So Can I Do Everything Yet?

Can I do everything yet? (That is everything I actually want to do)

Not quite but I’m getting there!

I enjoyed the Random Method, and it certainly produced a high volume of work from me. But in the end I found it is too much of a scatter-gun approach. I need something more targeted - though ideally producing no greater an amount of procrastination.

So, a method that’s closely focused but with minimum procrastination… where would I find that?

Well, I found one that fitted the bill among the many systems we’ve discussed recently. If you’re a regular reader, see if you can identify it.

A few clues:

• It’s one of the no-list systems
• It is much more targeted than the Random System
• It is very time sensitive
• It was the only way I succeeded in overcoming a particularly bad bout of resistance (to everything) this week.
• So it actually produces less procrastination than the random method.
• It provides a sense of direction.
• It’s very flexible
• You can quickly react to changes of circumstance or location

Comments

[nuntym]

Very time sensitive? Then it must be The Next Hour of Your Life (July 2) system.

http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/7/2/the-next-hour-of-your-life.html

[Bernie]

SMEMA!

[JD]

I would guess NoList FVP. For me, I've been using No List Autofocus. It seems to be working well. What I like about it is the ability to build up a list of things that are most pressing and working through them repetitively to completion.

[nediswizard]

Bernie:

I agree too! SMEMA is my favorite no list system. No list fvp causes me to procrastinate like crazy. Maybe I'm just doing it wrong.

[Martin Williams]

This is a little offbeat, but i thought I'd mention it because Mark has blogged about intermittent fasting, and this idea is inspired, obliquely, by no-list. My idea, that I intend to try out next week is this:

1. Start fasting at a point in the target day when it feels right, and write down the time.
2. Aim for a minimum of 16 hours' without any calories. (Though I permit myself tea and coffee.)
3. When the fast ends, the eating window may be as long as but no longer than, the fast.

My thought experiment (and common sense) demonstrates that the eating window is usefully compromised by sleep, but fasting, of course, is not.

I thought it might prove an interesting way of having a somewhat freestyle approach to starting and ending a fast (begin when you're ready, pack it in when you're losing your mind), with a simple algorithm: The longer you fast, the more you feast. Good old operant conditioning, albeit self-imposed.

The point is that the algorithm allows freedom to give up a fast when one is ravenous, but removes caprice from the equation. Once you start, of course, you begin an automatic binary process. (But I think one must have a minimum value for a 'fast' of about 16 hours.)

[Michael B.]

So let's see. Which one of the No-List systems fits all five of the following requirements?

1. More targeted than the Random System
2. Very time sensitive
3. Provides a sense of direction
4. Very flexible
5. Can quickly react to changes of circumstance or location

3T (1, 2)
SMEMA (1, 2, 4, 5)
No List FVP (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
One Day FVP (1, 2, 4, 5)
5T (1, 2)
5T Variation 1 (1, 2)
Another Little Method (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
Another Little Method Variation 1 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
The Simplest Form of No-List (1, 2, 4, 5)
Activefocus (No-List Autofocus) (1)
The May 9 System (1, 2, 4, 5)
The May 10 System (1, 2, 4, 5)
The May 15 System (1, 2, 4, 5)
The June 1 System (1, 2, 4, 5)
The Next Hour of Your Life (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)

According to these scores the possibles are:

No List FVP (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
Another Little Method (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
Another Little Method Variation 1 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
The Next Hour of Your Life (1, 2, 3, 4, 5)