In this episode, Robert Carnes and I dig into Michael Schur’s book “How to Be Perfect“.
You can listen to the episode here:
For more on Robert, he’s behind much of the content on the Green Mellen website, and you can also find him at JamRobCar.com or on his Medium page.
Full Transcript:
Mickey: The most important part of becoming better people, wow, all right. The most important part of becoming better people, I’ll say it again, is that we care about whether what we do is good or bad and therefore try to do the right thing. So that was from Michael Schur’s book, How to Be Perfect, and joining me today to discuss is Robert Carnes.
So Robert, welcome to the show.
Robert: Thanks for letting me join you on this podcast. Since we have another podcast together.
Mickey: we’ve, we’ve done quite a bit of podcasting, but this book you encouraged me to read and it’s a fantastic, deep, complicated book. And of course, Michael Schur, the creator of the good place among other things, and the good place. I think I don’t remember the order. You can kind of clear me up on this, but I think the good place sort of inspired.
Just dive into this stuff and then the book came out later, but it’s certainly fascinating.
Robert: I mean, that’s the quick backstory, which I guess that’s as good a place to begin as any, is that if you like the show, the good place from NBC from several years ago, um, this is from the creator and writer of that show based on his research into all the moral [00:01:00] philosophy that goes into the good place, which I rewatched the show. Recently, earlier this year in 2024, after having seen it, you know, when it, as it came out several years ago, um, it’s a quick watch, which is good. It’s only four seasons of, I don’t know, 12 to 15 episodes a piece. Uh, so it’s a quick, quick watch, but at the same time, I now watched it through the lens of having read this book and picking up all the different moral and ethical, uh, tenants that he unpacks there.
So it was an interesting rewatch because I, I watched it kind of. that point of view, which was, which is good. It got me a little bit deeper into some of these questions that we’ll be talking about. Yeah,
Mickey: the show itself, so many things come up along the way that you know are coming the second time that you see how they’re kind of framing things and it’s, it’s fascinating to do that, much less having read the book where you really understand the philosophy behind things.
So that’s, yeah, that’s a cool idea. I don’t think I’ve read, rewatched it since I’ve read the book. So that would be,
Robert: funny though.
Mickey: Oh, Oh, it is. It’s fantastic.
Robert: show, but at the same [00:02:00] time, those two things can be great, which is, again, I think one of the great things about this book is that Schur is just a very humorous, funny, quirky individual. And he brings that to this book, but yet it’s a, such a serious, universal concept of. Good and bad and right and wrong and all those sort of things. So it’s, it’s a cool dichotomy there. Absolutely.
Mickey: though is when he was on the office as Dwight’s weird cousin Mose and so I pictured with that crazy beard running around like this is the serious guy, but he really is. So it’s a fascinating book.
So cool. So you read it and we know how to be perfect now. So that’s fantastic. It’s great to be perfect. But yeah, no, tell me, tell, tell everyone, I guess a little more what, what the books, yeah, kind of dive in a little bit.
Robert: I mean, so it is a very large concept, which is not only for a book, but also for a podcast talking about the book. But yeah, I mean, it’s, it dives into an overview of ethical and moral philosophy, uh, which is very big and has been going on, you know, we’ve. I’ve been having these [00:03:00] conversations as humans for thousands and thousands of years and what is right and wrong and how do you make the right decision?
How do you be good? How do you be better? Um, yeah, it’s, it’s a very tough topic and I’ve, you know, been interested in learning more about this. Um, and so that’s, that’s one of the reasons why I think, again, I like this book is because it’s approached by somebody who is not a moral philosophy professor, which. watched The Good Place, nobody likes moral philosophy professors.
Mickey: There you go. Yeah,
Robert: but yeah, so Mike Schur is just a writer and a smart guy and a comedian. And, uh, he breaks this down in ways that we as normal people can understand and makes it a lot more accessible and interesting. And I mean, he’s not right about everything, and I’m sure that he’s missing a lot of things.
And he kind of admits to that, right? He admits to not being a philosopher that has studied this for a long, long time. He’s just a guy who’s read a lot about this and has synthesized a lot of this information. So, mean, we could spend hours kind of unpacking all of the [00:04:00] different schools of thought that he talks about.
I mean, there’s three kind of main ones, um, virtue ethics that was from Aristotle and deontology, which was from Immanuel Kant. Um, and then utilitarianism, which is by a couple of guys in England in like the 1800s. there’s a couple other. Um, other kind of schools of thought like absurdism and utilitarianism and lots of different kind of big pillars of philosophy.
