Discussion Forum > AF 1 improvement continued
Paul - I suppose this idea could be expanded to use C2 for whatever you want to emphasize in your particular environment.
For example, if you are an independent contractor who tends to spend too much time on administrivia, you could use C2 for "billable work".
For example, if you are an independent contractor who tends to spend too much time on administrivia, you could use C2 for "billable work".
January 6, 2012 at 2:58 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Yes, that would be exactly true. As I think about it, not everybody would have the same balance of "contact" vs. "non-contact" work as I have. At the same time, for me it seemed to have lifted the burden of having a pressing phonecall to return somewhere in C1.
January 6, 2012 at 4:34 |
Paul MacNeil
Paul MacNeil
Mark wrote:
<< What would the effect be of abolishing the dismissal rule in AF1?>>
This is what I've been doing! For months now.
Though, I've been feeling bad about it and have occasionally "gotten a folder out" just to avoid dismissing a page. In other words, I have not actually removed the rule or cheated it but have rendered it inoperable either by staying at the end of the list (where all the hot items are) or by taking trivial actions to pass through the older pages. I don't think I've dismissed a single page since restarting AF around August!
This entire past year, I have tried to take to heart the notion that dismissal is a crucial part of balancing the system, but it has always remained for me a source of resistance and of forcing me to do things at the wrong time—and then I have too many things Unfinished.
Telling me to ignore the dismissal rule ... this is telling me to do what I'm going to do anyway, without playing games or feeling bad about it!
I find this comes back to my favorite "dashboard" concept I've mentioned before: show me what's true, rather than prescribing the steps to take. If I see a clear display showing me, e.g. what's in progress, what's same-day-urgent, what's a great idea but hasn't been started yet ... I will know what I need to do just by looking at it. The trouble is, how to construct such a display without unacceptable overhead? Eliminating dismissal is a big step in this direction for AF. Along with the start-on-yesterday's-page rule, AF is becoming a nice dashboard.
<< What would the effect be of abolishing the dismissal rule in AF1?>>
This is what I've been doing! For months now.
Though, I've been feeling bad about it and have occasionally "gotten a folder out" just to avoid dismissing a page. In other words, I have not actually removed the rule or cheated it but have rendered it inoperable either by staying at the end of the list (where all the hot items are) or by taking trivial actions to pass through the older pages. I don't think I've dismissed a single page since restarting AF around August!
This entire past year, I have tried to take to heart the notion that dismissal is a crucial part of balancing the system, but it has always remained for me a source of resistance and of forcing me to do things at the wrong time—and then I have too many things Unfinished.
Telling me to ignore the dismissal rule ... this is telling me to do what I'm going to do anyway, without playing games or feeling bad about it!
I find this comes back to my favorite "dashboard" concept I've mentioned before: show me what's true, rather than prescribing the steps to take. If I see a clear display showing me, e.g. what's in progress, what's same-day-urgent, what's a great idea but hasn't been started yet ... I will know what I need to do just by looking at it. The trouble is, how to construct such a display without unacceptable overhead? Eliminating dismissal is a big step in this direction for AF. Along with the start-on-yesterday's-page rule, AF is becoming a nice dashboard.
January 6, 2012 at 7:11 |
Bernie
Bernie
I quite like the idea of "optional dismissal" i.e when a page is ready to be dismissed as per the normal AF1 rules, you now have three "options" instead:
1. Dismiss the page
2. Use your "get out of jail free" card to save the page from dismissal for now.
3. Rewrite any tasks you don't want to lose at the end of the list, freeing up the rest of the page for dismissal
Sometimes I find a task on a page that I would like to keep around, but would also not like to do there and then just to save it.
I'm a fan of doing tasks that you feel "inspired" to do rather than "forced" to do and the dismissal rule as it stands is too much "forcing" for me.
I'm of the view that anything you genuinely want to get done will feel "inspired" to you when the time is right for it to get done - and that momentum towards inspiration usually comes from successfully completing other "inspired" tasks. It's like building up speed before the long jump.
So, for me, being able to keep necessary tasks hanging around on ready-to-be-dismissed pages, until that inspiration comes, is a good idea.
I also think there comes a time when it is obvious that particular tasks are no longer relevant to your life and you just get tired of looking at them, so that is when a page can be safely dismissed with the full backing of your intuition.
If you are starting each day using the modified AF1 rule of beginning at yesterday's entry point then it becomes less of a handicap to have lots of old pages hanging around because they won't cause a drag on the currently-important stuff.
1. Dismiss the page
2. Use your "get out of jail free" card to save the page from dismissal for now.
3. Rewrite any tasks you don't want to lose at the end of the list, freeing up the rest of the page for dismissal
Sometimes I find a task on a page that I would like to keep around, but would also not like to do there and then just to save it.
