To Think About . . .

It’s not whether you win or lose, it’s how you place the blame. Oscar Wilde

 

 

 

My Latest Book

Product Details

Also available on Amazon.com, Amazon.fr, and other Amazons and bookshops worldwide! 

Search This Site
Log-in
My Other Books

Product Details

Product Details

Product Details

The Pathway to Awesomeness

Click to order other recommended books.

Find Us on Facebook Badge

Discussion Forum > Improvement to AF1?

Over the last few days I've been trying out AF1 with one simple amendment. The amendment is that I do the pages in reverse order. That is to say instead of doing them in the order p1, p2, p3, p4, p1, p2 etc., I do them in the order p4, p3, p2, p1, p4, p3 etc (assuming only four pages).

As I'm using a loose-leaf notebook, all I have to do to achieve this is to insert each new page at the front of the book instead of the end.

I'm using only one side of the page - keeping the reverse for any notes I may want to make.

Surprisingly this small change seems to have a big effect. I've not explored it fully yet but so far I have noticed that it makes AF1 more concentrated and better balanced.

Specifically:

1) It stops the process of chasing the end of the list.

2) With AF1 there was a tendency to skip through older pages by only doing one or two tasks on each pass. With this amendment, this tendency is reduced because you are moving from newer to older pages, rather than the other way round.

3) When you partially action a task on the oldest page you don't have to wait until the whole list has been gone through before you get another crack at the task.

Has anyone else tried this?
April 25, 2014 at 14:38 | Registered CommenterMark Forster
I have not. But the mere mention of AF 1 brings back nice memories (and that lovely video with Tara). Curious to see where you end up with this.
April 25, 2014 at 15:19 | Registered Commenteravrum
I remembered from exploring old threads recently on AF1 that Alan has tried this, with poor results for him:

http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/1732399
April 25, 2014 at 16:15 | Unregistered CommenterAustin
I would love to adopt AF1 for the shear pleasure of using it, but I've always had context issues with it because of the way dismissal works. My work life doesn't fit neatly into either the single-notebook or the separate notebook paradigm. The Final Version finally solved this for me when it came out. And now that I've finally let go of my preference for paper and am using FV in Evernote, I am able to handle my context issue perfectly - I have a .HOME tag when it makes sense to do just home tasks, a .WORK tag when it makes sense to do just work tasks, a .EXTRACTED tag when I want to extract a list (rarely), and finally, on days like today when I'm home all day but still have to work to do, I just work out of the entire Final Version notebook without regard to context.
April 25, 2014 at 16:24 | Unregistered CommenterAustin
Austin:

<<finally let go of my preference for paper and am using FV in Evernote, I am able to handle my context issue perfectly>>

Funny - I'm going through the exact same thing, but in reverse. Digital (Omnifocus 2.0, Tags, etc) to an analog system. The fact is, both have pros-cons. To my mind, the question is: Which medium supports the best in you, while dialling down the worst. Pen/paper provides a smidgen of hope (along with romantic nostalgia) that I can reel in my pleasure/escape pleasing tendencies (read: too much Facebook, Hockey reading, etc).
April 25, 2014 at 16:57 | Registered Commenteravrum
I quite agree, avrum. I'm actually using your Evernote approach from that video you made a while back, so thank you very much for creating that. I've been a diehard pen-and-paper-notebook guy for the several years I have been using Mark's systems. I'm finding that the Evernote approach is as simple as a paper approach and even better handles my context issues. Mind you, FV itself - even on paper - is very good about context. You can just re-write the top task if it's out of context, and ignore the rest during pre-selection. That's one of the things I've always loved about FV.

