Physician, Heal Thyself.

Standing on the Ledge

This is a self-audit.

I’ve been writing protocols about how to stabilize, regain traction, and rebuild after collapse. The uncomfortable question is: am I actually using my own tools… or am I just getting better at describing them?

So I went back through my own writing and looked for evidence of three things:

  • Looping (same thought, same argument, same courtroom—different day)
  • Rumination (analysis disguised as movement)
  • Avoidance (delay, disengagement, hiding in “preparing” instead of doing)

Verdict (short and blunt)

Mostly: I’m practicing what I preach.

Not perfectly. Not consistently. But the pattern I see is this: I’m getting faster at catching the loop, naming it, and converting it into one contained next step. That’s the entire point of the Tools page.

My main leak isn’t “no tools.” My main leak is “tools without instrumentation.” I’ll write the protocol, I’ll reference the protocol, I’ll even teach the protocol… and then I won’t always do the boring part: tracking receipts, running weekly reviews, and enforcing boundaries around the exact inputs that trigger my loops.

Where the tools are clearly working (evidence, not vibes)

1) I’m naming loops and cutting supply

In my anxiety/closure post, I caught myself using other people to scout information for me—“just checking”—and I called it what it was: a loop that buys temporary relief and keeps me stuck. Then I drew a line and put it in writing: stop recruiting people as proxies for my uncertainty.1

That’s not theory. That’s a real boundary.

2) I’m shrinking the mission instead of demanding heroics

Behavioral Activation shows up repeatedly as “ten minutes counts.” When my brain is buffering, I reduce the task until it’s executable and I do the smallest honest action.2

That’s me using my own “small fires” logic instead of waiting for motivation.

3) I’m explicitly challenging the “courtroom mind”

I’ve admitted something important: when I bargain, I don’t beg—I analyze. I call it “being responsible,” but it can be my mind trying to rewrite the past so pain becomes optional. Then I pivot the question from self-punishment to pattern recognition.3

This is exactly the difference between rumination and review.

4) I’m using structure as a stabilizer, not as a cage

In the morning ritual post, I explicitly asked: “Am I learning, or am I re-litigating?” Then I wrote a 24-hour micro-protocol: label the regret, refill the cup, do one small fire, do one structure move, write one boundary sentence.4

That is a protocol in action. Not a mood.

5) I’m showing evidence-ledger thinking inside grief, not just outside it

In the sibling loss reflection, I used my own language—freeze response, triage mode, evidence ledger vs shame ledger—and I refused to turn grief into a permanent life sentence. That’s me applying my own framework to something that could easily become pure courtroom.5

Where I’m still leaking (and yes, it matters)

Leak #1: External temperature checks (doom inputs) still tug at me

I can tell when I’m getting escalated because I start hunting for certainty: checking, scanning, looking behind the curtain, trying to “know” my way into calm. I wrote this clearly in the anxiety/closure post, which means I’m aware of it. But the fact it made it into a post means it’s a recurring pressure point.1

Correction: this needs its own protocol on the Tools page: an “Information Diet / Checking Loop Stopper.” If I don’t cap inputs, I’ll keep paying the loop tax.

Leak #2: The courtroom mind is my default under stress

My bargaining style is “analysis.” That’s a high-functioning form of rumination because it looks responsible while it quietly drains time, energy, and sleep.3

Correction: I need a hard rule: Review must produce one implementable change or it’s not review. If it doesn’t produce a step, it becomes a loop.

Leak #3: I don’t consistently publish receipts

I built the Evidence Ledger protocol because shame thrives in abstraction and receipts destroy abstraction.6 But in my day-to-day writing, I don’t always “close the loop” with receipts.

Correction: end more posts with 3 receipts (even tiny ones). Not as performance—just as proof.

Leak #4: The weekly rebuild review isn’t visible yet

My Tools page calls for a weekly rebuild review (what worked, what leaked, what matters next, one ask, one boundary sentence).7 I’m not consistently seeing that cadence reflected in the writing sample I reviewed.

Correction: I need one weekly post (or private log entry) that is nothing but that structure. No poetry. No court. Just the checklist.

So… am I guilty of not following my own advice?

Sometimes, yes—but not in the way I feared.

I’m not seeing “I’m stuck and refusing tools.” I’m seeing “I’m using tools, but the same two vulnerabilities keep reopening the wound”:

  • certainty-seeking (checking loops)
  • analysis-as-bargaining (courtroom mind)

The good news is those are solvable, because I’ve already written the building blocks. The missing piece is enforcement and repetition.

