Discussion Forum > Seraphim's method; or, how to live one day at a time
It is around 930 pm where I am, and my list has only three items remaining: prayer; make update on Seraphim's Method; comment on Mark's blog. After those tasks my list will have zero items and it will be time to sleep.
I was not able to do all the things I planned to do today but I am sure that I was able to do the things that matter the most. In fact, the acts of saying "no" to some tasks by crossing them out from my list was very empowering.
I can feel that I will be sleeping soundly tonight knowing I had a very fulfilling day.
I was not able to do all the things I planned to do today but I am sure that I was able to do the things that matter the most. In fact, the acts of saying "no" to some tasks by crossing them out from my list was very empowering.
I can feel that I will be sleeping soundly tonight knowing I had a very fulfilling day.
May 12, 2016 at 5:31 |
nuntym
nuntym
nuntym:
I'm having trouble finding Seraphim's method at that link. Is that the correct link? The only thing I see is Seraphim's reply in the 4T thread where he states that he doesn't limit himself to a sequence of 4 or 5 tasks.
I'm having trouble finding Seraphim's method at that link. Is that the correct link? The only thing I see is Seraphim's reply in the 4T thread where he states that he doesn't limit himself to a sequence of 4 or 5 tasks.
May 12, 2016 at 8:49 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
May 12, 2016 at 8:53 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Michael B.: "I'm having trouble finding Seraphim's method at that link. Is that the correct link? The only thing I see is Seraphim's reply in the 4T thread where he states that he doesn't limit himself to a sequence of 4 or 5 tasks."
Yep that is it exactly.
"Found it!
Seraphim's method:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2587756"
Nope, that's not it.
Yep that is it exactly.
"Found it!
Seraphim's method:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2587756"
Nope, that's not it.
May 12, 2016 at 13:09 |
nuntym
nuntym
I think the "method" to which nuntym is referring ( http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2571559#post2584169 ) is simply "not following any particular algorithm when processing the no-list".
We could call it "nT" for "as many T as makes sense at the moment", plus "MLUOMRTRTLWN" = Make Liberal Use Of Mark's Rule To Restart The List Whenever Needed", but I suppose the resulting acronym is somewhat Lovecraftian.
The other link ( http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2587756 ) is more of an expansion into how I personally implement it, using my whiteboard.
Maybe it should be called the "no-rules no-list". That's easier to say than nT+MLUOMRTRTLWN. :-)
We could call it "nT" for "as many T as makes sense at the moment", plus "MLUOMRTRTLWN" = Make Liberal Use Of Mark's Rule To Restart The List Whenever Needed", but I suppose the resulting acronym is somewhat Lovecraftian.
The other link ( http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2587756 ) is more of an expansion into how I personally implement it, using my whiteboard.
Maybe it should be called the "no-rules no-list". That's easier to say than nT+MLUOMRTRTLWN. :-)
May 12, 2016 at 17:08 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Well I did say that I "made my own interpretation about" the system :p
"Make Liberal Use Of Mark's Rule To Restart The List Whenever Needed" never crossed my mind, nor the white board example of just choosing one and erasing the rest; however, now they seem unnecessary because of rule three.
"Make Liberal Use Of Mark's Rule To Restart The List Whenever Needed" never crossed my mind, nor the white board example of just choosing one and erasing the rest; however, now they seem unnecessary because of rule three.
May 13, 2016 at 0:15 |
nuntym
nuntym
nuntym:
I feel like I'm missing something here. Are you saying your method is to simply write a daily to-do list of any length, do any task in any sequence, re-write tasks if unfinished, delete if you're not going to do them, and then toss the list at the end of the day (or during the day when it's no longer relevant)? Isn't that the classic daily to-do list?
I feel like I'm missing something here. Are you saying your method is to simply write a daily to-do list of any length, do any task in any sequence, re-write tasks if unfinished, delete if you're not going to do them, and then toss the list at the end of the day (or during the day when it's no longer relevant)? Isn't that the classic daily to-do list?
