watching Steph Ango (CEO of Obsidian) talk about how he uses his own tool gives me a calibration point for whether I’m over-engineering or under-engineering the vault. if the tool’s creator uses a simple, principled approach — minimal plugins, clean structure — then the complexity I’ve added (skills, automation, claude.md integrations) is either justified by genuine complexity of use, or it’s productivity theatre.
- simplicity as a principle — Steph Ango apparently uses Obsidian in a relatively simple way. the insight is that complexity should be earned by genuine need.
- notes as thinking, not filing — the distinction between a filing system (retrieval) and a thinking system (development). the vault is a thinking system.
- linking as the core mechanic — wikilinks are the foundational tool, not plugins or automation. the quality of connections matters more than the quantity of notes.
the “underrated genius” framing suggests Ango’s approach is counterintuitively simple. the useful calibration for me: which parts of my vault are genuinely serving the thinking, and which parts are friction I’ve generated for myself?
useful calibration reference. the value isn’t in copying Ango’s specific setup but in using his simplicity as a sanity check on my own. ★★★☆☆
- what is the simplest version of this vault that would still do everything I actually need?
- which of the vault’s skills and automations are used weekly, and which are set up but rarely triggered?
- Steph Ango’s personal website/blog — he writes about tools, design, and thinking
- obsidian reference note in this vault
- monthly simplification check — once a month, ask: what can be removed from the vault without losing capability?
- N/A
- watch the video and note specifically which practices Steph Ango uses that are simpler than what I’m doing
- audit the vault’s plugins and features: which are earning their place and which are noise?