Discussion Forum > Testing Yet Another Variation of SuperFocus
So, if you don't want to work a C2 task you just leave it on its page and move on?
April 4, 2011 at 12:30 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
For me too, the rule that C2 *must* be cleared before you can move on has on some occasions added back the resistance that had totally disappeared when working in AF1.
Also, being aware of this obligation has influenced whether I added back an "unfinished" task in C2 or C1. Adding it to C2 means I accept that the system will relentlessly drive me forward. This only works for some tasks, while for others I can already feel the resistance while writing the item in C2. Putting it back in C1 emulates AF1, where having done some work on the task leaves me satisfied that I've progressed and can let it rest until it stands out again.
This new variation will eliminate the need to make this distinction.
Also, being aware of this obligation has influenced whether I added back an "unfinished" task in C2 or C1. Adding it to C2 means I accept that the system will relentlessly drive me forward. This only works for some tasks, while for others I can already feel the resistance while writing the item in C2. Putting it back in C1 emulates AF1, where having done some work on the task leaves me satisfied that I've progressed and can let it rest until it stands out again.
This new variation will eliminate the need to make this distinction.
April 4, 2011 at 12:44 |
Marc (from Brussels)
Marc (from Brussels)
I'm grateful for the change. I was going to write in earlier that I had abandoned superfocus for a time because there were too many higher priority items that I had difficulty getting to and they were haunting my subconscious and adding stress. I think David Allen called it "Psychic drag" or something like that. I kept having to pull stuff out of my list and bring it to C2, which meant "seeing" all the rest of the stuff I hadn't done yet. so the system started lacking the spontaneity that I had benefitted from AF1. So I quit it for a while and went to Things and GTD, but now I find I really miss the fluidity of AF1. I was about to just go back to an earlier AF version, but I think this new revision of superfocus may solve my problem.
Thank you Mark.
Thank you Mark.
April 4, 2011 at 13:15 |
Paul MacNeil
Paul MacNeil
Alan:
Yes, though you can of course resurrect it a few pages later as an urgent item.
Yes, though you can of course resurrect it a few pages later as an urgent item.
April 4, 2011 at 13:54 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
What about looking at C2 as part of the page (for dismissal process of C1 and C2) and it's own entity. If you don't clear C2, that's ok, just dismiss all C2...
April 4, 2011 at 14:39 |
Erik
Erik
Mark - I'm wondering if it's working for you now, because you're already in the habit of being obliged to clear C2. Will it still be effective once that habit starts to fade away?
I'd be afraid that C2 would lose its "kick" with this rule adjustment.
When I get stuck on a particular C2 item, I reserve the right to consider it "done for now" and move it to C1 on the last page. Sometimes a C2 task just doesn't have the importance it used to have -- or something fundamental has changed about the project -- or I found it was a mistake to start it now and need to demote it again -- or my other priorities have shifted, and this task needs to be put on the back-burner for awhile. I try to make sure it's "serious" and not just an arbitrary decision.
Another way I do "regular cleaning and maintenance" of C2 is to move a C2 task that can't be done now into a tickler into Outlook Reminders for the time when it CAN be done. I then re-enter it into C2. This often works better than just moving it forward to the next page all the time.
These two tactics help keep C2 relevant and moving quickly and "in the flow".
I'd be afraid that C2 would lose its "kick" with this rule adjustment.
When I get stuck on a particular C2 item, I reserve the right to consider it "done for now" and move it to C1 on the last page. Sometimes a C2 task just doesn't have the importance it used to have -- or something fundamental has changed about the project -- or I found it was a mistake to start it now and need to demote it again -- or my other priorities have shifted, and this task needs to be put on the back-burner for awhile. I try to make sure it's "serious" and not just an arbitrary decision.
Another way I do "regular cleaning and maintenance" of C2 is to move a C2 task that can't be done now into a tickler into Outlook Reminders for the time when it CAN be done. I then re-enter it into C2. This often works better than just moving it forward to the next page all the time.
These two tactics help keep C2 relevant and moving quickly and "in the flow".
April 4, 2011 at 15:49 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Here's a proposed compromise, to keep C2 clean and clear and effective:
Normal SF3 rules, except:
When you are done processing a page (i.e., nothing else stands out), if there are any tasks remaining in C2, they all get moved to C1 on the last page. (Mass demotion back to C1.)
Dismissal would take precedence over this rule. In other words, if you failed to action anything in C1, all the items in C1 are dismissed, and anything left in C2 is also dismissed. The mass-demotion back to C1 would apply only if the page has already been saved from dismissal.
This seems like a very simple rule -- sorry I'm having a hard time writing it succinctly.