May 13, 2016 at 1:52 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Tried this yesterday. I have mixed results. On the one hand it made me think about what I wanted to do today in terms of long term results, I ended up with 56 items still on the list (44 if you don't count things that I did some work on; I was using the line in the list to track progress on that item through the day). On the other hand I accomplished 49 tasks. This is pretty amazing results for me, in a way. I should feel like I had a great day, but I don't. I didn't work on the most impactful tasks relentlessly like I would have on Mark's no-list system from the latest blog posts. (I had used the version where you enter one new task and do it and then do all the ones before the last crossed out item. I used it for 2 days before trying this thread's method and really really liked it.)
My list became a catch all and I started listing all my home and work projects regardless of how many I could do or even work on. I started picking only the easiest tasks from the list. Yes, they were useful things that had some value. After all, I had put them on the list the same day and wanted to remember to get them done. I stayed very busy, but I'm not sure if that's a good thing if I'm not asking myself essentially "if I start one thing right now what would it be?" And then relentlessly following up on just that all day long.
I should/could have switched to a fresh no-list when I realized what was happening but I wanted to give this system a full day's test. To be fair, I don't think I did it right based on your description because I was putting stuff on it when I could not get to all of it. The problem is I didn't want to lose any of those items. I noted a lot of problems that needed to be fixed (maybe I noticed more of them because I was doing so many things, reading all my unread mails, wrapping up lots of easy tasks). I don't feel like I can just cross those out any more.
My list became a catch all and I started listing all my home and work projects regardless of how many I could do or even work on. I started picking only the easiest tasks from the list. Yes, they were useful things that had some value. After all, I had put them on the list the same day and wanted to remember to get them done. I stayed very busy, but I'm not sure if that's a good thing if I'm not asking myself essentially "if I start one thing right now what would it be?" And then relentlessly following up on just that all day long.
I should/could have switched to a fresh no-list when I realized what was happening but I wanted to give this system a full day's test. To be fair, I don't think I did it right based on your description because I was putting stuff on it when I could not get to all of it. The problem is I didn't want to lose any of those items. I noted a lot of problems that needed to be fixed (maybe I noticed more of them because I was doing so many things, reading all my unread mails, wrapping up lots of easy tasks). I don't feel like I can just cross those out any more.
May 13, 2016 at 12:44 |
Don R
Don R
Don R:
<< I ended up with 56 items still on the list (44 if you don't count things that I did some work on; I was using the line in the list to track progress on that item through the day). On the other hand I accomplished 49 tasks. >>
I on the other hand - using the same no-list system you were using the day before - accomplished 69 tasks and had none left on the list. All of the 69 tasks were completely finished/zeroed.
Note that it's only possible to do this if you have been consistently working to finish/zero daily for some time. Which is why it doesn't matter too much if you swap no-list systems over, but it does matter a lot if you keep switching backwards and forwards between no-list and catch-all.
<< I ended up with 56 items still on the list (44 if you don't count things that I did some work on; I was using the line in the list to track progress on that item through the day). On the other hand I accomplished 49 tasks. >>
I on the other hand - using the same no-list system you were using the day before - accomplished 69 tasks and had none left on the list. All of the 69 tasks were completely finished/zeroed.
Note that it's only possible to do this if you have been consistently working to finish/zero daily for some time. Which is why it doesn't matter too much if you swap no-list systems over, but it does matter a lot if you keep switching backwards and forwards between no-list and catch-all.
May 13, 2016 at 14:33 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark,
Do you count each iteration of a little-and-often task as an accomplishment? For example, if you read some of War and Peace 4 times, would you could that as one accomplishment (because they are all the same thing), four (because you were able to cross it off four times), or maybe (just to be exhaustive) zero (didn't finish the book)?
Yesterday when I did the method from this thread, I didn't rewrite things, I just left them dotted and kept circling through the list. I would have hit a much higher if you could each time you work on something.
What you said makes me wonder, if I keep at this no-list approach as you say, and I get these large projects either out of the way or up and running, I'll end up keeping up with a wider variety of things which I am putting for now to keep my head down on the big tasks (projects) that I have hanging over me.
(By the way, I am getting a "403 forbidden" error frequently when I'm trying to post.)
Do you count each iteration of a little-and-often task as an accomplishment? For example, if you read some of War and Peace 4 times, would you could that as one accomplishment (because they are all the same thing), four (because you were able to cross it off four times), or maybe (just to be exhaustive) zero (didn't finish the book)?
Yesterday when I did the method from this thread, I didn't rewrite things, I just left them dotted and kept circling through the list. I would have hit a much higher if you could each time you work on something.