But just, you know, he kind of touches on each one and shows how they relate to one another. And, um, I, I like how he also formats the book, the way he’s structured it with the chapters. Kind of answers or, you know, he, he poses at the beginning of each chapter, just a question. Like the first one I think is, can I punch my friend in the face? Right. It’s just
Mickey: right.
Robert: kind of stuff. And it’s, yeah, again, it’s very kind of funny, but then he gets slightly more and more complex and more and more kind of from the black and white of obviously, no, you shouldn’t punch your friend in the face into stuff like, well, do I have to run into a burning building to save somebody’s life?
Mickey: Yes.[00:05:00]
Robert: I have to put away the shopping cart when I go to the grocery store? Right.
Mickey: Yes.
Robert: yeah, yeah, yeah, maybe you should, but, you know, depending on which philosophical lens you’re taking, argument for whether or not you should. Takes on different things because there are, there are philosophies that say, no, I mean, you shouldn’t have to do that.
You should seek, you know, the most pleasure for yourself. Right. And putting up the golf, the groceries cart at the grocery store isn’t helping you. And it’s really, you
Mickey: Mm hmm.
Robert: hurting anybody else that bad. So no, you shouldn’t do it. But.
Mickey: Yep.
Robert: schools of thought say you should? So yeah, it’s just, and holding all of those things at once is very complex and very difficult.
But again, just, just tipping your toe in a little bit by reading this book is an interesting way to just expand your mind.
Mickey: And you mentioned that he said he’s not always right, and that’s the key. No one ever is. Like, the concepts you mentioned contradict each other in a lot of ways, so there’s not a right answer for a lot of this. But I do like that early on in the book he said, a quote from what he said here, he said, To make it a little less overwhelming, this book hopes to boil [00:06:00] down the whole confusing morass into four simple questions that we can ask ourselves when we encounter any ethical dilemma, great or small.
And they are, what are we doing? Why are we doing it? Is there something we could do that’s better? And why is it better? So just kind of simplifying all this stuff into those questions, you can kind of just think through, again, what is, what is right and wrong, you can sort out for yourself, but at least you tried to do what you think is the right thing.
That’s the way to go, and this book kind of unpacks it, what is the right thing, based on a lot, a bunch of different viewpoints, you know.
Robert: Yeah. I mean, the title itself is. That’s a satire, right?
Mickey: Right, oh yeah.
Robert: no way to be perfect. And, and this book very much reinforces that is that there, there are no true universal right and wrong answers. There are just different paths that we can choose to take to try to uncover what is maybe not even right, but more right, and maybe not perfect, but.
How do you become better and more perfect? And of course, like there’s another quote that’s shortly after that in the book, because I have my notes pull up here as well. Um, attempting to be a decent moral agent in the universe means we are bound [00:07:00] to fail. Yeah,
Mickey: because he also had a quote from Maya Angelou that said, Do the best you can until you know better, then when you know better, do better. So it’s always just, yeah, improving ourselves slowly over time, but, yeah, failure was an interesting thing. He talked about failure.
a good bit. He quoted Samuel Beckett at one point, simply saying, try again, fail again and fail better. Like we’re all going to fail, but if you learn from it and become a better person as a result, then that’s a win. So yeah, it’s a good thing.
Robert: absolutely. Yeah, no, we, yeah, there’s a lot that you can pack into failures because, yeah, I mean, there’s, there is no way to be perfect. And so you’re naturally going to fail, but you can learn from those failures and become better. Um, Yeah. And every different philosophical school is also has their different views on failure, but ultimately it’s inevitable.
And I think that was kind of a big thing that he gets early on is that, you know, you’re, you’re not going to be perfect and that’s okay, but your approach and your attitude about that and about your moral failings is perhaps the most important thing about yourself.
Mickey: Yeah. And it applies to life and even to business. I saw Gary [00:08:00] Vaynerchuk the other day post. He said, if you want to reach out to me with a question about your business, please do, but only after you failed 60 times first, try 60 things first. If they all fail, then reach out and let’s talk, but don’t just come to me with an off off the cuff idea until you give it a shot and fail and learn from it and make it better and just iterate over and over again.
So, yeah. Failure is a big thing, which again, yeah, we could talk about that just for a couple hours, but let’s, let’s not spend too much time on that. Um, there was a concept that was new to me called the Overton window. I’d never heard of that before. So can you explain what that is and how that applies here?