I'm a fan of doing tasks that you feel "inspired" to do rather than "forced" to do and the dismissal rule as it stands is too much "forcing" for me.
I'm of the view that anything you genuinely want to get done will feel "inspired" to you when the time is right for it to get done - and that momentum towards inspiration usually comes from successfully completing other "inspired" tasks. It's like building up speed before the long jump.
So, for me, being able to keep necessary tasks hanging around on ready-to-be-dismissed pages, until that inspiration comes, is a good idea.
I also think there comes a time when it is obvious that particular tasks are no longer relevant to your life and you just get tired of looking at them, so that is when a page can be safely dismissed with the full backing of your intuition.
If you are starting each day using the modified AF1 rule of beginning at yesterday's entry point then it becomes less of a handicap to have lots of old pages hanging around because they won't cause a drag on the currently-important stuff.
January 6, 2012 at 8:22 |
Frank
Frank
Hi Paul
I like the idea. I never tried it. As a commercial in real-estate I guess this may be very interesting for me. I have many calls and calling is the best way for me for making advancing my business. I gone try it and give you a return asap.
Cheers.
I like the idea. I never tried it. As a commercial in real-estate I guess this may be very interesting for me. I have many calls and calling is the best way for me for making advancing my business. I gone try it and give you a return asap.
Cheers.
January 6, 2012 at 13:41 |
FocusGuy.
FocusGuy.
I think eventually you would experience AF3's problem of neglecting the expanding middle. New idea: if the problem (as I discuss in the other thread) takes a couple weeks to manifest, maybe a good rule can be found that doesn't dominate the system. Why worry every page about what's only a problem after two weeks?
Proposed rule: mark for review every page more than 7 days old ( OR: when you add a page, mark for review a page seven days back.)
Scan all pages, but marked pages call for the following choices on tasks:
Delete, move off-list rewrite, ignore, but not Do. I think having a page where the thought is what-to-kill will be a healthy emphasis, to maintain list control.
Proposed rule: mark for review every page more than 7 days old ( OR: when you add a page, mark for review a page seven days back.)
Scan all pages, but marked pages call for the following choices on tasks:
Delete, move off-list rewrite, ignore, but not Do. I think having a page where the thought is what-to-kill will be a healthy emphasis, to maintain list control.
January 6, 2012 at 13:49 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Combining ideas from previous thread, here's my plan:
a. Any time you think of a task, write it last page.
b. Any time you pick a task to work on, write it last page, do it, and cross-out the original.
(I'm keeping these visually distinct.)
c. When a task is finished, flag it, meaning Seraphim's "Finished - what's next?"
d. Each day, mark for review any page more than N days old. (7?)
1. Scan through the last two pages. Do any tasks, according to rule b. Repeat until nothing stands out.
2. Scan marked pages: Do none. Instead, pick some to delete, move off-list, or rewrite.
3. Scan remaining pages. Do any, according to rule b.
4. Repeat.
a. Any time you think of a task, write it last page.
b. Any time you pick a task to work on, write it last page, do it, and cross-out the original.
(I'm keeping these visually distinct.)
c. When a task is finished, flag it, meaning Seraphim's "Finished - what's next?"
d. Each day, mark for review any page more than N days old. (7?)
1. Scan through the last two pages. Do any tasks, according to rule b. Repeat until nothing stands out.
2. Scan marked pages: Do none. Instead, pick some to delete, move off-list, or rewrite.
3. Scan remaining pages. Do any, according to rule b.
4. Repeat.
January 7, 2012 at 15:42 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
The daily process should start at the first page not the last, because the looping already emphasizes the last.
I feel this combination of rules will perfect the balance.
I feel this combination of rules will perfect the balance.
January 7, 2012 at 16:04 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Tip 3 . alway encounter the same problem about following projects. Af become little by little very messy and without any control or feeling. It is because of the amount of stuff and the feeling of doing multitasking dropping to a task to another instead of doing the all of a project
Found a simplest solution :
Draw a vertical column like a marge and put your project name in it
Draw a secont vertical column it is for context
All what is on the right of this column is your tasks
if your need to work on a project drop all what is not the present project and read nothing but the project. Do it little by little like you do with AF1
when you fed up go back to af and read nothing but the third column
it is simple. Just try and let me know.
Found a simplest solution :
Draw a vertical column like a marge and put your project name in it
Draw a secont vertical column it is for context
All what is on the right of this column is your tasks
if your need to work on a project drop all what is not the present project and read nothing but the project. Do it little by little like you do with AF1
when you fed up go back to af and read nothing but the third column
it is simple. Just try and let me know.
