El-mom

Comment section. (Because apparently, that's not default when it comes to forwarding things on telegram)

*cough cough Guess I ended up writing it I guess, lol:

On the flip side, I feel weird writing something without a definite conclusion or something to impart. My approach to most of my writing, I think, is to show you a different perspective or a different conclusion and walk you through that. Or even if it's not a different conclusion, even if it's something you already know, I want you to relate, I want you to think deeper (maybe), and I want you to even realize you know that and verbalize it better. I think there are three reasons for this. The first one is, writing for me is a way to define things through as much as it's a way to think things through. In my day-to-day life, as everyone else I guess, I observe my surroundings, I consume content and engage in conversations, and I think. But that, in my head, is all jumbled up. And so writing, especially consistently, puts those things down in order and leads me to come up with, not conclusions per se, but a structured thought process of sorts. I write to define and make things concrete as much as I write to navigate through the abstract and broaden my limits. And that, I think, makes my writing slightly bit more certain and slightly bit more "I think" than "I feel". The second one is, when I write for the public (or when I decide to share one of my private writings to the public), I've realized that I'm writing for 14-year-old me. I'm writing for my even-more-naive-than-now self who's stumbling upon the internet everywhere and absorbing every article and blog she encounters like a sponge. I'm writing to enlighten her, to show her the world in a positive but pragmatic light, and I'm showing her how I got to those points in the first place. I'm not saying what I write is 14-year-old material per se (seeing how my favourite writer back then was 25-years-old), but that's who I'm imagining reading it. And I don't think she'd want something written with uncertainty, with no opening to challenge herself, and grow up with that voice. I'd rather her read that I'm making not-so-solid conclusions, but choosing to challenge myself through them. I'd rather her see me have a voice that's willing to stand my ground, but also to change my mind when a counterargument is offered. And the third, and something I've hinted towards I guess the entire time this channel has existed, is that I love counterarguments and challenges. I'm not saying I always respond to those challenges well, and I do usually take my time thinking through those challenges, reconstructing my argument, and then making my own conclusions from them. But, even at the cost of having seen myself contradict this at times, I truly truly love a challenge. The best conversations I have are those that pick on arguments I make, deconstruct them, make me see a different perspective, and then leave me with insights that make me think for months straight after that. Some of the people I call valued friends are those who drop small bits of gems, challenges, advices, from which I could map my exponential growth during the months ahead. And that is why I post (well... historically, better now than before I guess lol) my writings even when I know I'm being biased, and even when I know there are holes in my argument.

Food for thought? Challenges? Counter-arguments?

But also, I think it makes me a good writer too.

(at least in my opinion.) Because from what I’ve noticed recently with a lot of pieces I read, whether that’s on Substack or Telegram, is that I tend to feel very disconnected from them. They read as if they’re trying to tell me something, expose me to some enlightened level of thinking I have never reached before. There’s always this faint pressure underneath the words, like I’m being nudged toward a conclusion I didn’t arrive at myself. But it doesn’t sink in much. For the life of me, all I can feel is as if I’m reading a beautifully written, evidently well-researched (uhhm dull) textbook. It’s too polished. It has finished all that it has to do and become. And I think that’s what I hate, the explaining. The certainty. The high ground or enlightenment. And then I notice how I write. As you might know by now, I usually default to showing my inner world and how the gears in my brain turn. I write about the process itself, the friction, the (as much as I hate it) contradiction. I don’t write thinking of what message to put across, but what I need to get out of myself. Writing for me is like a release valve. It’s like I give the world a slice of my thoughts and how I react to certain topics, not because I think those reactions are correct or important, but because they’re mine, and they’re happening in real time. It is never about trying to make broad generalizations, and if you’ve read some generalization of mine, uh, no you didn’t. But if you have, it probably took me a lot of effort to step outside of myself and put the generalization there, just to make my piece sound more universal and less self-centered. But maybe being self-centered isn’t so bad. In a world of essays on TikTok, Instagram, Substack, YouTube, all low-key trying to call you out on your dumbness for not having read the philosophies of Aristotle or Carl Jung or Confucius or whoever the fuck, maybe it’s friendlier and more honest to read (and write) from the perspective of an individual who has no advanced thinking tools in her arsenal but the most common English words and a lot of free time. I think there’s something kinder about it. Less of “I know something you don’t.” And more “this is what it feels like to be me, do with that what you will.” And I think the lack of polish and the broken sentences leave space for the reader (to do whatever) instead of crowding them with conclusions. So I may not write statements, I may not be well-read, and I may even be a little self-absorbed and only see the world through how it makes me feel, but at least I don’t shove anything down people’s throats. I don’t corner you into agreement. I think in real time. I contradict myself in real time. I change my mind mid-sentence sometimes and that’s what I put to paper (screen tbh, i havent written on paper in a whileee) You, dear reader, can think along with me. Or not. You can drift in and out of what I’m saying. You can take something from it, or absolutely nothing at all. Either way, I’m not trying to tell you anything.