Robert: so it is not a new concept to me. I actually, we talked about that in journalism school quite a bit because it’s essentially and I am not going to define this perfectly, but my understanding of it is just how you shift what The public’s perception of normalcy is right. What? What is socially acceptable?
And by I mean, essentially, this is a very common journalistic, but also political concept, you know, by being more radical and being a little bit more crazy, you [00:09:00] shift the Overton window to say, well, Okay, maybe we’re not gonna be that crazy, but what is normal and acceptable kind of moves along with that. So, I mean, to bring it and make it not too political, but, you know, if you are more extreme on one side of the political spectrum or the other, you kind of open that window or you shift that window to one side because you’re saying, Okay, well We’re not kind of that crazy. We’re not that far left or right. But, um, yeah, but this is still acceptable, right? This, this idea that may have, you know, once upon a time been less acceptable, that is less off center, um, is, is now become a little bit more palatable because, you know, because you’ve been exposed to that extremism a little bit. Um, so that’s, that’s kind of the biggest application, certainly in this day and age that the Overton window gets used is just what is, uh, morally and, um, Understandably, socially acceptable, um, or viewed as kind of normal.
Mickey: Yeah. Yeah. I read a lot about it. Just trying to understand it. It is mostly tied to politics, at least in the definitions of it. And one thing I [00:10:00] saw that wasn’t from the book, but about it, it says contrary to a common misconception. Lawmakers do not shift the window, but rather align to it. So,
Robert: Yeah.
Mickey: as humanity starts shifting things, like you said, they’re gonna pick a piece near the edge of the window and say, that’s okay, it’s in the window, but then it’ll cause the whole window to swing even further and allow the next, you know, radical thing to happen there.
The order I saw it put in is you start with policy, to popular, to sensible, to acceptable, to radical, to unthinkable. Like, how would you ever do this unthinkable thing? Well, you wouldn’t just jump to it from sensible to unthinkable, but something comes a little more acceptable, a little more radical, and then suddenly That what was previously unthinkable is now just part of what’s acceptable.
And it’s, yeah, a whole interesting concept.
Robert: I mean, it’s, it’s essentially when people talk about that, the slippery slope, right? Oh my gosh, this is going to lead us down the path towards destruction. We’re opening up, you know, we’re, we’re getting a lot closer to that thing that was once unthinkable. Um, you know, now it becomes a little bit more thinkable, um, yeah.
And so you can certainly apply that to moral philosophy if you’re saying like something that, you know, murder is bad. Well, right now, yes, of course, [00:11:00] murder is bad. But what if we allow this thing and get us a little bit closer to murder? And it’s, you know, it just, you’re muddying the waters and making things a little bit less gray, which again, this is not a indictment on that.
It’s just, this is what happens. This is what happens when you
Mickey: Right.
Robert: people and certainly groups of people with different perspectives. So. Yeah, I don’t know
Mickey: Yep.
Robert: the, there’s no right or wrong answer with that, but that is a concept certainly that, yeah, that this is how societies shift and mold over time.
Mickey: Yeah, it’s a fascinating one to dig into. And I encourage you just to, just to look up that. Go Google the Overton window and just kind of dig into some of that and see how that concept works. Because again, it’s not something I had seen before, but a lot of other people had already seen it. And so now I’m on board with it.
And yeah, it’s an interesting way to view, yeah, politics and again, even life to a degree that way.
Robert: were, there were some other cool ideas that I had not heard of before as well. Just like, you know, little concepts that are sprinkled throughout this, because of course, anytime you, uh, you study the works of people who have been talking about this and thinking about this their whole lives and careers over the course of hundreds of years, you, You get some interesting ideas like the Overton [00:12:00] window, so like the idea of moral desert, the things that you morally deserve because you’re, you’re being a good person.
So, okay, you can do this other thing. So that the idea of moral desert,
Mickey: Yep.
Robert: exhaustion or compassion fatigue is another one that’s common. Now, you know, how can we care for every single cause we get to the point where we’re, we’re trying to take on the suffering of others too much and we just can’t handle it anymore.
Other. We can’t support every single cause that’s out there, even as Worthy as all of them are, um, what were some of the other ones? Oh, um, see, uh, effective altruism, uh, giving things away beyond the necessities to help others to the point of like basically giving where it hurts. And that’s
Mickey: Okay.
Robert: compassion fatigue comes in.
Mickey: Yep.