January 9, 2012 at 18:36 |
FocusGuy.
FocusGuy.
Jupiter:
<< alway encounter the same problem about following projects. Af become little by little very messy and without any control or feeling. It is because of the amount of stuff and the feeling of doing multitasking dropping to a task to another instead of doing the all of a project >>
I've never been able to see what the problem is with projects in AF/SF. You've always had the choice of entering projects as a whole or as individual tasks, or both. Having a separate project list is also an option (either composed ad hoc or maintained continually). For any really complicated project you would need to refer to the project documentation in any case.
So if you find that dealing with individual tasks is messy and without feeling then enter tasks at the project leval and use a separate project sheet. That is standard AF/SF practice.
<< alway encounter the same problem about following projects. Af become little by little very messy and without any control or feeling. It is because of the amount of stuff and the feeling of doing multitasking dropping to a task to another instead of doing the all of a project >>
I've never been able to see what the problem is with projects in AF/SF. You've always had the choice of entering projects as a whole or as individual tasks, or both. Having a separate project list is also an option (either composed ad hoc or maintained continually). For any really complicated project you would need to refer to the project documentation in any case.
So if you find that dealing with individual tasks is messy and without feeling then enter tasks at the project leval and use a separate project sheet. That is standard AF/SF practice.
January 9, 2012 at 20:57 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Frank:
<<I also think there comes a time when it is obvious that particular tasks are no longer relevant to your life and you just get tired of looking at them, so that is when a page can be safely dismissed with the full backing of your intuition.>>
This shows a completely diferent understanding of what dismissal is all about. This also explains why many people are so reluctant to dismiss.
I quite happily dismiss pages that contain tasks that I know I still have to do. To me, dismiss does not equal delete, but more something like "put on hold for now". I'm quite confident that these tasks will resurface in due time. To ensure this, I have a recurrent task in my system called "Review dismissed items". When I feel it's time, I go through the dismissed (highlighted) items again and either:
- definitively delete them,
- re-enter them,
- move them to my tickler to re-activate them on a specific date.
In the meantime, I don't have to read through all these pending items over and over again. In fact, you could consider dismissal as simply a change of frequency for checking out the items: from at each pass of the list (i.e. every one or two days) to at review time only (every one or two weeks). Psychologically, this is a big relief!
<<I also think there comes a time when it is obvious that particular tasks are no longer relevant to your life and you just get tired of looking at them, so that is when a page can be safely dismissed with the full backing of your intuition.>>
This shows a completely diferent understanding of what dismissal is all about. This also explains why many people are so reluctant to dismiss.
I quite happily dismiss pages that contain tasks that I know I still have to do. To me, dismiss does not equal delete, but more something like "put on hold for now". I'm quite confident that these tasks will resurface in due time. To ensure this, I have a recurrent task in my system called "Review dismissed items". When I feel it's time, I go through the dismissed (highlighted) items again and either:
- definitively delete them,
- re-enter them,
- move them to my tickler to re-activate them on a specific date.
In the meantime, I don't have to read through all these pending items over and over again. In fact, you could consider dismissal as simply a change of frequency for checking out the items: from at each pass of the list (i.e. every one or two days) to at review time only (every one or two weeks). Psychologically, this is a big relief!
January 10, 2012 at 14:26 |
Marc (from Brussels)
Marc (from Brussels)
I think you're right, Marc, in that dismissal is one of the hardest things for people to get their heads around. I know it took me a long time to be willing to dismiss things. Now I do so quite gleefully!
I don't keep a "review dismissed" as a recurring task - rather, it gets entered every time I dismiss a page (which, even though I've gotten past my mental block against it, is still only about once a week, depending on the number of crises I'm dealing with at any given time - more crises = more dismissals).
I don't keep a "review dismissed" as a recurring task - rather, it gets entered every time I dismiss a page (which, even though I've gotten past my mental block against it, is still only about once a week, depending on the number of crises I'm dealing with at any given time - more crises = more dismissals).
January 10, 2012 at 16:22 |
Sarah
Sarah
I believe it's the word "dismissed" that's at fault. As used it means "set aside for future review", but the usual meaning in this context is " to reject serious consideration of <dismissed the thought> " So we mistakenly feel we are expected to reject the task from all future consideration, which is wrong.
January 10, 2012 at 16:53 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Alan:
<< So we mistakenly feel we are expected to reject the task from all future consideration, which is wrong. >>
I can't really believe that changing the word would make much difference, especially as the rules clearly explain exactly what it means.
<< So we mistakenly feel we are expected to reject the task from all future consideration, which is wrong. >>
I can't really believe that changing the word would make much difference, especially as the rules clearly explain exactly what it means.