What do you think?
Normal SF3 rules, except:
When you are done processing a page (i.e., nothing else stands out), if there are any tasks remaining in C2, they all get moved to C1 on the last page. (Mass demotion back to C1.)
Dismissal would take precedence over this rule. In other words, if you failed to action anything in C1, all the items in C1 are dismissed, and anything left in C2 is also dismissed. The mass-demotion back to C1 would apply only if the page has already been saved from dismissal.
This seems like a very simple rule -- sorry I'm having a hard time writing it succinctly.
What do you think?
April 4, 2011 at 15:53 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
The way I'm doing it the task is left on the page. It's therefore "parked" for one complete turn of the list (though it can be resurrected earlier as I mentioned).
The way you're suggesting, it's put on the last page of the list which is a variable distance away depending on where you are in the list.
What do you see as being the advantages of the task being parked for a variable period as opposed to a fixed period?
The way I'm doing it the task is left on the page. It's therefore "parked" for one complete turn of the list (though it can be resurrected earlier as I mentioned).
The way you're suggesting, it's put on the last page of the list which is a variable distance away depending on where you are in the list.
What do you see as being the advantages of the task being parked for a variable period as opposed to a fixed period?
April 4, 2011 at 16:11 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Do the current rules allow you to choose whether an unfinished task goes into column 2 of the next page or column 1 of the last page? If not would this choice reduce 'column 2 stress'? :-)
I'd have thought that all urgent tasks added to column 2 should be worked on before turning the page, otherwise why add them?
I'd have thought that all urgent tasks added to column 2 should be worked on before turning the page, otherwise why add them?
April 4, 2011 at 16:51 |
smileypete
smileypete
smileypete:
<< Do the current rules allow you to choose whether an unfinished task goes into column 2 of the next page or column 1 of the last page?>>
No
<< If not would this choice reduce 'column 2 stress'? >>
See my answer to Seraphim above.
< < I'd have thought that all urgent tasks added to column 2 should be worked on before turning the page, otherwise why add them? >>
The question isn't whether they should be done, but whether they must be done.
<< Do the current rules allow you to choose whether an unfinished task goes into column 2 of the next page or column 1 of the last page?>>
No
<< If not would this choice reduce 'column 2 stress'? >>
See my answer to Seraphim above.
< < I'd have thought that all urgent tasks added to column 2 should be worked on before turning the page, otherwise why add them? >>
The question isn't whether they should be done, but whether they must be done.
April 4, 2011 at 17:49 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark -
The main difference is that, with my approach, you never leave any items in C2. This helps preserve the unique meaning and purpose of c2 - to deal with urgent tasks, and to keep relentless pressure on unfinished tasks.
Your new rule variation allows you to leave miscellaneous C2 tasks strewn about here and there. They are then treated like any other item -- no real distinction between them and the items in C1. This dilutes the meaning and power of C2.
Demoting unactioned items from C2 back to C1 (by moving them to C1 on the last page) also preserves the SF3 feeling of C1 -- tasks "waiting in the background" to be started and kicked up to high gear.
Over time, I'd expect your new variation to lose that sharp feeling of distinction between C1 and C2 tasks. Of course I haven't tested it so I may be wrong...
The main difference is that, with my approach, you never leave any items in C2. This helps preserve the unique meaning and purpose of c2 - to deal with urgent tasks, and to keep relentless pressure on unfinished tasks.
Your new rule variation allows you to leave miscellaneous C2 tasks strewn about here and there. They are then treated like any other item -- no real distinction between them and the items in C1. This dilutes the meaning and power of C2.
Demoting unactioned items from C2 back to C1 (by moving them to C1 on the last page) also preserves the SF3 feeling of C1 -- tasks "waiting in the background" to be started and kicked up to high gear.
Over time, I'd expect your new variation to lose that sharp feeling of distinction between C1 and C2 tasks. Of course I haven't tested it so I may be wrong...
April 4, 2011 at 17:58 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Mark – Glad to see you're still experimenting, and I think I like the new variation.
Seraphim – I see a number of variations for handling the undone-C2-task dilemma: V#1. Use extreme care when deciding whether to add any urgent or unfinished task to C2 (my current approach). V#2. Redefine it as "done for now" and add it to the end of the list (your proposed compromise). V#3. Leave it in place and move on (Mark's current variation). V#4. Push it forward to C2 of the next page.
I don't think anyone has considered V#4. It has the advantage of clearing C2 while still keeping the pressure on, just deferred a bit, rather than one full cycle (V#3) or a variable number of pages (V#2). What do y'all think?
