The crit that argues against the course. Cases where more analysis genuinely was the right call, and how overthinking behaves differently in a group than it does alone.
17 May 2027
Before the session#
Think of a decision, yours or one you watched happen, where spending more time thinking really did produce a better outcome, not just a longer one.
In the session#
Two threads, run one after the other. First, build a shared list of the group’s “worth it” examples and try to find what they have in common. The stakes, how reversible the decision was, information that genuinely was not available yet. Second, take one of the spirals from an earlier crit and imagine it happening across a group instead of in one head, a thread where everyone’s uncertainty feeds everyone else’s. What changes?
Contributing an example to the shared list is optional. You can pass without giving a reason, and an example you heard about second hand counts as much as one of your own.
Afterwards#
This is the last crit before the final project, and the two threads above are close to that brief. Bring them.
The spec
What you bring to the session. Written so a reader can tell whether it has been met without asking you.
- you can describe one real decision where more analysis was the right call, and say what made it different from the ones earlier crits picked apart
- you can describe how overthinking behaves differently in a group, in a thread, a meeting or a group chat, than it does alone
Teaching team
- Idris Fenn, tutor