January 10, 2012 at 17:12 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Please, Mark, don't underestimate the significance of a proper choice of words. Any politician or public figure will tell you that "what you say" is far less important that "how you say it". You should know that, yourself, considering the multitude of interviews that you've been in. The choice of vocabulary sets the tone of a message, much like background music sets the tone in a movie scene.
With that said, I must admit that I hadn't thought about the impact the term "dismiss" was having on me. Now that it's been brought to focus, I think I agree. I fear dismissal because, despite the rules about review, dismissal seems so... enduring. No, it seems permanent. (See? Two words that mean the same thing but invoke completely different emotions.)
With that said, I must admit that I hadn't thought about the impact the term "dismiss" was having on me. Now that it's been brought to focus, I think I agree. I fear dismissal because, despite the rules about review, dismissal seems so... enduring. No, it seems permanent. (See? Two words that mean the same thing but invoke completely different emotions.)
January 10, 2012 at 17:20 |
jFenter
jFenter
Interesting. I understand the rules of AF1 about dismissal but I have to also agree that the word "dismissed" brings up a sense of finality which makes you feel, perhaps only at a subliminal level, that there is something serious happening when you do it.
I note that with GTD's Someday/Maybe list (when I followed GTD), I could throw stuff into it all day long without a care in the world knowing that I would see it again at the next weekly review, but I feel much more (subliminally) reluctant with "dismissing" items in AF1.
I note that with GTD's Someday/Maybe list (when I followed GTD), I could throw stuff into it all day long without a care in the world knowing that I would see it again at the next weekly review, but I feel much more (subliminally) reluctant with "dismissing" items in AF1.
January 10, 2012 at 18:03 |
Frank
Frank
"Dismissed" in the context of AF1 just means "sent away from the list because not needed now".
Those dismissed tasks can be brought back to active status any time you want to.
Those dismissed tasks can be brought back to active status any time you want to.
January 10, 2012 at 18:06 |
Rainer
Rainer
"The soldiers were dismissed after the parade was over"
"I dismissed the thought from my mind for the time being"
"The staff can be dismissed for the holiday as soon as their work is done"
"Class dismissed!"
"I dismissed the task from the active list for later review"
No sense of finality in any of those - and they are all perfectly normal uses of the word "dismiss".
"I dismissed the thought from my mind for the time being"
"The staff can be dismissed for the holiday as soon as their work is done"
"Class dismissed!"
"I dismissed the task from the active list for later review"
No sense of finality in any of those - and they are all perfectly normal uses of the word "dismiss".
January 10, 2012 at 18:22 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
So odd.
The inability to stick to AF 1, or do work/chores, etc., is due to semantics. C'mon man!
The inability to stick to AF 1, or do work/chores, etc., is due to semantics. C'mon man!
January 10, 2012 at 18:26 |
avrum
avrum
Hm, well, regarding semantics: the way someone's unintentional self-talk is worded has great influence on one's motivation and ability to work. You can be harsh and angry with yourself and achieve nothing, or you can talk compassionately to yourself and make some progress.
January 10, 2012 at 18:36 |
Rainer
Rainer
Well, I guess you guys have convinced me with the compelling nature of your arguments. Therefore I have decided we need a new name. Since it's my system, what better name than my own?
So from now on we will use "forstering" instead of "dismissal". To "forster" should replace all the non-permanent senses of "dismiss". So in the above examples:
"The soldiers were forstered after the parade was over"
"I forstered the thought from my mind for the time being"
"The staff can be forstered for the holiday as soon as their work is done"
"Class forstered!"
"I forstered the task from the active list for later review"
I feel a wave of productivity coming on.
So from now on we will use "forstering" instead of "dismissal". To "forster" should replace all the non-permanent senses of "dismiss". So in the above examples:
"The soldiers were forstered after the parade was over"
"I forstered the thought from my mind for the time being"
"The staff can be forstered for the holiday as soon as their work is done"
"Class forstered!"
"I forstered the task from the active list for later review"
I feel a wave of productivity coming on.
January 10, 2012 at 18:42 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I'm not sure that implying it's only semantics is the whole story - we are, after all, dealing with a time management system that's entire basis is something as subtle as picking a task to do that "stands out".
Change that phrase to "compelling" or "urgent" or "important" or "easy" or "hard" etc and the whole flavour of the system becomes different.
But, for me at least, I'm happy to just live with the word "dismissed". Now that I've realized I have this inner reluctance, I can just treat it mentally as a GTD "Someday/Maybe".
Change that phrase to "compelling" or "urgent" or "important" or "easy" or "hard" etc and the whole flavour of the system becomes different.