What you said makes me wonder, if I keep at this no-list approach as you say, and I get these large projects either out of the way or up and running, I'll end up keeping up with a wider variety of things which I am putting for now to keep my head down on the big tasks (projects) that I have hanging over me.
(By the way, I am getting a "403 forbidden" error frequently when I'm trying to post.)
May 13, 2016 at 15:22 |
Don R
Don R
(I was finally able to submit a post by using the audio capcha, but the visual one with numbers failed every time.)
Some corrections to my post:
[...] would have have hit a much higher *number* [...]
[...] which I am putting *off* for now [...]
Some corrections to my post:
[...] would have have hit a much higher *number* [...]
[...] which I am putting *off* for now [...]
May 13, 2016 at 15:26 |
Don R
Don R
I've been pondering what makes this approach different from a catch-all, and different from a standard "to-do" list. For me, it doesn't turn into either of those and feels much more like 5T or some of the other no-list approaches being discussed here.
I think the key is in crossing out the things that you just aren't going to be working today. Or to state that more broadly: being fearless in deleting things. The no-list is not intended to serve as a list of reminders, or projects, or plans. It's a method of getting your mind engaged in your work. Keeping the list short, and frequently deleting or scrapping the whole thing, is what makes it totally different than a to-do list or catch-all list.
I still try this exercise when I find I have too many things on my mind:
1. Write down everything on my mind.
2. Use FVP algorithm identify the top item, or maybe the top 3 items
3. Erase everything else.
4. Work on the top item.
5. When I've worked as long as I want on the top item, then I erase everything and repeat from (1.)
Once I've established a focus and have some momentum, I find myself naturally switching to something more like 5T, or more like what Nuntym is describing in this post.
If I ever find myself hesitating about erasing an item -- maybe it's a reminder or commitment I don't want to forget -- then I move it to my calendar or to my iPhone reminders. The no-list is not the right place to park such items.
I think the key is in crossing out the things that you just aren't going to be working today. Or to state that more broadly: being fearless in deleting things. The no-list is not intended to serve as a list of reminders, or projects, or plans. It's a method of getting your mind engaged in your work. Keeping the list short, and frequently deleting or scrapping the whole thing, is what makes it totally different than a to-do list or catch-all list.
I still try this exercise when I find I have too many things on my mind:
1. Write down everything on my mind.
2. Use FVP algorithm identify the top item, or maybe the top 3 items
3. Erase everything else.
4. Work on the top item.
5. When I've worked as long as I want on the top item, then I erase everything and repeat from (1.)
Once I've established a focus and have some momentum, I find myself naturally switching to something more like 5T, or more like what Nuntym is describing in this post.
If I ever find myself hesitating about erasing an item -- maybe it's a reminder or commitment I don't want to forget -- then I move it to my calendar or to my iPhone reminders. The no-list is not the right place to park such items.
May 13, 2016 at 16:48 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Don R:
<< Do you count each iteration of a little-and-often task as an accomplishment? For example, if you read some of War and Peace 4 times, would you could that as one accomplishment (because they are all the same thing), four (because you were able to cross it off four times), or maybe (just to be exhaustive) zero (didn't finish the book)? >>
I was referring to lines which I crossed off the list, so in your example that would count as four. But it's more complicated than that. For instance if you clear your email completely four times is that one accomplishment or four? I've got plenty of that type of accomplishment in my list.
However if you take the strictest definition in that a task which is re-entered for any reason still only counts as one, I did thirty.
But it's not really the number of tasks done that is significant, but the fact that there was nothing left over at the end of the day. I was up to date with everything. That means every project, every in-box, every minor one-off task, everything.
<< Do you count each iteration of a little-and-often task as an accomplishment? For example, if you read some of War and Peace 4 times, would you could that as one accomplishment (because they are all the same thing), four (because you were able to cross it off four times), or maybe (just to be exhaustive) zero (didn't finish the book)? >>
I was referring to lines which I crossed off the list, so in your example that would count as four. But it's more complicated than that. For instance if you clear your email completely four times is that one accomplishment or four? I've got plenty of that type of accomplishment in my list.
However if you take the strictest definition in that a task which is re-entered for any reason still only counts as one, I did thirty.
But it's not really the number of tasks done that is significant, but the fact that there was nothing left over at the end of the day. I was up to date with everything. That means every project, every in-box, every minor one-off task, everything.
