This is like raw, n=1, personal feedback.
No, not really. I read it twice but couldn't bring myself to care. It seems you are going into tangents and not actually talking directly about your technique. I could be wrong, but I also couldn't care enough to read into the sentences and understand what you're actually pointing at with all the words. Having conclusion is nice because I jumped straight to that at first, seems kind of too normal to justify the clickbait though. Overall I feel like I read some ramblings and didn't learn much.
I'm talking about doing an audit of your whole life regularly, desperately trying to find the most effective things. Also, this technique is about highlighting potentially the most effective actions that you didn't spend a lot of time thinking about, but put them down as "stupid" because, for example, you need to get out of your comfort zone.
Does it clear?
The usefulness of the different actions differ by orders of magnitude. Sometimes, redirecting efforts can increase your efficiency by an order of magnitude or more.
Imagine that the person who first came up with the idea of sorting charitable foundations by efficiency, instead of implementing it, went to wash the dishes. Or Eliezer decided that creating a community is long and strange.
I'm not sure about the others, but I'm discarding many ideas, including potentially extremely effective ones, because I'm using the absurdity heuristic (this idea will change the world too much to be true). Or I reject ideas, because in order to implement them I will have to leave my comfort zone, and it causes me negative emotions.
Therefore, I came up with a technique that I call Regularly Meta-Optimization. It consists in regular trying to find potentially extremely effective ideas among those that you have been thinking about lately.
One of the potentially very effective ideas for me is to share a few of my potentially very effective blog ideas that can be implemented by anyone.