Design pre-commitments when calm to constrain behavior…

When This Fires

• When designing any behavioral constraint intended to override impulse, craving, or emotional reaction
• When you notice yourself making rules during emotional intensity — stop and defer to cold-state design
• When building Ulysses contracts (commitments that remove future choice)
• Complements Emotional trigger actions must be executable while… (emotional trigger actions) and Design triggers for your worst cognitive day… (worst-case design) with the broader cold/hot state principle

Common Failure Mode

Designing rules during hot states: "After this terrible meeting, I'm implementing a rule that I never attend meetings without an agenda!" The rule might be good — but the timing of its design is contaminated by the emotional intensity of the meeting. Wait 24 hours, re-evaluate in a cold state, and design the rule with deliberative clarity rather than reactive frustration.

The Protocol

(1) Pre-commitment rules should only be designed during cold cognitive states: well-rested, fed, calm, not under deadline pressure. (2) During the design, explicitly imagine the hot state: "When I'm stressed and craving junk food at 10 PM, this rule will say..." Does the constraint still seem reasonable when you vividly imagine the hot state? (3) Make the constraint structural, not willpower-dependent: automatic transfers, physical barriers, environmental modification (Subtract unwanted affordances before adding desired ones…), committed partnerships (Ask 'Did you write for 30 minutes?' not 'Did you finish…). (4) When you catch yourself designing rules during a hot state → write the rule down but don't commit. Revisit in 24 hours during a cold state. If it still makes sense → implement. If it seems extreme → the hot state was distorting your judgment. (5) Never override cold-state pre-commitments during hot states. That's the whole point of pre-commitment.