But, for me at least, I'm happy to just live with the word "dismissed". Now that I've realized I have this inner reluctance, I can just treat it mentally as a GTD "Someday/Maybe".
January 10, 2012 at 19:30 |
Frank
Frank
Mark, do you really want to be known for letting things go undone? :-)
I was going to suggest "Mark for review".
Anyway, forstering is not an issue for me anymore.
I was going to suggest "Mark for review".
Anyway, forstering is not an issue for me anymore.
January 10, 2012 at 20:33 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
Rainer: ". . . or you can talk compassionately to yourself and make some progress."
Self: "I'm good enough. I'm smart enough. And doggone it, people like me!"
(For those outside the U.S., or younger folks, this was from a recurring gag on the Saturday Night Live late-night comedy show, where Al Franken played the role of Stuart Smalley. He spoke these self-motivational words while looking in the mirror. Video link below.)
http://youtu.be/-DIETlxquzY
Self: "I'm good enough. I'm smart enough. And doggone it, people like me!"
(For those outside the U.S., or younger folks, this was from a recurring gag on the Saturday Night Live late-night comedy show, where Al Franken played the role of Stuart Smalley. He spoke these self-motivational words while looking in the mirror. Video link below.)
http://youtu.be/-DIETlxquzY
January 10, 2012 at 22:01 |
ubi
ubi
Alan:
<< Mark, do you really want to be known for letting things go undone? >>
So in one breathe you berate me for using a word with negative connotations to describe the process, and in the next give the process negative connotations yourself?
<< Mark, do you really want to be known for letting things go undone? >>
So in one breathe you berate me for using a word with negative connotations to describe the process, and in the next give the process negative connotations yourself?
January 10, 2012 at 22:47 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark, respectfully, when you quoted Alan, you didn't put the little smiley face that he included at the end of his statement. To me, that is 'body language', and implies that he may have not been very serious about it.
January 11, 2012 at 5:30 |
BKK
BKK
Thinking of my list as a 'to-start' list rather than a 'to-do' list made a difference for me - I read that suggestion in this forum several weeks ago. Similarly, using the word 'suspend' instead of 'dismiss' causes me to view that process differently. In fact some tasks I kill because I won't or can't get to them, and some I suspend because I want to revive or reconsider them later.
January 11, 2012 at 7:54 |
Zane
Zane
Dismiss --> put on hold; suspend; set aside; reconsider later; ...
Mark:
<<I can't really believe that changing the word would make much difference, especially as the rules clearly explain exactly what it means.>>
Your system is based on a balance between the conscious/rational and subconscious. It is fairly unique in that it acknowledges that both have their role to play. As an analogy, clearly explained and explicit rules are the rational aspect, whereas the associations people have when they hear a word could be considered in the area of the subconscious. And as such they influence people's behaviour.
In my professional career, I've often experienced how simply changing the name, the "label" of something will either increase resistance or acceptance, even when you don't change anything to the underlying concept or process... This has now ceased to surprise me. But many people don't realise this is happening.
Mark:
<<I can't really believe that changing the word would make much difference, especially as the rules clearly explain exactly what it means.>>
Your system is based on a balance between the conscious/rational and subconscious. It is fairly unique in that it acknowledges that both have their role to play. As an analogy, clearly explained and explicit rules are the rational aspect, whereas the associations people have when they hear a word could be considered in the area of the subconscious. And as such they influence people's behaviour.
In my professional career, I've often experienced how simply changing the name, the "label" of something will either increase resistance or acceptance, even when you don't change anything to the underlying concept or process... This has now ceased to surprise me. But many people don't realise this is happening.
January 11, 2012 at 8:18 |
Marc (from Brussels)
Marc (from Brussels)
Marc:
<< In my professional career, I've often experienced how simply changing the name, the "label" of something will either increase resistance or acceptance, even when you don't change anything to the underlying concept or process >>
Strangely enough I did consider the meanings and associations of the word "dismiss" very thoroughly before settling on the term. And the fact that over three years of people objecting to the term I've never been persuaded to change it shows that I am pretty happy with it.
Remember that "dismissal" has two objectives:
1) to increase gradually the pressure to get a particular task done
2) to give a chance to consider why a task has failed to get done and to do something about it.
Remember that according to the rules you are not supposed to re-instate a task without its being changed. This change may be a rewriting or rewording, or a change in circumstances, or a reconsideration of the importance of the task itself in conjunction with other tasks and its place in one's overall vision.
"Dismissal" is not just a matter of taking a task out of the system and putting it back a few days or weeks later. There is a finality about it, and that finality is intentional.
So I'm sticking with "dismiss".