May 13, 2016 at 17:06 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Don R:
<< (By the way, I am getting a "403 forbidden" error frequently when I'm trying to post.) >>
How long has this been a problem for you? It's usually just a temporary glitch, but if it's been that way for a long time let me know as much detail as you can and I'll report it.
<< (By the way, I am getting a "403 forbidden" error frequently when I'm trying to post.) >>
How long has this been a problem for you? It's usually just a temporary glitch, but if it's been that way for a long time let me know as much detail as you can and I'll report it.
May 13, 2016 at 17:15 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Seraphim:
<< For me, it... feels much more like 5T or some of the other no-list approaches being discussed here.>>
For me the real turning point with no-list came when I started using methods in which entry onto the list was strictly only by doing the task. It was then that I first found myself in the situation towards the end of the day of having to look around for stuff to do, rather than still having a huge list of things which i could never finish. I have a pretty good mental map now of what needs doing during a day, and it seems to take less and less time to do it. Perhaps I'll even get to the stage of having internalized the structure of a day so well that I don't have to write it down at all. I haven't got there yet.
<< For me, it... feels much more like 5T or some of the other no-list approaches being discussed here.>>
For me the real turning point with no-list came when I started using methods in which entry onto the list was strictly only by doing the task. It was then that I first found myself in the situation towards the end of the day of having to look around for stuff to do, rather than still having a huge list of things which i could never finish. I have a pretty good mental map now of what needs doing during a day, and it seems to take less and less time to do it. Perhaps I'll even get to the stage of having internalized the structure of a day so well that I don't have to write it down at all. I haven't got there yet.
May 13, 2016 at 17:27 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Michael B.: "I feel like I'm missing something here. Are you saying your method is to simply write a daily to-do list of any length, do any task in any sequence, re-write tasks if unfinished, delete if you're not going to do them, and then toss the list at the end of the day (or during the day when it's no longer relevant)? Isn't that the classic daily to-do list? "
No, it is not. You wrote, "delete if you're not going to do them", whereas I wrote as the third rule: "Cross out the things that you decide will not be done TODAY." That is a huge difference.
This means that you will never toss out the list at the end of the day nor will it ever be irrelevant during the day. Firstly, at the end of the day, your list has zero items. Can you even call that a list? LOL And secondly, since you are constantly crossing out the irrelevant items during the day (i.e. things you decide will not be done today) the list itself never becomes irrelevant.
No, it is not. You wrote, "delete if you're not going to do them", whereas I wrote as the third rule: "Cross out the things that you decide will not be done TODAY." That is a huge difference.
This means that you will never toss out the list at the end of the day nor will it ever be irrelevant during the day. Firstly, at the end of the day, your list has zero items. Can you even call that a list? LOL And secondly, since you are constantly crossing out the irrelevant items during the day (i.e. things you decide will not be done today) the list itself never becomes irrelevant.
May 13, 2016 at 19:00 |
nuntym
nuntym
Don R: "I ended up with 56 items still on the list..."
You are doing something wrong then. The rules (especially rule 3) are there to make sure that by the end of the day there are zero items left.
You are doing something wrong then. The rules (especially rule 3) are there to make sure that by the end of the day there are zero items left.
May 13, 2016 at 19:04 |
nuntym
nuntym
Seraphim: "I think the key is in crossing out the things that you just aren't going to be working today. Or to state that more broadly: being fearless in deleting things."
Exactly!.
Exactly!.
May 13, 2016 at 19:10 |
nuntym
nuntym
Mark Forster wrote:
<< For me the real turning point with no-list came when I started using methods in which entry onto the list was strictly only by doing the task. >>
I've enjoyed reading your reports on this, and seeing how it works out for everyone else who is trying it. It definitely has some appeal, but I was hesitant to try it, since I find myself doing so much brainstorming -- blasting out a quick list of 5-10 items, sometimes more, then doing a quick FVP-style scan to choose the 1-3 items I really want to focus on, and erasing the rest.
But it just occurred to me that I could use one of your new methods, and just put "brainstorm" on the no-list and then do it. :-) Then write out my brainstorm on a scrap of paper, use a quick FVP scan to choose the top item, then that item becomes the task I will do right now. Put that task on no-list, and throw away the rest. I've been doing something close to that most of the time anyway.