Seraphim – I see a number of variations for handling the undone-C2-task dilemma: V#1. Use extreme care when deciding whether to add any urgent or unfinished task to C2 (my current approach). V#2. Redefine it as "done for now" and add it to the end of the list (your proposed compromise). V#3. Leave it in place and move on (Mark's current variation). V#4. Push it forward to C2 of the next page.
I don't think anyone has considered V#4. It has the advantage of clearing C2 while still keeping the pressure on, just deferred a bit, rather than one full cycle (V#3) or a variable number of pages (V#2). What do y'all think?
April 4, 2011 at 18:32 |
ubi
ubi
ubi - I use V#4 when I "physically cannot do the task". E.g., I need to be at home to do the task, but I am working in my cubicle at work, or sitting in the doctor's waiting room. Or, e.g., I need to ask my wife about something but she's not available. I push the task forward to C2 on the next page in these cases.
I have found, though, that this can create a kind of numbness toward that task, if it gets pushed forward like that too often. It becomes tempting to expand the criteria for "can't physically do the task" to "I just really don't want to do it right now". And that just increases the numbness. C2 is at risk of losing its edge for those kinds of tasks.
To avoid that effect, I have taken to removing such C2 tasks from my list, and putting them into my tickler. For example, I know I'll be home tonight and have a few hours for working my list, so I'll put a reminder in Outlook to re-enter that task in C2 at 6 pm tonight.
Anyway, based on this experience, I would guess that making this an option for ANY C2 task that you just don't want to do right now, would eventually make C2 the parking place for tasks you don't want to do. C2 would lose most of its power. At least, that's what I think would happen to me.
I have found, though, that this can create a kind of numbness toward that task, if it gets pushed forward like that too often. It becomes tempting to expand the criteria for "can't physically do the task" to "I just really don't want to do it right now". And that just increases the numbness. C2 is at risk of losing its edge for those kinds of tasks.
To avoid that effect, I have taken to removing such C2 tasks from my list, and putting them into my tickler. For example, I know I'll be home tonight and have a few hours for working my list, so I'll put a reminder in Outlook to re-enter that task in C2 at 6 pm tonight.
Anyway, based on this experience, I would guess that making this an option for ANY C2 task that you just don't want to do right now, would eventually make C2 the parking place for tasks you don't want to do. C2 would lose most of its power. At least, that's what I think would happen to me.
April 4, 2011 at 19:06 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
ubi -
You also wrote: << Use extreme care when deciding whether to add any urgent or unfinished task to C2 >>
If that works for you, great!!
For me, I start to lose "the flow" when I have to think about things too much. I prefer to just follow the "standing out" rule and the "work as long as you want rule". So, if something pops into my head as "urgent", I try not to think about it too much. I just judge my emotional reaction. If I am about to write it in C1 on my last page, but that makes me feel nervous because it might take me too long to get there, or I am afraid I won't notice it and forget to do it -- then I'll put it in C2.
Same with "working as long as you want". If I am working a task, and I am just tired of it and want to stop, or am meeting resistance, then I move it to C2 on next page as "unfinished". I try not to think about it too much.
This keeps things moving along quickly, and avoids "analysis paralysis". I always had that "paralysis" with GTD when trying to determine "next actions". Sometimes I just don't have time or mental energy to think so hard, especially about the mechanics of my TM system. I want to save the hard thinking for my real work.
You also wrote: << Use extreme care when deciding whether to add any urgent or unfinished task to C2 >>
If that works for you, great!!
For me, I start to lose "the flow" when I have to think about things too much. I prefer to just follow the "standing out" rule and the "work as long as you want rule". So, if something pops into my head as "urgent", I try not to think about it too much. I just judge my emotional reaction. If I am about to write it in C1 on my last page, but that makes me feel nervous because it might take me too long to get there, or I am afraid I won't notice it and forget to do it -- then I'll put it in C2.
Same with "working as long as you want". If I am working a task, and I am just tired of it and want to stop, or am meeting resistance, then I move it to C2 on next page as "unfinished". I try not to think about it too much.
This keeps things moving along quickly, and avoids "analysis paralysis". I always had that "paralysis" with GTD when trying to determine "next actions". Sometimes I just don't have time or mental energy to think so hard, especially about the mechanics of my TM system. I want to save the hard thinking for my real work.
April 4, 2011 at 19:11 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim:
I think that "relentless pressure" and "sharp feeling of distinction" was what was causing the resistance that was building up. My new variation treats column 2 more as a convenient place to put tasks that you want to give special treatment to. We'll see. It's worked very well for me today - I've had a very productive day.