Indecisiveness has made me a bad writer.

I cannot commit. The fear of finality, of being pinned down and held accountable to something I once believed in, makes me incapable of writing statements. I say, "I feel like" instead of "I think" or “It is.” I hide in introspection. Inside, everything is fluid, subjective, unprovable. Inside, I cannot be wrong, because I am only ever describing what I feel. And that is what I do. I write about how things feel, not how they are. I circle myself endlessly, as if the world only exists in relation to my reaction to it. I refuse to generalize, even in the most harmless or widely accepted ways. To generalize is to say, "this is true beyond me." And I don’t trust myself enough to say that anymore. I have two theories for why this happened. The first is simple: I might just be lazy. To write with conviction about anything outside of myself requires effort. It requires reading, questioning, researching. It demands that I move beyond passive existence into deliberate thought. Whenever an unfamiliar thought starts forming in my head, it hits a barrier beyond which my innate knowledge cannot sustain it further. For the thought to grow to its true size and nature, I need to expend energy and... brain says no. And poof goes the thought, like a cloud in a particularly strong gust of wind. The second is: I am afraid. I notice how, in moments where my beliefs or ideas could be challenged, I disappear and label it as "protecting my peace." The lack of concrete, indisputable proof and the unwillingness to change my ideas and beliefs make it hard for me to stand in defense of my words; to even write words to defend. There is exposure in stating something plainly without softening it or retreating behind the curtain of individuality. To simply say "This is what I think, fight me". The possibility that I might be wrong, uninformed, naive, or worse, that I might have to change, is quite frankly simply unpleasant. So, I stay internal, I say, “This makes me feel…” And this pursuit of temporary relief (and the strongarming of self-preservation) makes me a bad writer.

Trying to see if there are personal telegram content creators (think levels of Dagmawi Babi or Tech Nerd) that aren't necessarily in Tech, if you can forward their channels (you can both comment them or DM them to @not_eldana), it'd be super awesome. Thank you in advance 🤗🤗

So Diana (the other Diana, our Diana for those who know) is now on Substack. This was an interesting read, especially having grown up with her and knowing how much of an amazing individual she is. It also felt weird coming from her, cause some of my earliest memories were my mom going "[her real name] is so beautiful, des sitl", and that holds true to this day. But, oh well... Beauty standards were something I thought through in high school and decided to ignore for my peace of mind. I still think of it from time to time, but my thought processes have become more mechanical than with any attachment of self-worth and emotions. That had both its positive and negative sides, but at least, at the cost of looking childish, naive, inexperienced, "not put together", and yes, chopped, it has given me some very well-deserved peace of mind and a peaceful life. But I'm thinking, it's still something to talk about, given how it's still so relevant in our lives. Check it out. I'll (no guarantees) share my reflections in a bit.