Robert: there’s just, I don’t know all these different ideas. There was another one. Oh, uh, anarchist calisthenics. That was just
Mickey: Okay.
Robert: one. Um, the idea of breaking small rules to prepare for a larger injustice.
Mickey: Hmm. Gotcha.
Robert: ins during the, um, [00:13:00] the civil rights movement, right. They were breaking little rules so that they could then kind of shift the Overton window maybe, and start to do things like, Oh, you know, now you’re going to desegregate schools, right.
That was
Mickey: Gotcha. Yep.
Robert: moving to the front of the bus, like Rosa Parks said, like, I don’t know, just those other things that again, familiar with conceptually, but this gives it a name and a title that we can, I don’t know, point it out.
Mickey: That’s where a lot of things are that, yeah, we know the concepts, but giving it a name and sometimes I’m curious who creates those names, like a word, a word I use a lot of Sonder, which is the idea that we understand that everyone else has a full and healthy life behind them. Well, there’s a guy that wrote a book that just kind of put words to a lot of things that didn’t have words before.
And so he just kind of made it the word and I wonder how much of this stuff has been made up. I mean, it’s all made up, but I wonder, yeah, how those names come to be. And yeah, it’s fascinating just to understand those, to put, put words around a concept and. That help everyone understand it together. So,
Robert: that’s kind of what philosophers do is just think of big things and up with concepts. It’s like, okay, you know, we’ve been talking about [00:14:00] this for a while, but like, what’s let’s, let’s put words around this or let’s
Mickey: yeah,
Robert: word that describes this thing and all just agree on it. I mean, that’s, yeah, that’s what language is. It’s a whole
Mickey: yeah,
Robert: Path to go down. But yeah, it’s it’s just fascinating to kind of swim in those waters for a little bit of just like this is just life and we’re just so accustomed to these things and we can very easily put our head down and just live life. But, you know, you you bump into moral ethics more often than you think about it.
And you’re making those decisions based on your background. But it’s, you know, to kind of inward and start picking apart why we think some things are good and why we think some things are bad is just, is a really interesting exercise in, in self reflection. Well,
Mickey: he talked about how we’ve always done it that way and how that’s not really an acceptable reason to do something. He said, quote, the amount of time something has been done is not by itself a good reason to keep doing it by relying solely on precedent and failing to critically examine the problems that precedent might create for us.
We’re basically just flipping the middle finger to the [00:15:00] idea of progress. Or finding ways to be better people. We’re not actively trying to be better, and worse, we’re seeing the not trying as a virtue. This benefits no one. So, I love that we’re seeing the not trying as a virtue. Saying, hey, this is how it’s always been done, and so I’m going to be a good person and just keep doing it the way it’s always been done, without actually examining whether things should maybe change.
And, I mean, I guess that gets in, you talk about segregation in schools. You could very easily say, no, no, that’s just how it’s been done, so I’m going to be the good person and keep, and that’s, yeah, not always keeping the status quo is, is a good way to go.
Robert: I think because, I mean, these are difficult questions. These are really hard things and concepts to wrestle with. And so sometimes we think, well, if somebody has wrestled with this before and they’ve come up with the right answer. Like, you know, there’s a reason that this happens this way because we want to feel like we live in a just society and we live in a
Mickey: Mm hmm.
Robert: that is right and good and you know, there’s, there’s order behind that.
So it’s like, okay, well, you know, we don’t want to introduce chaos to the system because it’s working and things are
Mickey: Right.
Robert: for me. So yeah. Why, why question things? Why try to shift things? Because [00:16:00] that’s just going to be difficult, right? Um, but yeah, no, I think that’s why there are people who do, um. Well, I can’t remember the term now. The uh, calisthenics
Mickey: Oh, yes, there you go.
Robert: to break little things here and there so that we get more used to questioning the system and being a little bit more okay with wondering, is this good? Is the system that we’re existing in okay? Or do we need to, um, push back against it and make it a little bit better?
Mickey: You see the people that push against that, too, then. When people are being the anarchists, people push against them, wanting to keep the status quo. And it’s nice, I mean, the world we’re in today is clearly far from perfect, but it’s nice to be able to look back over the past couple hundred years and see the progress we’ve made in terms of, yeah, acceptance and caring and healthcare and just all the ways that things have gotten better and better consistently over time.
And we’re nowhere near perfect, but we know it’s getting better and the next 50 years should just continue to Tighten things up and make it better for everyone. Hopefully. If we have the right anarchists pushing things forward.