I think that "relentless pressure" and "sharp feeling of distinction" was what was causing the resistance that was building up. My new variation treats column 2 more as a convenient place to put tasks that you want to give special treatment to. We'll see. It's worked very well for me today - I've had a very productive day.
April 4, 2011 at 19:22 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Seraphim:
What if this tweak ("parked C2") is applied only during the 1st complete turn of the list? After that, normal SF3 rules ("mandatory C2").
This would emphasize "speed" through the list the 1st time around, at the start of the day, to reduce the concerns of missing something, and at least "look" at everything on our plates.
2nd time around, back to C2 crunching and "relentless pressure on unfinished tasks".
PS: I too think that an optional C2 would make it the parking place for those task I *must* do but don't really *like* to! Anecdotal evidence: this morning, "paperwork for accountant" stood-out cause it's already 2-3 months overdue; wanted to flip the page before going for lunch but C2 was stuck on this unfinished task; thought "darn, i'll just take the folder out" and ended up shuffling papers for 20min… had it been optional, it would still linger there, 2 pages ago.
What if this tweak ("parked C2") is applied only during the 1st complete turn of the list? After that, normal SF3 rules ("mandatory C2").
This would emphasize "speed" through the list the 1st time around, at the start of the day, to reduce the concerns of missing something, and at least "look" at everything on our plates.
2nd time around, back to C2 crunching and "relentless pressure on unfinished tasks".
PS: I too think that an optional C2 would make it the parking place for those task I *must* do but don't really *like* to! Anecdotal evidence: this morning, "paperwork for accountant" stood-out cause it's already 2-3 months overdue; wanted to flip the page before going for lunch but C2 was stuck on this unfinished task; thought "darn, i'll just take the folder out" and ended up shuffling papers for 20min… had it been optional, it would still linger there, 2 pages ago.
April 4, 2011 at 19:54 |
Hugo Ferreira
Hugo Ferreira
<What do you see as being the advantages of the task being parked for a variable period as opposed to a fixed period?>
Can't answer for Seraphim, but if it's put with the new non-urgent tasks at the end of the list in column 1, it's like being 'reset'.
<I think that "relentless pressure" and "sharp feeling of distinction" was what was causing the resistance that was building up. My new variation treats column 2 more as a convenient place to put tasks that you want to give special treatment to. We'll see. It's worked very well for me today - I've had a very productive day. >
Would you have less resistance if unfinished tasks could be put in column 1 at the end of the list? Horses for courses though...
Can't answer for Seraphim, but if it's put with the new non-urgent tasks at the end of the list in column 1, it's like being 'reset'.
<I think that "relentless pressure" and "sharp feeling of distinction" was what was causing the resistance that was building up. My new variation treats column 2 more as a convenient place to put tasks that you want to give special treatment to. We'll see. It's worked very well for me today - I've had a very productive day. >
Would you have less resistance if unfinished tasks could be put in column 1 at the end of the list? Horses for courses though...
April 4, 2011 at 21:00 |
smileypete
smileypete
Mark - I suppose time will tell! Let us know how the experiment carries on.
April 4, 2011 at 21:09 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Hugo - I'm afraid I would always forget which "turn" of the list I'm on... :-)
April 4, 2011 at 22:16 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
We can speculate forever on theoretical variations, but the only way to tell if something works is to try it. I'll keep you posted.
April 4, 2011 at 23:09 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Very interesting!
Mathematically speaking, the only difference between C1 and C2 becomes the frequency with which a task can receive attention. C1 tasks are seen once per turn through the whole list. C2 tasks are seen once per page, until you "park" them by choosing not to copy them forward.
Once you have parked a C2 task, its frequency drops to once per turn, meaning it is effectively demoted to C1 status. Even though it remains in that page's C2, it will have no special function or opportunity on your next visit.
I did not like this variation on first reading. Like Seraphim, I felt C2 had lost its crispy power.
However, the idea is growing on me.
In fact, I just realized it is practically identical to the thing that finally made C2 really work for me: lately, when I write "Project X" in C2, I consider that to mean, "make satisfactory, little-and-often progress on Project X." I can call it "finished" any time it feels "satisfactory." I.e., whenever I no longer feel pulled or pressured to work on it, I cross it out of C2 and keep it on my 3T/top-project list. I don't move it to C1, but I check the top-project list regularly for C2 options.
Under Mark's new variation, I could do much the same thing without all that verbal finessing, and I'd have less need for a top-project list. C2 itself becomes, perhaps, the top-project list, the parking place for projects I want to get back to. That eliminates a moving part. Very elegant!
The more I consider Mark's new variation, the more I like it. And the more insight I get into what I was *really* doing with my C2 method.
