The ostrich effect. It causes people to avoid situations they might perceive as negative. Don't use the Napoleon technique as an excuse to avoid seeing information you don't want to see even though you should.
Procrastination. When using the Napoleon technique, make sure you're doing it because you believe it will benefit you and not because you prefer to needlessly delay getting things done.
Parkinson's law states that work expands to fill the time allotted for its completion. When using the Napoleon technique, don't postpone things so that you take longer to complete them than you usually would.
When using the Napoleon technique, set clear deadlines for yourself to reduce the likelihood of postponing things unnecessarily.
Based on the Sagan standard, if someone claims that they came across a unicorn during they commute, they would be expected to brig stronger evidence in order to verify that claim than if they claimed that they came across a horse.
This happens because there is significant evidence for the existence of horses, but no relevant evidence to support the existence of unicorns, which makes the latter claim extraordinary.
Instead of viewing claims as either ordinary or extraordinary, it’s better to view them as ranging between these two ends of the spectrum, based on how likely they are given everything that is known on the subject.
It can be difficult to define the exact threshold on the ordinary-extraordinary spectrum that a certain claim needs to cross before it’s considered extraordinary, it’s generally preferable to focus on how extraordinary a claim is instead, and to expect a stand of proof that matches that degree of extraordinariness.
A claim should generally not be viewed as extraordinary simply because it’s novel, but rather because it contradicts existing evidence.
A classic example is when a proponent of some pseudoscience bombards an expert with many weak arguments and start a new argument each time the expert successfully refute one of them.
But Gish gallops also appear in less formal contexts. E.g., someone who wants to support an unfounded stance on social media might post a huge list of irrelevant sources that they didn't actually read.