Robert: uh, another idea, have you, I don’t know if you’ve done atomic habits on, on this show or not. I [00:17:00] mean,
Mickey: I don’t think we have yet. No, it’s on the list though, yeah.
Robert: you’re like, you’re probably morally obligated to do that book at some time. It’s, I mean, it is a really, really good book. We read it for our
Mickey: Oh, it’s fantastic, yeah.
Robert: was that last year maybe, but the whole idea of heuristics, right?
The idea of, it’s almost like, you know, forming habits and creating behaviors within ourselves, almost through like human algorithms is the way I think of a heuristic.
Mickey: Hm, yeah, okay.
Robert: just a shortcut of how to think about something. And oftentimes we just naturally inherit those heuristics from other people, from the, you know, our family, our friend group, our, um, work or wherever.
Yeah, again, we’re going to adopt kind of the natural societal. Uh, that we’re surrounded by. And so that’s, again, that’s one of the reasons why it, it takes work to get outside of that system and push back against something, because it’s almost not even like, I mean, people will push back against it, but it’s almost just society in general, like the status quo has its own, I don’t know, kind of will sometimes to exert, um, and it naturally wants to just stick where it is and be, [00:18:00] you know, homogenous, but oftentimes, yeah, to get better and to keep pushing, uh, pushing the boulder up the hill. It’s a little, uh,
Mickey: There you go, little Sisyphus. Yeah.
Robert: call back there. Um, yeah, it, it takes work.
Mickey: Yeah, well, I like Adam Grant. I think this applies to politics to where you kind of can say, I’m part of this political group. So therefore, I must believe these 12 things that I believe this about the border and this about health care and this about taxes, like they all have to go together. And he says, I don’t vote a straight ticket.
I vote on issues and politicians as each one comes up versus just saying, Oh, I’m a red or blue. Therefore, I have to believe all the things in that column. And you don’t, you should, you should pick and choose a bit. I think this is the right way to go on this side. But I think it. The other side has some good points here and fine that, that middle ground, which is tough to do and makes it very difficult to vote because then you have things you like and don’t like about everyone.
But, and not voting a straight ticket I think is a way to kind of get yourself out of that heuristic of, you know, locked into all these things I’m supposed to believe because I voted red once or blue once, you know.
Robert: only politics still had that [00:19:00] nuance, it’s
Mickey: Correct, yes.
Robert: now because
Mickey: for sure.
Robert: parties want to align both parties.
Mickey: That’s a whole, whole other show there for sure, yeah.
Robert: Um, I did want to ask you, was there like a school of moral philosophy or like a thing that stood out like is most interesting to you? Um, cause there were certainly ones that I agreed with more and some I agreed with not at all on here, but I didn’t know if there was one that, you know, was kind of interesting, most interesting to you.
Mickey: I think really just the, the questions are the most interesting part, like the trolley problem. Like I still, you know, there’s no answer to the trolley problem, and if you’re not familiar with that, go watch The Good Place or go Google it, but, but it’s one that there’s not a right answer, you know. In the show, Michael has the right answer, which is to kill everyone, which is not the right answer, you know, but, um, yeah, I find those kinds of things fascinating, just these moral dilemmas that have no answer and trying to sort through that.
I was talking the other day to someone, not exactly a moral dilemma, but how many holes does a straw have? One or two. And just questions like that fascinate me, and I can make a great argument to defend either side because I don’t know the right answer, and you know, so there are a lot of those [00:20:00] kinds of questions in the book where here’s the question and there’s no right answer, but what do you believe, and here’s ways to look at it from this view and that view, and I didn’t find any viewpoint necessarily.
Spoke to me the most because whenever I read about one, I say, Oh, yes, that’s the way to think. That’s the way you do it. Then read the next one. Oh, no, no, that’s the way you do it. Like it. So I,
Robert: of
Mickey: yeah, exactly. I was professionally convinced, which at least I was able to see. So I could, I could back up. And how about you?
Does, was there one angle that you preferred
Robert: Yeah,
Mickey: or felt the best?
Robert: well, I’ll say, I guess, one, start with one that I didn’t necessarily agree with, um, and that’s Kant’s Deontology. And in The Good Place, Chidi, he most likes Kant. He is mostly a Deontologist, which is interesting because, mostly because Kant is very difficult, and I think he’s probably the epitome of why people don’t like moral philosophy for professors, which is, again, The end joke on the show,
Mickey: Right.