Hm, I think I will give it a try. :-)
<< For me the real turning point with no-list came when I started using methods in which entry onto the list was strictly only by doing the task. >>
I've enjoyed reading your reports on this, and seeing how it works out for everyone else who is trying it. It definitely has some appeal, but I was hesitant to try it, since I find myself doing so much brainstorming -- blasting out a quick list of 5-10 items, sometimes more, then doing a quick FVP-style scan to choose the 1-3 items I really want to focus on, and erasing the rest.
But it just occurred to me that I could use one of your new methods, and just put "brainstorm" on the no-list and then do it. :-) Then write out my brainstorm on a scrap of paper, use a quick FVP scan to choose the top item, then that item becomes the task I will do right now. Put that task on no-list, and throw away the rest. I've been doing something close to that most of the time anyway.
Hm, I think I will give it a try. :-)
May 13, 2016 at 23:03 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
nuntym:
I initially wrote the following to nuntym:
"I feel like I'm missing something here. Are you saying your method is to simply write a daily to-do list of any length, do any task in any sequence, re-write tasks if unfinished, delete if you're not going to do them, and then toss the list at the end of the day (or during the day when it's no longer relevant)? Isn't that the classic daily to-do list?"
nuntym replied:
"No, it is not. You wrote, "delete if you're not going to do them", whereas I wrote as the third rule: "Cross out the things that you decide will not be done TODAY." That is a huge difference."
My reply:
That's why I wrote "daily to-do list". It's a list dedicated only to that day. Any deleting/crossing off of tasks will take place the same day. That list, one way or another, will not make it out of that day alive.
nuntym wrote earlier:
"This means that you will never toss out the list at the end of the day nor will it ever be irrelevant during the day."
My reply:
I'm pretty sure the completed list will be tossed out at the end of the day, but I think I'm beginning to see what you're intending here. Initially, I imagined a list that had been randomly weeded of tasks throughout the day that you decide you will not do that day after all. By that evening, I imagined there might still be tasks on that list and that crossing them out would be redundant as the list is getting tossed before the next day anyhow. I think I understand your method now. It's a subtle distinction between what I saw as random weeding and what you intend, which is systematic weeding. Is your intention that a person using this method decides whether to delete tasks every time they interact with the list? As in, "Oh, hey there's my list again. It's time to pick a task to do. But first, I must decide if there's anything I'm not doing today after all and immediately cross them off the list?"
nuntym wrote earlier:
"Firstly, at the end of the day, your list has zero items. Can you even call that a list?"
My reply:
I would call it a completed task list. By the way, do you review your list at the end of the day?
nuntym wrote earlier:
"...since you are constantly crossing out the irrelevant items during the day (i.e. things you decide will not be done today) the list itself never becomes irrelevant.
My reply:
That is the sentence in your reply that helped me understand your method better. In short:
1. Make a list of any length during your day. Add to it throughout the day.
2. Every time you look at the list (in any order) to pick something to do (based on intuition), cross out anything you know you will not actually do that day.
3. Rewrite any unfinished tasks at the end of the list after working on them.
Do I have that correct?
I initially wrote the following to nuntym:
"I feel like I'm missing something here. Are you saying your method is to simply write a daily to-do list of any length, do any task in any sequence, re-write tasks if unfinished, delete if you're not going to do them, and then toss the list at the end of the day (or during the day when it's no longer relevant)? Isn't that the classic daily to-do list?"
nuntym replied:
"No, it is not. You wrote, "delete if you're not going to do them", whereas I wrote as the third rule: "Cross out the things that you decide will not be done TODAY." That is a huge difference."
My reply:
That's why I wrote "daily to-do list". It's a list dedicated only to that day. Any deleting/crossing off of tasks will take place the same day. That list, one way or another, will not make it out of that day alive.
nuntym wrote earlier:
"This means that you will never toss out the list at the end of the day nor will it ever be irrelevant during the day."