<< In my professional career, I've often experienced how simply changing the name, the "label" of something will either increase resistance or acceptance, even when you don't change anything to the underlying concept or process >>
Strangely enough I did consider the meanings and associations of the word "dismiss" very thoroughly before settling on the term. And the fact that over three years of people objecting to the term I've never been persuaded to change it shows that I am pretty happy with it.
Remember that "dismissal" has two objectives:
1) to increase gradually the pressure to get a particular task done
2) to give a chance to consider why a task has failed to get done and to do something about it.
Remember that according to the rules you are not supposed to re-instate a task without its being changed. This change may be a rewriting or rewording, or a change in circumstances, or a reconsideration of the importance of the task itself in conjunction with other tasks and its place in one's overall vision.
"Dismissal" is not just a matter of taking a task out of the system and putting it back a few days or weeks later. There is a finality about it, and that finality is intentional.
So I'm sticking with "dismiss".
January 11, 2012 at 10:31 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
BKK:
<< Mark, respectfully, when you quoted Alan, you didn't put the little smiley face that he included at the end of his statement. >>
So in one breath you berate me for using a word with negative connotations to describe the process, and in the next give the process negative connotations yourself? :-)
<< Mark, respectfully, when you quoted Alan, you didn't put the little smiley face that he included at the end of his statement. >>
So in one breath you berate me for using a word with negative connotations to describe the process, and in the next give the process negative connotations yourself? :-)
January 11, 2012 at 10:38 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I guess that some people might think of Dismissal like you're "disbanding" something.
Instead, I like to think of Dismissal as if I were telling the task: "Right now, I don't want you loitering around and slowing up my standing-out process for the more important tasks at-hand. Is that clear?".
Instead, I like to think of Dismissal as if I were telling the task: "Right now, I don't want you loitering around and slowing up my standing-out process for the more important tasks at-hand. Is that clear?".
January 11, 2012 at 10:44 |
BKK
BKK
BKK:
If you look at my definition of the two objectives of dismissal above you will see that "stopping tasks from slowing up the standing out process" is not one of them.
If you look at my definition of the two objectives of dismissal above you will see that "stopping tasks from slowing up the standing out process" is not one of them.
January 11, 2012 at 11:18 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Thanks. However, I did not say "stopping tasks". What I said was that I didn't want them "loitering", and what I meant was "… so I could apply your two objectives of dismissal".
Another way I look at "important" tasks that are candidates for dismissal is that my plate is just too full and I want to simplify things to concentrate on what has to be done now.
Another way I look at "important" tasks that are candidates for dismissal is that my plate is just too full and I want to simplify things to concentrate on what has to be done now.
January 11, 2012 at 11:54 |
BKK
BKK
<<Another way I look at "important" tasks that are candidates for dismissal is that my plate is just too full and I want to simplify things to concentrate on what has to be done now.>>
YES! This is what gets at the possibly "temporary" nature of dismissal for me. Last week I had a Friday deadline on one thing. Things that got dismissed during that time included sending invoices for my freelance work, trimming the cat's claws, etc. They'll make it back in to the list when "review dismissed" stands out (which will likely be this morning now that I'm thinking about them!).
YES! This is what gets at the possibly "temporary" nature of dismissal for me. Last week I had a Friday deadline on one thing. Things that got dismissed during that time included sending invoices for my freelance work, trimming the cat's claws, etc. They'll make it back in to the list when "review dismissed" stands out (which will likely be this morning now that I'm thinking about them!).
January 11, 2012 at 12:33 |
Sarah
Sarah
"So in one breath you berate me for using a word with negative connotations to describe the process, and in the next give the process negative connotations yourself? :-)"
Yes :-)
Seriously now, I believe the rule is good. It's actually good in a weaker fashion like that of Romans 7:
"For I don't understand what I am doing. For I do not do what I want - instead, I do what I hate. But if I do what I don't want, I agree that the law is good." -Romans 7:15, 16
Even so, I should dismiss things and thus be more able to do the things I want done.
Yes :-)
Seriously now, I believe the rule is good. It's actually good in a weaker fashion like that of Romans 7:
"For I don't understand what I am doing. For I do not do what I want - instead, I do what I hate. But if I do what I don't want, I agree that the law is good." -Romans 7:15, 16
Even so, I should dismiss things and thus be more able to do the things I want done.
January 11, 2012 at 12:38 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I do think we unconsciously react to the choice of the word dismissal differently than we would if a different word were used, e.g., suspend. But dismissal does apply some pressure that might be needed whereas if I was to suspend an item, I might not feel any pressure at all to consider it now.
Some of Mark's examples actually make the case for our feeling that dismissal might be somewhat final, especially "class dismissed". Sure, it might be scheduled to reconvene the next day, but the completed class is done. The next one will be different. Same topics, same course, same teacher, same students, but different lesson. The class is dismissed, but the course will continue tomorrow.