Robert: just very difficult to understand and also very difficult to live by. Um, so the one that I think that I kind of liked the most again has problems for sure, as all of these schools do. [00:21:00] But, um, Aristotle’s virtue ethics, which I think was the most interesting to me
Mickey: Mm hmm.
Robert: was there’s the set, these, you know, lots of virtues that are out there, like. compassion or generosity and things that, you know, we should likely aspire to, you know, good things. But the idea that there was the, like the golden mean, like any of those things, like take generosity, for example, like the idea isn’t just to maximize generosity. The, the idea is actually to balance generosity. So
Mickey: Yep.
Robert: just like, don’t just be the most generous. You actually want to find the perfect balance in the middle. Because, you know, not being generous at all is obviously not good because then you’re selfish, but being overly generous and, and doing it too much means that you don’t have, you know, you can’t sustain that. And you
Mickey: Right.
Robert: and that’s not going to be good for anybody. Um, so
Mickey: Huh?
Robert: of the perfect center of it and balancing all of those virtues within yourself, um, I don’t know, it was just a very different take on, you know, kind of the default, uh, morality. Thoughts that a lot of people have. It’s [00:22:00] just like, Oh, here’s some good things and I should just do as much of those as I can, but there’s, you know, there’s negative sides to that too. Um, like Doug for set on the good place.
Mickey: There you go. It’s interesting. Yeah. You’re putting words to thoughts I’ve had before. Like. Something I’ve thought for years, a church I used to work at years ago was a, a big mega church, and there was a lot of pushback of, hey, they should just give away all this stuff, they have too much recreation there and things, but they gave away like a million dollars a year, you know, because they were such a big church, they were able to do that, and I was thinking, if they had started small and just given away everything they had, they’d be giving away 20 grand a year worth of, worth of stuff and never grown bigger, but by allowing themselves to grow bigger, but still set aside a portion to give, they’re able to grow bigger and give even more as a result, and I think that’s kind of what you said, if you just, Burn yourself out.
You can only give so much, but if you keep yourself healthy and strong, you’re able to give more by not giving too much. And yeah, it’s an interesting, interesting balance there to sort that stuff out too.
Robert: I think the easy one to look at is, you know, why help the, you know, on the airplane when it says, Hey,
Mickey: Mm hmm.
Robert: mask dropped down, like help yourself. And then help the child out next to you or whatever, somebody who needs
Mickey: [00:23:00] Right.
Robert: why don’t I just help them first? It’s like, well, because if you pass out and then you wouldn’t be able to help the other person, like sometimes you do
Mickey: Yep.
Robert: the right amount of selfish so that then you can maximize, you know, then you
Mickey: Yep.
Robert: more good potentially.
Or yeah, you want to, you want to have a good, healthy life. And maybe make a decent amount of money from a job so that you then, yes, can be more generous with both your time and your resources because you’re the healthiest, best version of yourself that you can be. So yeah, I mean, there’s, there’s a lot of different ways to look at it and a lot of different nuances to kind of pick apart.
But, um, that idea of balance and, and having those kind of virtues, uh, was a really interesting concept to me.
Mickey: Yep. That was fantastic. So, we’re about out of time here, so I would suggest to folks, if you haven’t watched A Good Place, I’d say watch A Good Place first. Then read this book, and then go watch it again. That’s a, that’s a good way to go. It’s a, it’s,
Robert: again. And
Mickey: right, and then it’ll sound different there, too. Yeah, the book is just over nine hours on Audible, and this is not one that you could, uh, you should listen to at double speed.
It gets some, some pretty deep thoughts in there. So it’s, it’s gonna take your full nine hours to get through it, but [00:24:00] it’s fantastic. So, hey, Robert, how can folks, uh, find out more about you, and, and connect with, with your brain?
Robert: Um, I don’t know. I mean, obviously you can check us out at Green Melon, obviously,
Mickey: Yep, for sure.
Robert: work. Um, we have a brighter web podcast is where you and I talk about, uh, digital marketing things. Um, yeah, I don’t know. I’m not doing as much stuff on social media personally these days. I mean, I’m
Mickey: Yep.
Robert: on pretty much all the social media channels, but I’m a lot less active.
I’m a lot more introspective and focused on offline things, I guess nowadays.
Mickey: Yep. Good stage of life to be doing that. So fantastic. Appreciate your time.
Robert: Yeah.
Mickey: See you soon. All right, cool. Bye
Leave a Reply