So this is the official invitation to everyone. we are going to be meeting up on Saturday afternoon to socialize, share ideas, but most importantly to foster and strengthen our community. Lets all get together and create beautiful memories and foster meaningful connection ❤️❤️❤️ if you want to be a part of this beautiful community, please feel free to come by. now ik what you're asking, is food free? unfortunately no. this is the plan tho, we'll order food and then share the expense just like how any group of friends would do, 300-500 birr per person will be more than enough (sorry for the inconvenience here, habtam sehon gabezachuhalw :)) SO IF YOU ARE COMMING, PLEASE LET ME KNOW AT @BlackLion325 or 0979562972, because the place needs to know the exact number of people coming before Saturday. if you are a telegram content creator, feel free to share this around let people know what were are up to. cant wait to see you all. ❤️✨✨

Honorable brochachos and sischachos (yes, I'm cringing), check this out eski: Exitetbot (It's an Exit Exam bot for Seniors in Uni)

🚀 Break the Pattern: Build. Innovate. Win. If you can think, you can build. If you can build, you can win. Whether you’re a creative, a student, a developer, or a non-technical join us for a high-energy day of building and discovery. No prior coding experience? No problem. What’s happening: ✨ Vibe Coding Workshop: Learn to build functional apps instantly using AI tools (perfect for beginners!). 🏗 Hands-on Building: Turn your ideas into working prototypes in one afternoon. 🔥 Fireside Chats: Insights from industry voices and tech leaders. 💰 Major Cash Prizes: Reward your impact significant prizes for top-performing teams! 🍕 Free Hospitality: Food and refreshments provided all day. 📅 When: April 25th 📍 Where: Aurora Co-working - Dani Plaza, 4th Floor 🎟 Status: Registration is OPEN! Capacity is strictly limited. 👉 REGISTER HERE - https://luma.com/goh9p860 Break old patterns. Build new solutions. Win the future. #BreakThePattern #WomenTechmakers #GDGoCBITS #GDGoCHiLCoE

Comment section (if needed, once again).

- Topic 3: On Perspectives - Part 2

One, what is reality, really? One of the drawbacks of my being biased is that numbers have stopped making sense to me. I've, in a very weird way, learnt to shrug whenever I hear someone makes tens of millions of birr or learnt to relate whenever someone shows me their bank account with 20 Birr in it. But the biggest drawback here is in what I consider to be good money, let me give you an example. A while back, I saw an ad that went "we can teach you skills that can make you up to 40,000 birr per month". I forwarded this to one of my friends and went "can you imagine this is the highest ceiling they're advertising this as?" to which he went "you... do know that's a lot of money, right?". And I forget that, genuinely. Which, again, is very weird, considering I've had days with 3 figures in my bank account. Which leads me to my next reflection... Is there a "right" perspective? This could be asked about a lot of things, but I'm going to talk about it from the financial point of view. There, obviously, are differences in how we think about money based on the financial statuses we had growing up and what we've seen growing up. There obviously are nuances even in this, someone whose parents sacrifice themselves to ensure that their children grow up in private school and someone whose parents live a humble life even when their bank accounts are riddled with zeros don't have the same perspective as the numbers surrounding them show. But the difference in perspectives goes deep to the point that, is there an objective perspective to look money through? Ultimately, my temporary answer to this question was that whatever perspective serves you well is the "right" perspective. So if it's hustle culture that gets you the stability you want, then hustle culture it is. If it's taking stability as a baseline and taking the slow but rewarding in the long-term path that'll reward you more, then that perspective it is. If it's la-di-da-ing and chasing your passion what gives you meaning, then la-di-da it is.