My reply:
I'm pretty sure the completed list will be tossed out at the end of the day, but I think I'm beginning to see what you're intending here. Initially, I imagined a list that had been randomly weeded of tasks throughout the day that you decide you will not do that day after all. By that evening, I imagined there might still be tasks on that list and that crossing them out would be redundant as the list is getting tossed before the next day anyhow. I think I understand your method now. It's a subtle distinction between what I saw as random weeding and what you intend, which is systematic weeding. Is your intention that a person using this method decides whether to delete tasks every time they interact with the list? As in, "Oh, hey there's my list again. It's time to pick a task to do. But first, I must decide if there's anything I'm not doing today after all and immediately cross them off the list?"
nuntym wrote earlier:
"Firstly, at the end of the day, your list has zero items. Can you even call that a list?"
My reply:
I would call it a completed task list. By the way, do you review your list at the end of the day?
nuntym wrote earlier:
"...since you are constantly crossing out the irrelevant items during the day (i.e. things you decide will not be done today) the list itself never becomes irrelevant.
My reply:
That is the sentence in your reply that helped me understand your method better. In short:
1. Make a list of any length during your day. Add to it throughout the day.
2. Every time you look at the list (in any order) to pick something to do (based on intuition), cross out anything you know you will not actually do that day.
3. Rewrite any unfinished tasks at the end of the list after working on them.
Do I have that correct?
May 14, 2016 at 3:01 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Michael B.
Whereas using my current no-list method I have no tasks left at the end of the day either on my list or in fact.
Actually that didn't quite work out yesterday. I still had half a movie left unwatched.
Whereas using my current no-list method I have no tasks left at the end of the day either on my list or in fact.
Actually that didn't quite work out yesterday. I still had half a movie left unwatched.
May 14, 2016 at 7:34 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark:
Yep, same here. Just stacked my final completed no-list of the day to review after this movie. (And that's a habit!)
Yep, same here. Just stacked my final completed no-list of the day to review after this movie. (And that's a habit!)
May 14, 2016 at 9:38 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
Michael B.:
"1. Make a list of any length during your day. Add to it throughout the day.
2. Every time you look at the list (in any order) to pick something to do (based on intuition), cross out anything you know you will not actually do that day.
3. Rewrite any unfinished tasks at the end of the list after working on them."
That is correct.
Mark: "Whereas using my current no-list method I have no tasks left at the end of the day either on my list or in fact."
Me too!
"1. Make a list of any length during your day. Add to it throughout the day.
2. Every time you look at the list (in any order) to pick something to do (based on intuition), cross out anything you know you will not actually do that day.
3. Rewrite any unfinished tasks at the end of the list after working on them."
That is correct.
Mark: "Whereas using my current no-list method I have no tasks left at the end of the day either on my list or in fact."
Me too!
May 15, 2016 at 18:33 |
nuntym
nuntym
I found I can analyze what kind of tasks I have been doing for the rest of the day and its ratio to the other tasks that I decided will not be done. It is to just use an "x" beside the item you are about to do. Since unlike a heavy dot an "x" is still visible after crossing out an item after doing it I can count the number of x's and see what kind of tasks I have been doing and what kind of tasks I have been not doing.
May 15, 2016 at 18:49 |
nuntym
nuntym
Mark said: "assess where you are at present. "
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2600884#item2600929
I think this is one of the main reasons I like this method so much: it allows me to see where I am at the present by showing me an inkling of the day that is ahead. And then I can decide how I will do throughout the day.
----
I think I am going to call this method as ADT. "DT" stands for "Daily To-Do", but the "A"stands for the many things I found it to be.
It is Assertive: it allows me to practice my free will on the day in not only doing things, but in also refusing things.
It is Adaptive: the number and difficulty of items in the list increases and decreases depending on my energy levels and how the day is.
It is Analytical: not only does it give me an overview of my day ahead, but it also lets me look at what kinds of things I have done and what I avoided by the day's end.
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2600884#item2600929
I think this is one of the main reasons I like this method so much: it allows me to see where I am at the present by showing me an inkling of the day that is ahead. And then I can decide how I will do throughout the day.
----
I think I am going to call this method as ADT. "DT" stands for "Daily To-Do", but the "A"stands for the many things I found it to be.
It is Assertive: it allows me to practice my free will on the day in not only doing things, but in also refusing things.
It is Adaptive: the number and difficulty of items in the list increases and decreases depending on my energy levels and how the day is.
It is Analytical: not only does it give me an overview of my day ahead, but it also lets me look at what kinds of things I have done and what I avoided by the day's end.