Thanks again, Mark, for continuing to add value to this system.
Mathematically speaking, the only difference between C1 and C2 becomes the frequency with which a task can receive attention. C1 tasks are seen once per turn through the whole list. C2 tasks are seen once per page, until you "park" them by choosing not to copy them forward.
Once you have parked a C2 task, its frequency drops to once per turn, meaning it is effectively demoted to C1 status. Even though it remains in that page's C2, it will have no special function or opportunity on your next visit.
I did not like this variation on first reading. Like Seraphim, I felt C2 had lost its crispy power.
However, the idea is growing on me.
In fact, I just realized it is practically identical to the thing that finally made C2 really work for me: lately, when I write "Project X" in C2, I consider that to mean, "make satisfactory, little-and-often progress on Project X." I can call it "finished" any time it feels "satisfactory." I.e., whenever I no longer feel pulled or pressured to work on it, I cross it out of C2 and keep it on my 3T/top-project list. I don't move it to C1, but I check the top-project list regularly for C2 options.
Under Mark's new variation, I could do much the same thing without all that verbal finessing, and I'd have less need for a top-project list. C2 itself becomes, perhaps, the top-project list, the parking place for projects I want to get back to. That eliminates a moving part. Very elegant!
The more I consider Mark's new variation, the more I like it. And the more insight I get into what I was *really* doing with my C2 method.
Thanks again, Mark, for continuing to add value to this system.
April 5, 2011 at 7:00 |
Bernie
Bernie
I've been using this variation since yesterday and I'm liking it so far.
I find that there's times when my life is just drifting along on autopilot and I feel like I need some "external" nudge to make me consciously and deliberately consider if I'm doing the right things. In those cases, a time management system of some kind is useful to help me make a wise decision.
But there are other times when I am really sure within myself exactly what things I need to do next and I need those previous commitments to move into the background for a while to let me follow my gut feeling. So that same time management system has to now just get out of the way otherwise it is going to end up being ignored - and that leads down the slippery slope to having no system at all, or an ad-hoc one at best.
This variation, so far, seems to work both ways.
I found myself rebelling more and more often against the more rigid C2 processing.
I find that there's times when my life is just drifting along on autopilot and I feel like I need some "external" nudge to make me consciously and deliberately consider if I'm doing the right things. In those cases, a time management system of some kind is useful to help me make a wise decision.
But there are other times when I am really sure within myself exactly what things I need to do next and I need those previous commitments to move into the background for a while to let me follow my gut feeling. So that same time management system has to now just get out of the way otherwise it is going to end up being ignored - and that leads down the slippery slope to having no system at all, or an ad-hoc one at best.
This variation, so far, seems to work both ways.
I found myself rebelling more and more often against the more rigid C2 processing.
April 5, 2011 at 8:27 |
Frank
Frank
Bernie:
<< C1 tasks are seen once per turn through the whole list. C2 tasks are seen once per page, until you "park" them by choosing not to copy them forward.>>
This isn't quite right. C1 recurring tasks, such as email, are seen more often than once per turn provided that you work on them. In fact they can sometimes be seen more often than once per page.
For example I am just doing the recurring task "Comments". As I am on the last page but one I will re-enter it on the page after next. If that is still the last page when I reach it (quite possible) then it might get re-entered on the same page, and done again. This in fact often happens - particularly with that task!
-----------
I wrote the above at 8.47 am GMT, and here I am back again at 10 am GMT taking action on the re-entered task "Comments". And now I'm going to re-enter it again on the same page - which is still the last page as I suggested above that it might be.
<< C1 tasks are seen once per turn through the whole list. C2 tasks are seen once per page, until you "park" them by choosing not to copy them forward.>>
This isn't quite right. C1 recurring tasks, such as email, are seen more often than once per turn provided that you work on them. In fact they can sometimes be seen more often than once per page.
For example I am just doing the recurring task "Comments". As I am on the last page but one I will re-enter it on the page after next. If that is still the last page when I reach it (quite possible) then it might get re-entered on the same page, and done again. This in fact often happens - particularly with that task!
-----------
I wrote the above at 8.47 am GMT, and here I am back again at 10 am GMT taking action on the re-entered task "Comments". And now I'm going to re-enter it again on the same page - which is still the last page as I suggested above that it might be.
April 5, 2011 at 8:47 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Day 3 and still working well. Currently I've got 8 active pages. I've got one task in Column 2 on my current page, and one other Column 2 task which got parked four pages back. I'm quite happy to leave it there because it was a leisure task (watching a downloaded tv programme) which I can pick up again this evening.