#Theblogseries

- Topic 3: On Perspectives - Part 1

It might not seem like it, but I curate my surroundings heavily. It's something that's been in the back of my head for sometime now, almost like a throwaway thought. But it came to full light yesterday, in a conversation with a guard of a deaf school. So here's the thing, I do get "exposed" to a lot of perspectives in my daily life, but getting exposed and actually engaging with the exposure are different things. Like sure, there are multitude of perspectives in my class and in my academic circle, but the ones I choose to engage with beyond that of simple "hi"s and occasional complaints against the lecturers all have similar perspectives than mine. Same thing happens with circles career-wise, extracurricular-wise, social life-wise. At this point, I can almost create a profile for how similar the people I choose to deepen my relationship with are similar to each other. Yesterday, I was talking about finances with my co-contemplator, and she said something along the lines of "even personally, we think differently when we're broke and when we're not, let alone between people that have had money throughout their lives and those that had to fight for it everyday". We were talking about how the people we see go aggressively after money, who get into hustle culture, who sacrifice the la-di-da of life for the pursuit of stability, usually come from places where money had been tight. And while this might be a very biased take with a very small sample, it does hold true to some extent. The people around us who were somewhat similar to us, i.e., people raised somewhat middle class (whether they're middle class now or not and what qualifies as middle class in Ethiopia being ignored here), didn't really care much about stability or going after money for the sake of it. And, again, this is a heavily biased take, but the people around us pursued life in terms of passions, goals, contentment, happiness, and somehow, money seemed to find its way towards them. Let me elaborate on this a bit based on my experience. So I'm someone who thinks life will work out well, truly. And this reflects back to when I said I curate my surroundings heavily. When I imagine late 20s me or early 30s me, the people I see are the older Addis Shapers (the community I'm in, google it if you want) and people like Diana (Diana Yohannes) and Pomi (Mekdim Hailu Legesse, you can Google her). And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying their lives are perfect or that they've never had challenges, but they've somehow made things work out so well to the point that from my point of view, I genuinely wouldn't mind living their lives when I reach their ages. My perspective is heavily biased in the sense that stability is a given when I look forward in life, even during my 3 AM contemplation moments when I'm imagining myself lost at the age of 25 and even when my net-worth is sub 4 figures. This whole contemplation moment got me reflecting on two things... Continued in Part two

Edit: *Hailu #Theblogseries

I'd like to imagine.

I'd like to imagine the small dot the painter put on the rocket making a kid happy. I'd like to imagine someone sitting in front of it, noticing it, and smiling a little. I'd like to imagine the throwaway comment I made making someone chuckle throughout the day. I'd like to imagine that being their random memory 10 years down the line. I'd like to imagine the taste of cinnamon in my tea adding flavour to my small pocket of happy moment. I'd like to imagine my little sister knowing that when she put it there. I'd like to imagine the tiny squeeze in my hug comforting you. I'd like to imagine that it keeps you going when life gets hard. I'd like to imagine the world running through the smallest details, and I'd like to imagine them mattering.

#Theblogseries #Poem?

- Topic 6: Working smart is actually hard work

"Practice doesn’t make perfect. Perfect practice makes perfect." I'm remembering this... YouTube video, I think, that I saw a couple of months ago which was about Oxford University and who gets in. The argument was that Oxford, while being meritocratic and less... unambiguous in its acceptance criteria, the majority of people that go to Oxford tend to be from the top private schools in Britain. Which makes one wonder, in a country where the public school education is considered adequate enough for students to get into Oxbridge, why are the numbers still skewed towards those from the top private schools? The answer to this is, as much as it's about resources, it's also about the type of practice. Practice, study, and hard work by themselves aren't enough, knowing how to practice also matters. And that's what differentiates the top schools from the albeit qualified "good schools" in the UK, in the sense that the students that go to top schools not only have better resources, perhaps a better culture of learning, more expectations, but they also build a better system on how to study and how to practice. Let me put this back into our context. In school, you probably have noticed that you can classify the top students in the class in two, those that chill around and still manage to get good grades, and those that study 24/7 and get good grades. The differences among them could be attributed to whether they had a good intellectual base as children or whether they're late bloomers, and to some extent, to their natural abilities as well. But still, in competition among the two groups, you somehow still find those who chill doing marginally better across many areas of life than those that grind 24/7. Both are working hard, obviously, but one is working better than the other. Now after all this argument, my initial title might seem misleading to you, so here's my clarification: Simply working hard for the sake of it is less cognitively demanding, if you think about it. You don't analyze your learning process, you don't look into building up from first principles, you don't have to take risks, you can just take the pre-determined path you're given and grind on it. It is challenging, but it's challenging in the sense that the specific issues are challenging, while the lens you're approaching it is the same. On the other hand, when you decide to work smart, you actually have to actively work on how you work in addition to what you work on. You have to look for better ways to learn, bite a lot more than you can chew and break your teeth in the process of chewing it, constantly question what you're learning and how you're learning, and constantly look for the bigger picture and across other areas of knowledge to find links on how to better learn. Working smart requires you to constantly look into and build systems behind your work and it requires you to build a personal feedback loop that looks beyond surface level results and "I should work harder", and this, in my opinion, makes "working smart" be actually harder than it looks. Food for thought?

