【Before Asking Three Lines】How to Ask in a Reproducible Way

There are times when I can’t respond to a question on the same day it’s received.

It’s not that I don’t want to answer; it’s that I can’t read what happened clearly enough.

...I wonder in what situation this is about.

I reread the text three times and still couldn’t understand.

The person who sent it is clearly troubled, isn’t he?

Here I’ll write what I replied and how things changed.

In fact, when you shape the question, you can even see your own problem.

Good evening!

This is Masashi^^

This time I’ve summarized how to ask in a way that makes it easier to get a response.

You only need to write three lines, and you don’t need any special terms at all.

What’s interesting is that these three lines aren’t just for asking others a question.

While writing, many people arrive at the answer by themselves.

Even after reading the text three times, if you still don’t know what scene it’s about.

✅ There was a common feature in questions that are hard to respond to

There are questions that can be answered right away and those that take time.

The ones that take time had a clear common feature.

Before describing what happened, they wrote their impressions.

Things aren’t going well, they’re not moving as expected, they feel it isn’t right.

This, emotionally, is something I can understand very well.

When you’re troubled, you first want to convey the fact that you’re troubled.

When I ask people, I tended to write in almost the same way as well.

But from the recipient’s viewpoint, there’s nowhere to point out what can be fixed.

What scene, what actions, what happened.

Without these three, I can only guess in回答。

If I answer by guessing, I’m usually off the mark.

✅ When you’re troubled, you want to write your impressions before describing what happened.

What’s lacking in hard-to-answer questions are scene, actions, and results.

? If you fix how you ask, your own records will also improve

This is the part I want to emphasize most in this talk.

The three things needed for asking are exactly the same as the three needed for recording: scene, actions, results. That’s all.

In other words, when you can’t write it in a way others can ask about, you’re writing in a way you can’t even review yourself.

Conversely, practicing how you ask becomes practice for recording.

I realized this while I was composing the reply.

As I lined up the information needed to answer, it became the same items as in my own notes.

That time I found myself a little amused on my own.

I had thought this was a completely different task, but it turned out to be the same thing.

So now I use the three preceding lines as the exact format for recording before asking.

Even on days when I’m not sending anything to anyone, I leave these three lines behind.

【Tuesday noon / waiting for return / in the evening I extended but did not act】

? When you can’t write in a form that others can read, you’re writing in a way you can’t review yourself.

The three things needed for asking and the three needed for recording are the same: scene, actions, results.

? There are states where you can’t receive an answer either

Even when you finally get a reply, there are times you can’t use it.

When does that happen?

Actually, it’s when you don’t remember the scene at the time you asked.

If days pass and a reply comes, you can’t recall the on-the-day screen anymore.

Then you don’t know where to place the received explanation.

You read it, think, and that’s the end of it.

There’s no way to prevent this because even the person who answered doesn’t know.

That’s why if you write three lines, your own reception changes as well.

If you lay the three lines side by side and read the reply, you can determine where to apply it.

I myself make a point of doing this when I’m taught by others.

It’s more important to record the situation when you asked than the content of what you asked.

? It’s more important to record the situation at the time you asked than the content you asked about.

If you lay the three lines side by side and read the reply, the place to apply the explanation becomes clear.

? The three lines are what you write

Line 1: where and when it happened.

Line 2: what you did.

Line 3: what happened and what trouble you encountered.

【Thursday morning / three candidates appeared and I chose the top one / immediately moved in the opposite direction and was cut off】 This is the format.

Do not include judgments of good or bad here.

If you include judgments, the reader’s perspective will lean toward that from there on.

Listing only what happened is the fastest way to get a response.

If you can provide numbers, adding the quantity and tolerance helps as well.

That’s because there are often underlying causes there.

If a screen shot can be attached, that’s the fastest way.

But even without it, three lines are enough.

Sometimes it’s easier to read when the order is written than when a photo is provided.

? The three lines do not include judgments of good or bad. They list only what happened.