What I’m changing this week (48-hour correction plan)

This is the part where I stop preaching and start executing.

  1. Daily Evidence Ledger (5 receipts minimum). If I can’t name five receipts, I’m not allowed to call myself “stuck.” I’m allowed to call myself “under-instrumented.”6
  2. One 10-minute activation ladder action. Boots on, movement, one small fire—then stop. Ten minutes counts.2
  3. One structured ask (contained). One request, one scope, one boundary. No chaos dumping.8
  4. One input boundary. No “just checking.” If I need an answer, proper channels—or I sit with not knowing.1

If I do those four things, I’m following my own Tools page—even on a low-capacity day.

Tools page updates I should add (based on what my writing reveals)

  • Information Diet / Checking Loop Stopper
    A short protocol: when I feel the urge to scout, I do (1) label the urge, (2) set a timer, (3) take one real-world action, (4) postpone checking to a defined window.
  • Courtroom-to-Clipboard Converter
    A one-page card: “If this is review, what pattern is being named? What boundary changes? What’s the one next step?” If none—stop.
  • Post Closure Card
    Every post ends with: 1 receipt, 1 next step, 1 boundary sentence. This keeps the writing from becoming a substitute for action.

Closing

Standing on the ledge doesn’t mean standing still.

The point of this site was never to be “wise.” The point was to be functional. And the evidence says I’m moving in the right direction—so long as I stop feeding the two loops that keep trying to reclaim the wheel.

Godspeed.

Footnotes

  1. “Breaking the Cycle of Anxiety: Strategies for Closure” (Jan 6, 2026). ↩︎
  2. “Behavioral Activation: Small Steps to Rebuild Today” (Jan 4, 2026). ↩︎
  3. “Post-Mortem Analysis: Moving Beyond Guilt and Blame” (Jan 2, 2026). ↩︎
  4. “Rebuilding from Regret: A New Morning Ritual” (Jan 23, 2026). ↩︎
  5. “Reflections on Sibling Loss: A Personal Journey” (Jan 22, 2026). ↩︎
  6. “Transforming Shame: The Evidence Ledger Approach” (Jan 13, 2026). ↩︎
  7. “Tools & Protocols” hub page (triage phases + weekly rebuild review). ↩︎
  8. “Mastering the Art of Asking for Help Without Chaos” (Jan 15, 2026). ↩︎

Discover more from Standing on the Ledge

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Unknown's avatar

Published by Lugh Sulian

Lugh Sulian Standing on the Ledge · Rebuilding from the Rubble Lugh Sulian is a working name for a working moment. This profile exists to hold Standing on the Ledge: Rebuilding from the Rubble—an ongoing, real-time record of what happens after collapse, when old rules stop functioning and new ones haven’t yet earned trust. This is not myth reenactment. Not spiritual bypass. Not curated healing. It’s a field journal from the threshold. The name Lugh points toward skill, clarity, and responsibility carried with awareness. Sulian gestures toward sight—what can be seen when illusion drops away and pretending becomes too expensive. Together, they frame the posture of this work: to look clearly, act deliberately, and refuse to rebuild what already failed. Through short-form video, spoken reflection, and long-form writing, this project explores: Collapse without spectacle Responsibility without authority Burnout as a systems problem, not a personal flaw Pagan cycles as lived practice, not aesthetic Small fires instead of grand rebuilds This space is intentionally unfinished. It documents: Standing still without freezing Moving forward without rushing Learning from rubble instead of hiding it Unplugged-Pagan.com serves as the grounding—seasonal awareness, ritual stripped of performance, and meaning built from experience rather than doctrine. Standing on the Ledge is one expression of that grounding, focused on the human cost of broken systems and the slow work of rebuilding integrity. This is not a teaching platform. It’s a shared watchpost. If you’re here, you’re likely between versions of yourself—tired, alert, uncertain, and still standing. You don’t need answers yet. You need honesty, boundaries, and permission to move at the speed of truth. No conclusions offered. No certainty promised. Still on the ledge. Still watching. Still working the rubble. Godspeed. Optional Short Versions (for profile headers or bios) Short bio (Facebook / site header): Threshold work. Pagan-rooted, process-driven. Documenting collapse, clarity, and the refusal to rebuild what failed.

Published

Leave a comment