I love AF1, too - especially the ability to select one task at a time. When a system comes out that has the list-shrinking power of FV, the excellent context handling of FV, and the single-task selection of AF1, I will jump on it. I haven't succeeded in thinking of a way yet that is simple and in accordance with the principles I've learned from Mark's systems. In the meantime, I'm finding that FV with simple tagging in Evernote is a beautiful solution.
April 25, 2014 at 17:12 | Unregistered CommenterAustin
Austin:

<< I remembered from exploring old threads recently on AF1 that Alan has tried this, with poor results for him >>

Alan's post was dated 2012 and doesn't mention which system he was using (in fact he talks about "my algorithm" as if he was using a system of his own) - so was this actually AF1 which he is referring to?
April 25, 2014 at 18:42 | Registered CommenterMark Forster
Perhaps not. I thought so because of the references to "pages," but he liked AF4R, which also has pages, and of course a personal system hadn't occurred to me. Hopefully he'll notice the thread at some point and weigh in. Regardless, if you're getting good results, it's hard to argue with that.
April 25, 2014 at 20:30 | Unregistered CommenterAustin
I switched to ToodleDo a few months ago, with 1MTD and my new tablet. I was excited about sorting by date entered or by urgency or due date or arbitrary priority. It worked for a week or two. Just long enough to move most of my system over. Then the video game hit, and I can't blame the system for that.

Now that I'm rebuilding habits, I'm not excited about digital. There's something about pen and paper that I find reliable and relaxing. Things stay put in order entered. With ToodleDo, I kept playing with the prioritization. Monthly cleaning is low priority early in the month, but grows over time, then after I do it, the next recurrence is low priority. Creating a hot list worked better.

When I do a daily report, typing feels permanent (probably because I rarely delete things and know they'll be on the backup). Writing on paper is ephemeral because when a book is finished I throw it out (after double-checking each remaining page and filing when necessary). That's opposite intuition, which says bytes are ephemeral and paper permanent.

Yet making a digital todo list feels ephemeral. One click and it changes. Yes, it changes because I wanted a different order, but that's still change. On paper, it stays put.
April 25, 2014 at 20:31 | Registered CommenterCricket
Austin:

<< I would love to adopt AF1 for the shear pleasure of using it, but I've always had context issues with it because of the way dismissal works. >>

This seems to me to give you three choices:

1) Don't use AF1.

2) Use AF1 but ignore the rules about dismissal.

3) Use AF1 and invent some rules for dismissal which work better for you.
April 25, 2014 at 21:39 | Registered CommenterMark Forster
avrum:

<< and that lovely video with Tara >>

Taragh http://www.taragh.co.uk
April 25, 2014 at 21:44 | Registered CommenterMark Forster
Mark,
<<1) Don't use AF1.

2) Use AF1 but ignore the rules about dismissal.

3) Use AF1 and invent some rules for dismissal which work better for you.>>

1 is of course my current choice, but I will have to brainstorm possibilities regarding option 3. I'll wait till I graduate (in a couple weeks) before I do any more experimenting - the end of the semester (presentations, papers, final exams) is a bad time to be changing systems. At any rate, I'm sorry for somewhat de-railing the thread.
April 25, 2014 at 23:47 | Unregistered CommenterAustin
Mark

AndreasE suggested something quite similar in his post on Reverse Autofocus.
April 26, 2014 at 17:16 | Registered CommenterCaibre65
Caibre54:

<< AndreasE suggested something quite similar in his post on Reverse Autofocus. >>

http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/746683

Thanks for finding this. I had a feeling that someone had tried something very similar at some stage, but I couldn't find it.

I think AF2 was what came out of the discussion.

I see that AndreasE said that doing AF backwards on its own (as I described above) didn't make much difference. That's not what I'm finding so far - though it's early days yet.
April 26, 2014 at 22:24 | Registered CommenterMark Forster
It worked less well as the list grew longer. An important point might be that I tend to work rather longer on a single tasks than (as I have deduced from the examples you gave) you do. If an AF1 list is longer than a few pages, I don't make it through all pages in one day.
May 4, 2014 at 19:48 | Unregistered CommenterAndreasE
I' ve tried this with good results:
1. First page: 1; last page: n
2. Start processing last page. When nothing stands out, go to page n-1.
3. When nothing stands out, return to last page. When nothing stands out, go to page n-2
4. When nothing stands out, return to last page. When nothing stands out, go to page n-3.
5. Etc. Etch.
6. When nothing stands out, return to last page. When nothing stands out, go to page 1.
7. When nothing stands out, return to last page. When nothing stands out, go to page n-1.
8. Etc. Etch

Dismissal as in AF1 (no on last page).
Rewrite unfinished tasks on the last page as usual.