April 5, 2011 at 14:53 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
<<C1 recurring tasks, such as email, are seen more often than once per turn provided that you work on them.>>
Thank you for pointing that out, Mark. Although I had not been thinking of recurring tasks, your point is true even for project tasks. I'd thought to keep things simple by considering attention given to tasks before they stand out, but of course that makes no sense for C2, and I ended up comparing apples to oranges.
Let me revise what I said about task frequency:
Items that don't stand out will receive our *attention* ...
- at least once per turn through the list,
- up to however many times we scan their page before moving on.
Items that do stand out will be *worked on* ...
- at least once per turn (completed in one go or reentered in C1 and then passed over),
- quite possibly 2-3 times per turn (reentered each time in C1 on a growing list),
- up to once per page, for most pages (using C2),
- up to several times within the last page (because C1 is not closed).
I hope that is more accurate. There is a continuous range from once per turn up to once per page, with the last page allowing for an extra frenzy. The new "parking" rule does not affect min/max frequency but allows for a more continuous range in between.
All this came about as I tried to grasp the new rule, and frequency is turning out not to be so useful after all.
I think the essential point is that a parked C2 item functions henceforth as a C1 item ("demoted to C1"), except only for the visual reminder that it used to be in C2. Yet, this visual reminder can be valuable, as it creates an ad-hoc list of items likely to have higher priority—another level of sifting.
Thank you for pointing that out, Mark. Although I had not been thinking of recurring tasks, your point is true even for project tasks. I'd thought to keep things simple by considering attention given to tasks before they stand out, but of course that makes no sense for C2, and I ended up comparing apples to oranges.
Let me revise what I said about task frequency:
Items that don't stand out will receive our *attention* ...
- at least once per turn through the list,
- up to however many times we scan their page before moving on.
Items that do stand out will be *worked on* ...
- at least once per turn (completed in one go or reentered in C1 and then passed over),
- quite possibly 2-3 times per turn (reentered each time in C1 on a growing list),
- up to once per page, for most pages (using C2),
- up to several times within the last page (because C1 is not closed).
I hope that is more accurate. There is a continuous range from once per turn up to once per page, with the last page allowing for an extra frenzy. The new "parking" rule does not affect min/max frequency but allows for a more continuous range in between.
All this came about as I tried to grasp the new rule, and frequency is turning out not to be so useful after all.
I think the essential point is that a parked C2 item functions henceforth as a C1 item ("demoted to C1"), except only for the visual reminder that it used to be in C2. Yet, this visual reminder can be valuable, as it creates an ad-hoc list of items likely to have higher priority—another level of sifting.
April 5, 2011 at 16:50 |
Bernie
Bernie
For what it's worth, I am going to call this SFv2.5. ;)
April 6, 2011 at 3:28 |
Bernie
Bernie
Mark -- I've been thinking through the mechanics of this new variant, and am thinking about joining the experiment. But I have some questions about how dismissal would operate.
You wrote, <<< The dismissal rules are exactly the same as for AF1 with Column 2 treated as part of the page. >>>
Question 1 -- What happens when you turn to page N, enter an urgent task in Column 2 before doing anything else, action that task, then nothing else stands out, so you move to the next page? Does actioning that urgent task save the tasks on Page N from dismissal?
Question 2 -- Does any special dismissal rule apply when Column 2 is completely filled, as with SFv3? (Basically, anything left on that page is dismissed when you leave the page.)
Thanks!
You wrote, <<< The dismissal rules are exactly the same as for AF1 with Column 2 treated as part of the page. >>>
Question 1 -- What happens when you turn to page N, enter an urgent task in Column 2 before doing anything else, action that task, then nothing else stands out, so you move to the next page? Does actioning that urgent task save the tasks on Page N from dismissal?
Question 2 -- Does any special dismissal rule apply when Column 2 is completely filled, as with SFv3? (Basically, anything left on that page is dismissed when you leave the page.)
Thanks!
April 6, 2011 at 5:44 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Bernie:
<< For what it's worth, I am going to call this SFv2.5. ;) >>
Sorry, no. I've no objection to your developing your own variations on this discussion board, but version numbers of SuperFocus (or other programs of mine) can only be allocated by me.
<< For what it's worth, I am going to call this SFv2.5. ;) >>
Sorry, no. I've no objection to your developing your own variations on this discussion board, but version numbers of SuperFocus (or other programs of mine) can only be allocated by me.
April 6, 2011 at 8:21 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Seraphim:
<< Question 1 -- What happens when you turn to page N, enter an urgent task in Column 2 before doing anything else, action that task, then nothing else stands out, so you move to the next page? Does actioning that urgent task save the tasks on Page N from dismissal? >>
Yes.
