My Latest Book

Product Details

Also available on,, and other Amazons and bookshops worldwide! 

To Think About . . .
I stopped pretending to myself that I was anything other than what I was, and began to direct all my energy into finishing the only work that mattered to me. Had I really succeeded at anything else, I might never have found the determination to succeed in the one arena I believed I truly belonged. J. K. Rowling
My Other Books

Product Details

Product Details

Product Details

Product Details

Click to order other recommended books.

Find Us on Facebook Badge

Search This Site

Discussion Forum > The fastest yet thorough scanning techniques

Hypothetical question: if you want to process a long task list using "standing out" without using a formal dismissal process, what is the fastest way to do it?

I want some ideas on how to do that so I can try them.

What do I mean by "fast yet thorough scanning"? I am thinking of one that has a minimum of page flipping yet processes the whole list equally.

An example of a not fast yet thorough scanning technique is AF1: you go treat the whole list equally but you keep on getting trapped in a page. And I think Simple Scanning might not be that fast either since you have to go back to the beginning of the list everytime you reach the end.

An example of a fast yet not thorough scanning is AF2: since you are anchored to the end of the list, rewriting tasks is made trivial, and you do not have to make note of your last tasks' position. However, since you are anchored to the end of the list the beginning of the list gets neglected.

An example of a "fast yet thorough" process that I have in mind is the Bounce,

There is a minimum of flipping of pages and yet handles all parts of the list equally well.

Another is one that I am trying right now, which is like the Bounce: instead of going back to the beginning or the end, I just reverse direction whenever I reach either the end or the beginning of the list.

Any other ways you can think of?
November 16, 2017 at 5:41 | Registered Commenternuntym
This one seems as good as any: -

Although I'm not sure about Mark's comments at the start on doing things FIFO and the list just gets longer and longer. That would indicate that there is too much working coming in that can be done, rather than a fault with the system?
November 16, 2017 at 11:06 | Unregistered CommenterMrBacklog
I don't g t how returning to the beginning (re simple scanning) is slow. If it is, put a bookmark and problem solved.
November 16, 2017 at 18:20 | Registered CommenterAlan Baljeu
Shorter lists.

Every week I go through my main list once, and copy a reasonable number of things to the week list. That balances the benefits and problems of each list type nicely. When I want to go back to the big list, I remind myself that doing so will slow progress on the things I'd promised myself I'd do this week.
November 16, 2017 at 21:44 | Registered CommenterCricket
I was thinking FVP but you mentioned that you wanted to use "standing out" as the principle though. Found the post where Mark mentioned No Question FVP:

Just like FVP is efficient at finding the item you want to do the most at any given point in time, I think this looks very efficient for finding items that stand out without missing anything and less reviewing of non-stand-out items towards the beginning of the list.
November 17, 2017 at 0:40 | Unregistered CommenterDon R
<< if you want to process a long task list using "standing out" without using a formal dismissal process, what is the fastest way to do it? >>

Why would you want to?
November 17, 2017 at 1:23 | Registered CommenterSeraphim