#Theblogseries

- Topic 5: On building Rome in a day

One of the things that bugs me from some cultures is this, it's the notion that you can become "besties" in a day. Don't get me wrong, there are people you click with instantly and find yourself at ease within a very short amount of time, but getting close in a meaningful way requires time and what time brings. A couple of months ago, I was having a conversation with some of the Addis Shapers in who we consider close friends and what our metrics were (don't ask which line of conversation got us there). There were a lot of metrics: vulnerability, dependence, comfort in being yourself... my biggest one was time. The friends I consider closest to me are those I've known for more than 10 years now, and the only person who has managed to be an exception is someone I've known for almost three years now. I didn't understand why this was until yesterday. I realized, it's because time is the best way to show you the different colors of someone and the growth stages of someone. Sure, I can try to compress topics in an afternoon, get to know someone deeply, and tell myself that we're friends, but it doesn't work that way. Time shows you how a person truly acts, and what that means to you. Time also makes you truly vulnerable, in ways that simply talking about your problems doesn't. And time gives you the space to show the different aspects of yourself, to let your seasons unfold and grow within them. I realized, to call someone close, to build the Rome of friendships, I have to be around day in and day out for longer periods of time. This doesn't necessarily mean seeing them everyday, I have long distance friendships that are just as fulfilling as with those I see in-person, but it means some form of constant presence, constant communication. And, again, that communication doesn't have to be everyday or even every week at times, but it has to exist, and I have to see you unfold, grow, and live through time to consider myself close to you. I don't know what you (the reader) can take away from this to be honest, maybe looking into what time means for you or what makes a friendship truly a friendship for you. But, anyway, food for thought?

#Theblogseries

- Topic 4: On hustle culture

Umm... ok, so do argue with me on this, but I genuinely think hustle culture doesn't make sense. Whenever I hear "there's someone working more hours than you making more money than you" or "no rest for the wicked" or I don't know, whatever sends the message that work is all there is to life, I can't help but question, "so what?". One thing I've learnt these past few months is that I genuinely couldn't care less about having a lot of money or being able to afford everything for the sake of it. Don't get me wrong, I do care about money a lot, but genuinely, I'm content with a simple life. I can't tell you the happiness I felt when I cleaned out my closet, dumped almost 1/3rd of it to my little sister (as God had intended), and was left with only the comfy essentials. I've learnt that all the money in the world wouldn't compensate for hours-long good conversations with that white friend of mine, or laughing till my insides hurt in the middle of a walk in Kasanchis at 8 PM, or my little sister running for a hug the moment I get into my home, or Sunday mornings with my good cup of tea and saved articles on Substack. I don't understand the need to sell your soul, the need to chase money wherever it is, when ambition doesn't necessarily mean money. Again, this is where my take on perspective comes. Whenever I look at the older Addis Shapers (granted, they lived and worked in different times than I do now), I see stability, thriving, good careers, while also having more than enough time to lounge around, relax, take walks, go to cafes. And again, maybe I'm heavily biased, but isn't that what life is about? Something I'd like to make sure isn't taken out of context here, when I'm saying this, I'm not discarding the pursuit of money or working hard. I actually think both are important. And I don't think money or working hard are evil, in the contrary, I think both are truly essential topics and skills that can truly enrich your life. My question lies on the "so what?". So you make money, so you work extremely hard, and...? What do those serve exactly? Are they fulfilling you? Is the money you're making enriching your life and buying you your time (could be present time, could be future time) or making you even more miserable? Is there truly a point to you losing out on the small moments for the sake of "working hard"? Food for thought?