<< Question 2 -- Does any special dismissal rule apply when Column 2 is completely filled, as with SFv3? (Basically, anything left on that page is dismissed when you leave the page.) >>
No.
<< Question 1 -- What happens when you turn to page N, enter an urgent task in Column 2 before doing anything else, action that task, then nothing else stands out, so you move to the next page? Does actioning that urgent task save the tasks on Page N from dismissal? >>
Yes.
<< Question 2 -- Does any special dismissal rule apply when Column 2 is completely filled, as with SFv3? (Basically, anything left on that page is dismissed when you leave the page.) >>
No.
April 6, 2011 at 8:24 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Day 4 and still working well. I'm away for the rest of the day in half an hour, so I've been dealing with the things I need to do before leaving. The system copes with this very well.
Eight active pages with one page dismissed (1 dismissed task). Three Column 2 tasks, all on the current (last) page.
Eight active pages with one page dismissed (1 dismissed task). Three Column 2 tasks, all on the current (last) page.
April 6, 2011 at 10:25 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark - Thanks for the clarifications regarding dismissal.
Also - When you started this new variant, did you start a new notebook or continue with your existing SF3 notebook?
Also - When you started this new variant, did you start a new notebook or continue with your existing SF3 notebook?
April 6, 2011 at 18:11 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Apologies if I'm being gormless, but if one has say 10 active pages of which just 3 have C2 items on them, does one cycle through the 3 or the 10? I can make arguments for both cases.
Admittedly, one's freedom to do the smallest imaginable amount of work on the seven C2-free pages makes the distinction smaller than it might be.
Admittedly, one's freedom to do the smallest imaginable amount of work on the seven C2-free pages makes the distinction smaller than it might be.
April 6, 2011 at 18:42 |
DavidC
DavidC
<< Sorry, no. I've no objection to your developing your own variations on this discussion board, but version numbers of SuperFocus (or other programs of mine) can only be allocated by me. >>
I understand, Mark. My apologies.
I understand, Mark. My apologies.
April 6, 2011 at 23:03 |
Bernie
Bernie
@Mark: how many cycles are you doing per day? I'm already having some trouble getting to one cycle per day, and I fear that with this variation, the urgent and unfinished tasks may not get done fast enough because there is a significant chance I won't get to that page again soon.
I (and some others I suppose!) would be very grateful for a blog post with tips on cranking up the cycle rate in SF3.
I (and some others I suppose!) would be very grateful for a blog post with tips on cranking up the cycle rate in SF3.
April 7, 2011 at 18:54 |
Tijl Kindt
Tijl Kindt
Tijl:
<< I fear that with this variation, the urgent and unfinished tasks may not get done fast enough because there is a significant chance I won't get to that page again soon.>>
In that case re-enter them as urgent tasks on the current page.
<< I fear that with this variation, the urgent and unfinished tasks may not get done fast enough because there is a significant chance I won't get to that page again soon.>>
In that case re-enter them as urgent tasks on the current page.
April 7, 2011 at 18:59 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
DavidC:
<< if one has say 10 active pages of which just 3 have C2 items on them, does one cycle through the 3 or the 10? >>
The 10.
<< if one has say 10 active pages of which just 3 have C2 items on them, does one cycle through the 3 or the 10? >>
The 10.
April 7, 2011 at 19:02 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Seraphim:
<< When you started this new variant, did you start a new notebook or continue with your existing SF3 notebook? >
Same notebook. New list.
<< When you started this new variant, did you start a new notebook or continue with your existing SF3 notebook? >
Same notebook. New list.
April 7, 2011 at 19:03 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Tjil says " I'm already having some trouble getting to one cycle per day". My cycle time is slower than once every six weeks.
April 8, 2011 at 17:16 |
DavidC
DavidC
I suggest that anyone who is having difficulty with their cycle rate introduces a rule that any page they haven't visited in two days is deleted.
April 8, 2011 at 17:43 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark wrote: << I suggest that anyone who is having difficulty with their cycle rate ... >>
I am very glad that is only a suggestion! :-)
I will start a new thread on this topic since I've been keeping a list of things that can help move faster, but such a post would be off topic for this thread.
I am very glad that is only a suggestion! :-)
I will start a new thread on this topic since I've been keeping a list of things that can help move faster, but such a post would be off topic for this thread.
April 9, 2011 at 5:22 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim,
Good news: I was thinking of asking your opinion, as our most notable recovered crawler.
Good news: I was thinking of asking your opinion, as our most notable recovered crawler.