I like Marc's way of looking at it: <In fact, you could consider dismissal as simply a change of frequency for checking out the items: from at each pass of the list (i.e. every one or two days) to at review time only (every one or two weeks). Psychologically, this is a big relief! > But he still uses the word dismissal, so the word itself still carries on in our subconscious.
This is really just another way that we all are different.
Some of Mark's examples actually make the case for our feeling that dismissal might be somewhat final, especially "class dismissed". Sure, it might be scheduled to reconvene the next day, but the completed class is done. The next one will be different. Same topics, same course, same teacher, same students, but different lesson. The class is dismissed, but the course will continue tomorrow.
I like Marc's way of looking at it: <In fact, you could consider dismissal as simply a change of frequency for checking out the items: from at each pass of the list (i.e. every one or two days) to at review time only (every one or two weeks). Psychologically, this is a big relief! > But he still uses the word dismissal, so the word itself still carries on in our subconscious.
This is really just another way that we all are different.
January 11, 2012 at 12:52 |
MartyH
MartyH
We might all be different, but it is still a mechanism to further a process (and a good at that) - whichever way you want to look at it.
January 11, 2012 at 13:10 |
BKK
BKK
Defer?
(adjourn, postpone, withhold...)
(adjourn, postpone, withhold...)
January 11, 2012 at 14:00 |
smileypete
smileypete
(Re-evaluate?...)
January 11, 2012 at 14:19 |
BKK
BKK
If you are using a paper system dismissed items are still on the list and highlighted. So your attention is now drawn to the things you decided you are not going to do. I am not sure I see the logic of this. Why not just cross off stuff you have decided not to do.
I think with all systems at some point it is healthy to start fresh in a new notebook and prune.
Gerry
I think with all systems at some point it is healthy to start fresh in a new notebook and prune.
Gerry
January 11, 2012 at 16:13 |
Gerry
Gerry
Gerry:
<<If you are using a paper system dismissed items are still on the list and highlighted. So your attention is now drawn to the things you decided you are not going to do. I am not sure I see the logic of this. Why not just cross off stuff you have decided not to do.>>
I'd say, "...your attention is now drawn to the things you decided you are not going to do FOR NOW", which is fundamentally different. The highlighting helps to quickly locate the items to reconsider when you're reviewing your dismissed items. If at review time I decide to definitively drop the item, I then cross it out.
By the way, when going through the active pages, it happens that I decide an item is not relevant or needed anymore. Then I simply cross it out: no need to wait until the page gets dismissed.
<<If you are using a paper system dismissed items are still on the list and highlighted. So your attention is now drawn to the things you decided you are not going to do. I am not sure I see the logic of this. Why not just cross off stuff you have decided not to do.>>
I'd say, "...your attention is now drawn to the things you decided you are not going to do FOR NOW", which is fundamentally different. The highlighting helps to quickly locate the items to reconsider when you're reviewing your dismissed items. If at review time I decide to definitively drop the item, I then cross it out.
By the way, when going through the active pages, it happens that I decide an item is not relevant or needed anymore. Then I simply cross it out: no need to wait until the page gets dismissed.
January 11, 2012 at 16:57 |
Marc (from Brussels)
Marc (from Brussels)
It's actually "decided not to look at page until later", not "decided not to do". If you read above, you'll note many people have difficulties with what you are suggesting.
January 11, 2012 at 16:57 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
<<So I'm sticking with "dismiss".>>
I will too. I like looking at my list as a dinner plate that can only get so full, which is why I keep it to four pages. It makes sense, using Mark's explanation/definition above, that I'd "dismiss" food from my plate that at one time I thought I would like to eat.
I will too. I like looking at my list as a dinner plate that can only get so full, which is why I keep it to four pages. It makes sense, using Mark's explanation/definition above, that I'd "dismiss" food from my plate that at one time I thought I would like to eat.
January 11, 2012 at 17:14 |
Zane
Zane
Zane, nice analogy.
And if you get hungry in the middle of the night, you can always go dumpster diving.
:0)
And if you get hungry in the middle of the night, you can always go dumpster diving.
:0)
January 11, 2012 at 17:47 |
Will
Will
I guess I have a differing view on the idea of dismissal. By not doing an item, I have decided I may do it later, highlighting it or not the result is the same to me. My pages are a huge mix of longer term items including some things that may actually be deemed a project, along with things like call Ted. So for me it is easier to make the decision at the individual task/item level.
The more I contemplate TM systems, the more I realize I want to be thinking about my business and less about following rules. The change I have made so far seems to move things forward. Since dismissal caused me hesitancy with it removed, there are only two options do it or don't do it. Dismissal was just a form of don't do it that I find I don't need.
