen as well. James Franco, nominated for an Academy Award for his performance in 127 Hours, apparently wasn’t satisfied with his film career and reenrolled at UCLA in 2006, receiving permission to take up to 61 (!) credit hours (as opposed to the normal 19) while still acting. He graduated in 2008 with a 3.5 GPA and moved to New York to simultaneously attend graduate school at Columbia University’s MFA writing program, New York University’s Tisch School of the Arts for filmmaking, and Brooklyn College for fiction writing. Naturally, he also occasionally committed to North Carolina’s Warren Wilson College for poetry. He received his MFA from Columbia and is now a PhD student at Yale and planning on attending the Rhode Island School of Design as well.

How depressing :)

I could go on…check out Dolph Lundgren or Mayim Bialik (now playing Dr. Farah Fowler on the hit sitcom The Big Bang Theory).

These people had already arrived in one sense. They had every reason to relax and just enjoy their success in their field, but they didn’t. They kept pressing forward, learning new things, reinventing themselves.

This is a lesson I constantly have to remind myself of. (Warning: egotistical statement coming up)  I’m not a big success yet, but I’m doing OK. In the last five years I’ve seen my income more than quadruple and earned the freedom to work when and where I want, on what I want. And I’m in the process of separating my time from my income. But sometimes I catch myself slowing down, subconsciously thinking that I’ve arrived somehow. Nothing could be further from the truth.

As the Apostle Paul said:

“I do not consider myself yet to have taken hold of it. But one thing I do: forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ahead, I press on toward the goal to win the prize for which God has called me heavenward in Christ Jesus.”

Paul is obviously not talking about his career here, but this isn’t taking his words out of context. I think that being on guard against complacency is a principle to be applied to every area of life. It’s a constant danger that we have to be aware of.

On the other hand, where does contentment fit in? There’s a lot to be said for being grateful for what you have, instead of always striving to have more. There must be a sense of balance in terms of striving to be our best and not holding ourselves to an impossible standard; we should be proud of our accomplishments if we worked hard and did our best. So where is the line between contentment and complacency?

After some reflection, I think the difference is in the distinction between what we have and who we are. None of us are perfect, so while we shouldn’t beat ourselves for our limitations, neither should we be satisfied with them. We should always be pushing ourselves to new challenges and opportunities for growth, whether that’s taking a full-time course load at an Ivy League school while being cast in an Academy Award nominated performance, or just applying for that management position that’s just a little outside our comfort zone.

Just keep pushing forward and never be afraid to reinvent yourself. Who knows what your wikipedia entry might read someday? :)

0 Comments


0 Comments

Feb 2011 Blog Income Report

Posted in Blogging, Entrepreneurship, Finances, Goals, News, Personal, Posts, Social Media by

The bloodbath continues:

ryanwaggoner.com revenue tracking.jpg

0 Comments


Subscribe by email:
Connect With Me