I've recently been thinking about the motives for people writing these kinds of articles. A year ago I would have found this a weird question because when the actions of blogging and sharing are so culturally ingrained it's very difficult to step outside and ask "Why?". Now I find it instructive to do so. Sincerely and unrhetorically: "Why did you write this?"
My belief at the moment is that such articles are validation-seeking. The writer draws strength from committing their plans to a socially-viewable document and subjecting it to discussion. Most of the likely responses to posting the piece online (including no responses) can, with a little squinting, be interpreted as positive reinforcement for the individual's system, hence the incentive to share.
Interesting question I think, seriously.
Do I search for validation online? I don't think so, I have enough of it around me, without having to turn to the web :).
What about tip (experience, hack, call it the way you want) sharing?
I see a lot of great posts written by really cool people around here; maybe is it also a way to try to give something back (or in your words, probably try to fit in the group in search for the reassuring feeling of being part of it ;)). This is (IMHO) the most probable reason.
I use all those tools for a long time, and discuss about it with my friends regularly. I think it is good for yourself to try to be good at what you do. Writing such articles and sharing it in the open is a way to find people having the same interests as me that I would never have found otherwise.
Hopefully, the post will lead to interesting interactions (exactly what I am doing right now :).
Can I call that peer-validation? Maybe, but not in the exact way in understood it in your comment :).
As a non native English speaker, I might be wrong but I felt like condescension in your comment. But this is probably my french nature speaking :p
Additionally, a blog post a good resource/ starting point for others who are looking to accomplish something similar. I've heard of many of these tools before, but not all of them, so it's good reference material for me.
Validation may be a positive side effect, but maximizing individual productivity is a subject of genuine interest for many people, myself included. Look at www.lifehacker.com. I don't think that website exists as a conduit for authors' self-esteem. Look at the success of Tim Ferriss. Examples go on...
OP clearly put a lot of work into researching various methods, tried them out on himself, and wanted to share the results, maybe even give back to the "productivity community." I appreciate that.
I think there's a clash between lifehacker/Tim Ferriss and '[wanting] to share the results, maybe even give back to the "productivity community"', rather than an affinity as you seem to suggest. The former are profit-generating enterprises whose business is selling productivity techniques. Lifehacker is fairly authentic, but a Gawker-owned for-profit nonetheless while I don't personally place Tim Ferriss far from Tony Robbins et al. Whether that's overly harsh or not, I don't think either are comparable to independent folk posting their productivity systems on their personal blogs when their businesses are not related to selling books of those techniques, or making money from ad revenue their productivity tips attract.
I'm cynical, but '[wanting] to share the results, maybe even give back to the "productivity community"' doesn't seem like a complete answer to me. And I'm not trying to get anyone to admit secret motives, I just think there are subconscious things going on when people post their productivity solutions, and I'm trying hard to figure out what they are.
Maybe you should author a summary of your findings ("A Novel Theory on the Subconscious Motivations of Personal Productivity Articles") and then we can analyze the subconscious reasons driving your quest.
A mirror in a mirror :)
EDIT: I think OP did confirm that he believes his own intent was to share with the community, but one can debate whether or not he is a fair judge of his own motivations.
This is funny, but it's only a mirror in a mirror if I write and post the article. Why one would do that is exactly what I'm trying to understand.
But then, I have been commenting actively here and "Why do that?" is almost the same question. Trying to step away from myself and answer honestly I think it's because I've been a lurker on HN for years but don't feel like a proper HNer without 500 karma. A few weeks ago I tried to start posting more. It's difficult, because before I click reply I always try to rigorously break down my motives. Usually I don't like what I see, and close the tab.
A large percentage of writings on the internet are motivated by unhealthy narcissism. Well, why don't we just replace "writings on the internet" with "things people do"?
Then share a complete answer with your thoughts, instead of being cynical :).
That would be more constructive than posting such comments, wouldn't it ?
Maybe because it takes a lot of effort to implement all that stuff and it's still a big deal for a lot of people. This is also a regular blogger why not? Also there are probably a lot more out there, you see this one because people find it upvoteworthy.
You could ask the question for almost every blog post, i think this one is not much different why posts on codehorror are written. There are a lot of good reasons to blog, just Google for it.
> You could ask the question for almost every blog post
Indeed. Usually I perceive the motives are to increase the author's employability attractiveness, promote their business, or build status within their community. Some productivity posts fall into those categories too I believe, but usually to me the validation model is a better fit.
> i think this one is not much different why posts on codehorror are written.
My belief at the moment is that such articles are validation-seeking. The writer draws strength from committing their plans to a socially-viewable document and subjecting it to discussion. Most of the likely responses to posting the piece online (including no responses) can, with a little squinting, be interpreted as positive reinforcement for the individual's system, hence the incentive to share.