Example: 【Thursday morning / three candidates appeared and I chose the top one / immediately moved in the opposite direction and was cut off】

? How to use it before sending, actual usage

After writing the three lines, preview once before sending.

You’ll often notice quite a bit at this point.

The action you wrote in the second line may not match the procedure you had planned.

If you discover that, you won’t need to ask the question on the spot.

It often gets resolved before it reaches me, so I don’t see it here.

But I sometimes receive reports that it was resolved that way.

It’s just one word: “resolved.”

I’m really happy to hear that!

While it’s in your head, you can’t see the misalignment of actions and steps.

When you lay it out in order, you can see it at a glance.

So I recommend writing three lines whenever you’re unsure.

Whether you send it or not, just writing it already halves the workload.

? While it’s still in your head, you can’t see the mismatch between actions and steps.

Example: 【Planned steps: wait for a return / Actual: entered before returning】

?View details of the Golden Line Sniper AI

⚠ There is nothing you should not ask about

I mention this here because there can be concerns.

The question is whether it’s okay to ask something so basic. It’s not something to worry about at all.

On the contrary, questions from beginners are the most helpful.

There are many people who are stuck at the same point behind you as well.

In fact, the parts that received many questions have been added to the main text of the material.

There is one thing I ask you to do.

Don’t end with only “What should I do?”

With three lines, the accuracy of the answer changes dramatically.

⚠ The questions that beginners struggle with are the most helpful.

The parts that prompted many questions have been added to the main text. Your questions are also material for us.

? Questions about tools, the most common one

Among questions about the Golden Line Sniper AI, this is the most frequent.

You see a display but it doesn’t extend—how should you think about it?

This question is where the three lines work best.

When you write it, you can see which candidate you chose and where it was.

Many people end up choosing the closer distance among the options presented.

As described in the guidance, simply having an arrow isn’t enough to win.

Which one you choose and where you finish is the user’s responsibility.

That’s where the strength of the three-line method lies: you can review it together with the user.

When creating, I narrowed down my thinking by looking at 9,192 chart examples of real cases.

I tested over thirty-five approaches, and less than a third remained.

There are 626 verification reports and 496 raw data items preserved.

Still, the parts you choose remain with the user until the end.

? The most common thing was choosing the closer distance among the options shown.

Actual development figures: 9,192 real example charts / 35+ tested thought processes / 626 official reports

⭕ This writing style isn’t necessary for some people

Finally, I’ll note when it isn’t needed.

For those who already keep very detailed records, this isn’t a new task.

If you just send the relevant instance as it is, that’s fine.

Also, if you want to solve things without asking, it may be unnecessary.

However, even in that case, I think you can still use the three-line form.

As for tools, they don’t promise future profits.

During periods when market conditions change, there are stretches of stability as well.

They don’t decide where to enter for you.

Start with a practice account or a small amount to check how it moves and the costs involved.

Then, if you stumble, write those three lines and send them.

I’ll respond as much as I can within my ability.

⭕ Even those who want to solve things without asking can use the three-line form.

What cannot be done: determining entry points / Guaranteeing future performance

? Summary: the three lines before asking become your own record

In hard-to-answer questions, impressions appeared before describing what happened.

From the receiver’s perspective, there isn’t a single place you can fix.

That’s why I’m asking you to use these three lines. The actual example is 【Thursday morning / three candidates appeared and I chose the top one / immediately moved in the opposite direction and was cut off】.

The points to look at are only scene, actions, and results. No judgments of good or bad.

What’s interesting is that sometimes you’ll find a solution while writing. While it’s still in your head, you can’t see the mismatch between actions and steps.

The most common thing about questions regarding tools is that they show up but don’t extend. The choice of which to pick and where to end remains the user’s job.

If you have something you want to know but can’t put into words, start with the three lines: when and where / what you did / what happened ^^

?View details of the Golden Line Sniper AI

Thank you always for reading ^^