#Theblogseries

- Topic 2: on content and obviousness

You can never be original, not really. But applying it to reflections and writings, I can't help but think that everything I can say or write is obvious in one way or another. Any type of lesson, theme, or reflection I can try imparting on people is something that already exists out there, and I'm not really inventing or showing you anything new. And this sometimes bugs me, it makes me feel like I'm not contributing anything of value. Like, when you think about it, obviously, choosing to deliberately be naïve is the hack to happiness. Obviously (the next topic), different perspectives exist. So me writing them down or choosing to reflect on them feels, not dumb per se, but like telling you what you already know, and why would I do that? But then, I think about some of my favourite writings and reflections, and I realize that they serve to make me think about/ reflect on the obvious more. The thing that made Diana my inspiration for my writing from the moment I read her first blog was that. I somehow had always known that Ethiopian Feminism should be different from Western Feminism, I had known that good marriages exist but that they're a lot of work, and I had known that Ethiopian pride existed. Seeing it written down in a sorted-out way, in a challenging way, and in a way that gave me perspective was what made it different. Whenever I sit down with writers', both professional and non-professional, the question of "why do we write?" always gets asked. And the typical answers, "catharsis", "because it's relatable", "passion", get thrown around, and they get debated on to the point that they stop becoming valid reasons. The one reason I've seen hold its ground in these discussions is this, "it's to reflect what's seemingly obvious but is different in every context and in every story". Most stories, reflections, and experiences people talk about and write about have been told, thought, and written many times before, and if one chooses to look for them, are obvious. What makes each different is the perspective it gets told from, and the way they're communicated.

#Theblogseries

- Topic 1: Choosing to deliberately be naïve

I'm a generally happy individual, truly. My default moods are usually grateful, content, or at their worst (aka, PMS), tired. I really try not to dwell much on the disappointments and the negative things in life (which are a lot), both in my personal one and around the world. How I do this is by deliberately being naïve, by deliberately ignoring the things outside of my control and adopting the "how can I solve it?" mindset when things are in my control, and by assuming the good in everything. I'm delusional to a pragmatic extent. I have this mindset that things will work out anyway, that I'll have the life I want, and that I'll die with a life well-lived. I'm going to focus on the "assuming the good in everything" part. I don't have the energy to assume anybody is out to get me or that I have haters surrounding me, I genuinely don't. I'm not saying I'm completely oblivious here, I do put up my boundaries and dissociate when I see red flags (or when my gut instinct twitches even a tiny bit), but I'd rather still assume a person is good when I first interact with them. And for good measure, I've met enough good people to cancel out the bad ones, so I'll continue believing that. About three months ago, I had a conversation with a friend who asked me "would you rather go for the truth or for the comfort in things within your life?". That question was posed specifically for religion, but applying it generally, I'd ideally go for truth than comfort. But I've learnt that my peace of mind hangs on me choosing comfort, and I've also learnt that choosing comfort doesn't necessarily mean not choosing truth. It could mean seeing the truth, but choosing to amplify the positive aspects of it, choosing to forget the parts that aren't in your control, and choosing to still see good.

#Theblogseries

The Blueprint https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/blueprint-diana-yohannes-6cytf?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_android&utm_campaign=share_via