Good luck Gerry
The more I contemplate TM systems, the more I realize I want to be thinking about my business and less about following rules. The change I have made so far seems to move things forward. Since dismissal caused me hesitancy with it removed, there are only two options do it or don't do it. Dismissal was just a form of don't do it that I find I don't need.
Good luck Gerry
January 11, 2012 at 18:40 |
Gerry
Gerry
Gerry:
<< If you are using a paper system dismissed items are still on the list and highlighted. So your attention is now drawn to the things you decided you are not going to do. I am not sure I see the logic of this. Why not just cross off stuff you have decided not to do >>
First, dismissed tasks are not "tasks you have decided not to do". Tasks you have decided not to do are deleted, not dismissed.
Second, your attention is not drawn to dismissed tasks because you don't look at the pages they are on. These pages are only looked at when you are reviewing dismissed tasks, and the highlighting then enables you to see easily which these are.
<< If you are using a paper system dismissed items are still on the list and highlighted. So your attention is now drawn to the things you decided you are not going to do. I am not sure I see the logic of this. Why not just cross off stuff you have decided not to do >>
First, dismissed tasks are not "tasks you have decided not to do". Tasks you have decided not to do are deleted, not dismissed.
Second, your attention is not drawn to dismissed tasks because you don't look at the pages they are on. These pages are only looked at when you are reviewing dismissed tasks, and the highlighting then enables you to see easily which these are.
January 11, 2012 at 18:44 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark,
Thanks, I think I now finally understand the mechanics of dismissal and the benefit which seems to reduce active pages to speed processing up.
But to implement it, I need to add one rule. I would line through a completed page top to bottom so I know a page with highlights has dismissed items and will at some point be reviewed , a line through page is done and never needs to be reviewed again and a page with neither of these things is active.
But, since I committed to try my revision, I will stick with it and see how it goes.
Thanks
Thanks, I think I now finally understand the mechanics of dismissal and the benefit which seems to reduce active pages to speed processing up.
But to implement it, I need to add one rule. I would line through a completed page top to bottom so I know a page with highlights has dismissed items and will at some point be reviewed , a line through page is done and never needs to be reviewed again and a page with neither of these things is active.
But, since I committed to try my revision, I will stick with it and see how it goes.
Thanks
January 11, 2012 at 19:18 |
Gerry
Gerry
Gerry:
<< But to implement it, I need to add one rule. I would line through a completed page top to bottom so I know a page with highlights has dismissed items and will at some point be reviewed , a line through page is done and never needs to be reviewed again and a page with neither of these things is active. >>
In the AF1 rules it is suggested that you put a cross at the top of a page when it is completed and put a circle round the cross when there are no active pages before the page with the cross. That way you can easily find where the first active page is.
If you want to put a line through the page instead that is up to you, but I suggest that you make it a double line when there are no preceding active pages.
<< But to implement it, I need to add one rule. I would line through a completed page top to bottom so I know a page with highlights has dismissed items and will at some point be reviewed , a line through page is done and never needs to be reviewed again and a page with neither of these things is active. >>
In the AF1 rules it is suggested that you put a cross at the top of a page when it is completed and put a circle round the cross when there are no active pages before the page with the cross. That way you can easily find where the first active page is.
If you want to put a line through the page instead that is up to you, but I suggest that you make it a double line when there are no preceding active pages.
January 11, 2012 at 21:09 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Sarah:
<< YES! This is what gets at the possibly "temporary" nature of dismissal for me. Last week I had a Friday deadline on one thing. Things that got dismissed during that time included sending invoices for my freelance work, trimming the cat's claws, etc. >>
I'm not sure I quite understand this example. If you were only doing one thing on Friday, why were you circulating through the list?
Even so, dismissing invoices and the cat's claws suggests that you had already been avoiding doing them, since things generally speaking don't get dismissed unless they have been on the list for quite a while.
<< YES! This is what gets at the possibly "temporary" nature of dismissal for me. Last week I had a Friday deadline on one thing. Things that got dismissed during that time included sending invoices for my freelance work, trimming the cat's claws, etc. >>
I'm not sure I quite understand this example. If you were only doing one thing on Friday, why were you circulating through the list?
Even so, dismissing invoices and the cat's claws suggests that you had already been avoiding doing them, since things generally speaking don't get dismissed unless they have been on the list for quite a while.
January 11, 2012 at 21:19 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
This idea came from a post I saw a while ago, I probably can't find it now, but about dividing work into "contact" type work and "non-contact" type work, and devoting a certain amount of time each day to "contact" type work.
I think keeping up with the contact type work and giving it a higher priority is a very good practice in general.