I especially agree with breaking larger goals into bite-sized pieces. A goal becomes much more useful when it identifies the next action rather than merely naming the desired outcome. “Build my author platform” can feel overwhelming. “Enter five books into the store,” “create one reader pathway,” or “review one product page” gives the day something concrete to accomplish. I also appreciate that the goals remain private within the group. Accountability can be helpful without turning every unfinished task into a public performance. My own current focus is completing the product data and infrastructure needed to make direct sales practical. It is not the most glamorous part of publishing, but steady, measurable progress is beginning to turn the larger goal into a working system.

I agree that writers should understand the rules before deciding when to bend them. I would add one caution, though: words such as was and were are not automatically problems. Sometimes they signal passive or distant writing, but sometimes they are simply the clearest and most natural choices. A search can reveal patterns, but each use still deserves judgment in context. I write about grammar and revision under the pen name Slay Pendragon, and one principle I return to is that writing rules should function as diagnostic tools rather than automatic deletion commands. Search-and-find is excellent for spotting habits. The real editing question is not merely, “Did I use this word?” but, “Is this sentence doing its job as clearly, directly, and effectively as it could?” Two hundred uses may reveal a pattern worth examining—but they do not necessarily represent two hundred mistakes. 😉

My biggest challenge right now is helping the right readers discover the right books. I have a varied catalog, including fiction, nonfiction, genealogy, and author resources, so the problem is not simply “more visibility.” It is creating clearer reader pathways—helping someone understand where to begin, which books belong together, and what the next useful step might be. I am also working on the practical infrastructure behind that: product data, website organization, direct sales, and systems that are affordable enough to maintain. In other words, I have no shortage of books. The challenge is building better bridges between those books and the readers they were written to serve.

My biggest concern is not simply choosing between traditional publishing, self-publishing, or a service provider. It is understanding the actual exchange of value before committing. Authors need to know what they are paying for, which rights they are granting, what responsibilities remain theirs, what the publisher or service will genuinely provide, and how the arrangement supports the long-term relationship with readers. Predatory vanity presses are the obvious danger, but even legitimate agreements can become disappointing when the promises are vague and the author’s obligations continue expanding after the contract is signed. I increasingly believe the best protection is clarity: define the goals, contributions, costs, rights, risks, and measurable commitments before choosing the path. A publishing agreement should function as a partnership plan, not merely a transfer of rights.

Writing in progress. Interruptions may become characters.