May 15, 2016 at 19:12 |
nuntym
nuntym
nuntym:
"use an "x" beside the item you are about to do. Since unlike a heavy dot an "x" is still visible after crossing out an item after doing it I can count the number of x's and see what kind of tasks I have been doing and what kind of tasks I have been not doing."
Good idea!
"use an "x" beside the item you are about to do. Since unlike a heavy dot an "x" is still visible after crossing out an item after doing it I can count the number of x's and see what kind of tasks I have been doing and what kind of tasks I have been not doing."
Good idea!
May 15, 2016 at 23:49 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
nuntym:
"I think I am going to call this method as ADT. "DT" stands for "Daily To-Do", but the "A"stands for the many things I found it to be..."
Another name to consider might be somewhere along the lines of:
ADD: Adaptive Daily Deleter
Out of the three "A"s you mentioned, "Adaptive" is the one most obviously connected to the system's function.
"I think I am going to call this method as ADT. "DT" stands for "Daily To-Do", but the "A"stands for the many things I found it to be..."
Another name to consider might be somewhere along the lines of:
ADD: Adaptive Daily Deleter
Out of the three "A"s you mentioned, "Adaptive" is the one most obviously connected to the system's function.
May 15, 2016 at 23:52 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
I think I like ADT: Adaptive Daily To-Do List the best.
Though DAD: Daily Adaptive Deleter might work as well! "Look, if you're having trouble managing your tasks, just give them to DAD!"
Though DAD: Daily Adaptive Deleter might work as well! "Look, if you're having trouble managing your tasks, just give them to DAD!"
May 16, 2016 at 0:01 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
The first post on the page sounds similar to what I'm doing now, with a few changes.
1. List down only the things you plan to do today; you can write on the list anytime.
Add: This can should include planned breaks.
Add: Estimate the time for each task, and reduce the list as necessary. Include travel time and your average (or pessimistic) amount of emergencies and unplanned breaks.
Add: Batch tasks to encourage routines.
Add: Have a safety-net for things you need to do in the future.
2. Mark and do the thing you want to do now, and then cross it out when done; re-write at the end of the list if necessary.
Change: On separate list (ideally the facing page) write the next few tasks. Do, and record time taken (to improve estimates). (I have 3 time columns: Planned, unplanned productive, and unplanned break.)
3. Cross out the things that you decide will not be done today.
Change: Put a checkmark beside things you did as you planned. Cross out the things that you decide might never be done. Put an arrow beside things you have put into another part of the system to do later. Put an open circle beside tasks that you want to see next time you review the page (and checkmark them when finally done, or cross out, or arrow, as appropriate).
4. Add: At the end of the day, the page is now part of the safety-net catch-all. Refer to it only when planning.
++++
Don R and Michael B.
As I read the first post in the discussion, the list isn't of any length.
"1. List down only the things you plan to do today; you can write on the list anytime."
1. List down only the things you plan to do today; you can write on the list anytime.
Add: This can should include planned breaks.
Add: Estimate the time for each task, and reduce the list as necessary. Include travel time and your average (or pessimistic) amount of emergencies and unplanned breaks.
Add: Batch tasks to encourage routines.
Add: Have a safety-net for things you need to do in the future.
2. Mark and do the thing you want to do now, and then cross it out when done; re-write at the end of the list if necessary.
Change: On separate list (ideally the facing page) write the next few tasks. Do, and record time taken (to improve estimates). (I have 3 time columns: Planned, unplanned productive, and unplanned break.)
3. Cross out the things that you decide will not be done today.
Change: Put a checkmark beside things you did as you planned. Cross out the things that you decide might never be done. Put an arrow beside things you have put into another part of the system to do later. Put an open circle beside tasks that you want to see next time you review the page (and checkmark them when finally done, or cross out, or arrow, as appropriate).
4. Add: At the end of the day, the page is now part of the safety-net catch-all. Refer to it only when planning.
++++
Don R and Michael B.
As I read the first post in the discussion, the list isn't of any length.
"1. List down only the things you plan to do today; you can write on the list anytime."
May 16, 2016 at 20:41 |
Cricket
Cricket
Cricket:
"Don R and Michael B.
As I read the first post in the discussion, the list isn't of any length.
"1. List down only the things you plan to do today; you can write on the list anytime.""
I was referring to the list being of any length for the day. "...a daily to-do list of any length..."