April 9, 2011 at 8:53 |
Will
Will
To get back to topic, I've decided to go back to the existing rules for SuperFocus with one small variation:
Tasks in Column 2 can be deleted and entered on the next page without being worked on. This is the equivalent of putting the task on "snooze".
However if the next page is the last page, then these tasks are re-entered in Column 1.
Tasks in Column 2 can be deleted and entered on the next page without being worked on. This is the equivalent of putting the task on "snooze".
However if the next page is the last page, then these tasks are re-entered in Column 1.
April 9, 2011 at 17:10 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark,
Is the idea that you won't just keep re-writing it without doing SOMETHING on it eventually?
And re: "if the next page is the last page, then these tasks are re-entered in Column 1" why is that? Is it to give them x-number of chances to be demoted? If so, it seems that it would need to be tied to how far back in the book it is. But then again, when you reach it in C1, you can always re-promote it if you feel necessary.
I hope you don't mind me asking for clarification. It's nice to know the "why" behind some of the decisions that seem contra-system at first glance.
Is the idea that you won't just keep re-writing it without doing SOMETHING on it eventually?
And re: "if the next page is the last page, then these tasks are re-entered in Column 1" why is that? Is it to give them x-number of chances to be demoted? If so, it seems that it would need to be tied to how far back in the book it is. But then again, when you reach it in C1, you can always re-promote it if you feel necessary.
I hope you don't mind me asking for clarification. It's nice to know the "why" behind some of the decisions that seem contra-system at first glance.
April 9, 2011 at 17:29 |
malisa
malisa
Malisa:
<< Is the idea that you won't just keep re-writing it without doing SOMETHING on it eventually? >>
Obviously.
<< And re: "if the next page is the last page, then these tasks are re-entered in Column 1" why is that? >>
So you won't just keep re-writing it without doing SOMETHING on it eventually.
<< Is it to give them x-number of chances to be demoted? >>
No, it's to provide a simple and obvious limit point which doesn't need calculation.
<< Is the idea that you won't just keep re-writing it without doing SOMETHING on it eventually? >>
Obviously.
<< And re: "if the next page is the last page, then these tasks are re-entered in Column 1" why is that? >>
So you won't just keep re-writing it without doing SOMETHING on it eventually.
<< Is it to give them x-number of chances to be demoted? >>
No, it's to provide a simple and obvious limit point which doesn't need calculation.
April 9, 2011 at 22:40 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark,
Great minds think alike (see my V#4 above from Apr 4)! I like the "putting the task on 'snooze'" description. In answer to malisa's question, it really is analogous to hitting the snooze button on an alarm clock; most of us who use one do eventually get out of bed.
I also like the auto-demotion (to C1) when hitting the last page. It seems that the use of C2 could be reserved for full-C1 pages, in general. This would mean that no unfinished task could remain in C2 for more than one cycle, until it was considered afresh from C1 on the last page. This 1-cycle reconsideration would then solve the dilemma some of us have been discussing, about changing priorities.
Great minds think alike (see my V#4 above from Apr 4)! I like the "putting the task on 'snooze'" description. In answer to malisa's question, it really is analogous to hitting the snooze button on an alarm clock; most of us who use one do eventually get out of bed.
I also like the auto-demotion (to C1) when hitting the last page. It seems that the use of C2 could be reserved for full-C1 pages, in general. This would mean that no unfinished task could remain in C2 for more than one cycle, until it was considered afresh from C1 on the last page. This 1-cycle reconsideration would then solve the dilemma some of us have been discussing, about changing priorities.
April 9, 2011 at 23:03 |
ubi
ubi
Hi all
As I completely lost the train of SF and MF variation, could some one please tell me if there is any variation about MF original rules or after testing all remains as the original rules were.
Many thanks indeed.
As I completely lost the train of SF and MF variation, could some one please tell me if there is any variation about MF original rules or after testing all remains as the original rules were.
Many thanks indeed.
April 29, 2011 at 16:49 |
FocusGuy.
FocusGuy.
Nothing is concluded yet. At this point the original rules seem okay, and many variations seem okay, but nothing is proven optimal.
April 29, 2011 at 18:29 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Hi Alan many thanks to you, so I can stay up to date
Good week end
Good week end
April 29, 2011 at 20:11 |
FocusGuy.
FocusGuy.
What this means is basically AF1 with a second column added in which urgent tasks go on the page I am currently working on and unfinished tasks on the next page. The dismissal rules are exactly the same as for AF1 with Column 2 treated as part of the page.
So far (Day 2) it is working very well. The sense of strain caused by the compulsory nature of the current rules has gone, but urgent and unfinished tasks are still getting done effectively.