Works better if each page corresponds to each day: use notebooks with many rows or draw a line (add date) ad the beginning of each day and consider each section as processing unit instead of pages.
May 5, 2014 at 6:09 | Unregistered Commenternick61
That was years ago so I can't be sure, but I expect "my algorithm" was some variant of:
1 Do something on the first page.
2 Skim the subsequent pages.
3 Repeatedly scan the last page.

And apparently (I have no memory of this), reversing these steps didn't work for me.
May 5, 2014 at 16:37 | Registered CommenterAlan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu:

I'm wondering what would happen if one worked only on the first page on the list and the last page on the list. The "last page" being the last page when you arrive on it - if another page is opened you ignore it for that pass. Rules for processing the two pages as in AF1.

Afternote: On second thoughts, after working on the first page it would be better to move to the page which has the last crossed-out task (i.e. the last actioned task) and work to the end of the list from there. Then back to the first page and repeat. That would ensure that all tasks get their chance at the end of the list. All pages processed as in AF1.
May 6, 2014 at 0:40 | Registered CommenterMark Forster
Working on only the first and last pages (or blocks) worries me. I have lots of things in the middle that need attention. Like AndreasE, I tend to work for quite a while on a task, so don't cycle through the pages very often. Many days, I don't leave the hot list (which includes tasks from the middle of the book).
May 6, 2014 at 16:57 | Registered CommenterCricket
Cricket:

<< Working on only the first and last pages (or blocks) worries me. I have lots of things in the middle that need attention. >>

Yes, you have lots of stuff that needs attention in the middle in your current list, but that's because you constructed that list using a different set of rules.

The question to ask yourself is how your list would be different if you'd constructed it using the first and last page system. You would have had to clear the last pages more thoroughly so that only stuff that could wait a while would be left in the middle pages - stuff that would eventually arrive on the first page and be cleared systematically.
May 6, 2014 at 23:55 | Registered CommenterMark Forster
Grrr. Typed two different replies. Deleted the first because writing it caused me to realize it wasn't accurate. Didn't check if it needed the captcha for the second.

If I had to get things done before they entered the Sargasso Sea of the mid-list, I might start out doing everything on the current page and burn myself out. I'd probably do things too quickly to be quality, and do things that a few days rest would show weren't important in the first place.

My mid-list is huge, and my oldest task is very old. I don't want to hibernate it, though, because it's for someone else. Trying to prioritize them doesn't work, since my feelings about them change too often.

I like the idea of the oldest page getting more attention. I tend to hop between oldest tasks. None get done, and none get the benefit of momentum, and they all sit there and drain my will to work on anything else. "Oldest, deal with it" might help, especially if I leave it where it is -- in the oldest spot. Similar to Current Initiative.

I think "minimal work on the mid-list" would work well if the mid-list were short, so things moved to the "oldest" position fairly quickly. To convert to a shorter mid-list, I'd have to start my list from scratch. I keep thinking I should start my list over, using this method, and backlog everything in my current list that can be backlogged, but it's too daunting. There's too wide a variety of deadlines and goals in it to be backlogged in a single chunk, or even to be sorted.
May 7, 2014 at 17:33 | Registered CommenterCricket
I tried again AF1 with the reversed order and it works well with me.
- Best control on the last information
- Treatment of backlogs little by little
- Good focus on what is important or not on a page
- Better for me than FV because it avoids the boring effect of readings pages before acting

There is only one important habbit I keep which is keeping on the list only but what is weekly actionable. Non actionable item or futures items goes to Omnifocus. I do it every night and look at a glance to OF in the morning to extract what is actionable by the end of the week.

This is indeed important for me. It makes my list actionable and clean the list on OF and on AF1
June 17, 2014 at 16:02 | Unregistered CommenterJupiter
Also I do like MF I use only the right page. Left page is for notes which usually goes into a paper folder by projects. I dont use a loose-leaf notebook but a spiral note book. It makes an historical check list automatically of all my activities.
June 17, 2014 at 16:06 | Unregistered CommenterJupiter