"Don R and Michael B.
As I read the first post in the discussion, the list isn't of any length.
"1. List down only the things you plan to do today; you can write on the list anytime.""
I was referring to the list being of any length for the day. "...a daily to-do list of any length..."
May 17, 2016 at 2:14 |
Michael B.
Michael B.
So a month after I started posting this method, and I am still using ADT with some minor forays into Mark's published no-list methods. And what Mark noted about no-list methods, that they can be interchanged during the day without any disadvantages, I also found with ADT.
The main alteration with the rules from before is that I changed Rule 3: from "Cross out the things that you decide will not be done today," I changed it to "Cross out the things that you cannot do today." That is, you cross out items only when they impossible to do today.
I found that I was abusing the last rule to procrastinate and not feel bad about it, while knowing those same tasks will languish on the list until late in the day makes me feel bad about not doing them early.
The main alteration with the rules from before is that I changed Rule 3: from "Cross out the things that you decide will not be done today," I changed it to "Cross out the things that you cannot do today." That is, you cross out items only when they impossible to do today.
I found that I was abusing the last rule to procrastinate and not feel bad about it, while knowing those same tasks will languish on the list until late in the day makes me feel bad about not doing them early.
June 13, 2016 at 3:10 |
nuntym
nuntym
nuntym:
<< The main alteration with the rules from before is that I changed Rule 3: from "Cross out the things that you decide will not be done today," I changed it to "Cross out the things that you cannot do today." >>
Although that sounds like a minor change in wording, I think it is in fact a very significant change and makes this method sound much more interesting to me. Previously I'd considered it to be just the daily open list which I had described here:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/1/27/types-of-lists-iii-the-daily-open-list.html
I might give it a try.
<< The main alteration with the rules from before is that I changed Rule 3: from "Cross out the things that you decide will not be done today," I changed it to "Cross out the things that you cannot do today." >>
Although that sounds like a minor change in wording, I think it is in fact a very significant change and makes this method sound much more interesting to me. Previously I'd considered it to be just the daily open list which I had described here:
http://markforster.squarespace.com/blog/2016/1/27/types-of-lists-iii-the-daily-open-list.html
I might give it a try.
June 13, 2016 at 10:52 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2571559#post2584169
about how he does his own "no-list" method. I was so intrigued by it that I tried it and eventually made my own interpretation about it. Basically the method (or at least how I interpreted it) only has three rules:
1. List down only the things you plan to do today; you can write on the list anytime.
2. Mark and do the thing you want to do now, and then cross it out when done; re-write at the end of the list if necessary.
3. Cross out the things that you decide will not be done today.
And I like it, I like it so much that I am making a thread about it even though I have only used it for three days. I do not know how it will work out in the succeeding days but I will be posting here whether I abandon it or not.
My preliminary thoughts and observations for this system:
1. It looks like a "catch-all", but it works like a "no-list".
Yesterday my list ballooned to around 20 items but at the end of the day all items were crossed out. Right now I count my list to have 16 items but I am confident that by the end of the day it will have zero items.
2. It is self regulating.
That is, the list will ALWAYS have items that are relevant for today according to the time, energy, and resources you currently have.
I am confident that all items will be crossed off by tonight, even if the list (no matter how improbable it may be) grows into the hundreds at one point, because of the third rule above: all items that cannot be done by today will be crossed off. I do not even have to add a rule that you have to start with a new list every day because the system GUARANTEES you will have a new list every day.
In fact, you can use the same list for both work and home, because all things that you need to do at work will be erased by the time you get home, which is what I tried and proved yesterday.
3. Its emphasis is not "doing things" but "exercising your will".
The self-regulating nature of the list ensures not only that I do things but also that I NOT do certain things. The first rule emphasizes that things planned only for today will be added to the list, the second rule emphasizes deciding the things to be done right now, and the third rule emphasizes on choosing the items I decide will not be done today.
Also, having a list of the things I plan to do today gives me an overview of my day today.
All of these gives me a sense of self-empowerment and control.
4. It is the system that makes most sense to me, out of all the systems I tried, read about, or made myself.
There are no arbitrary rules of "not adding to the list until such and such requirement is made" or "only such amount of items can be listed" or "dismissal" or any such thing.
The rules are simple, short, and logical. There is no headroom required. It all just makes sense.