Discussion Forum > Serial No-List - update
I'm not following any system at home now. For work, I have a system which might fit:
Each day I start a new section. I write tasks as they come up. I'm using an outliner, so as subtasks come up I write subtasks within each task. I also write the details as I work on them, things I learned as I investigate the task, and mark details done as they are done. Sometimes I'll go back to previous days' stuff and copy down tasks from before that were not finished (and perhaps not even started), or mark them done if they are done.
This way of operating is much more a work log than a task runner, as after all is done I can simply read through everything and know exactly what I did in detail.
Each day I start a new section. I write tasks as they come up. I'm using an outliner, so as subtasks come up I write subtasks within each task. I also write the details as I work on them, things I learned as I investigate the task, and mark details done as they are done. Sometimes I'll go back to previous days' stuff and copy down tasks from before that were not finished (and perhaps not even started), or mark them done if they are done.
This way of operating is much more a work log than a task runner, as after all is done I can simply read through everything and know exactly what I did in detail.
September 23, 2019 at 23:54 |
Alan Baljeu
Alan Baljeu
I flirted for a time with Todoist; the teacher of an online course I took really touted its usefulness. It's actually a pretty good home for the large number of routine items I'm charged with on a weekly basis. I can use it in a web browser at work and the Mac app at home so I can capture on the fly tasks for both home and work at either place.
But I have to say I exhaled a sigh of relief when i returned to pen and paper serial no-list last week. Seeing a list of things in Todoist made me think my thinking was done and i could go into automaton task-killer mode. But starting with a blank list and really thinking through my day just gave me a sense of peace and space in my head that Todoist, for all its impressiveness, does not. And yes, I have "Todoist" as an item to check in my no-list.
I had been using a blank composition book for this but splurged on an At-a-Glance Plan Write Remember book, with two days per page. Each day is just a block of lines I can write my tasks on; I got the desktop size so I effectively have two columns per day. My days are not busy enough to need more than that. It's also big and sturdy enough that i can stuff papers into it.
Using a dated planner also lets me send tasks to a future date (like the online training I want to do on Friday but that is not at a specific time), as Seraphim describes above.
meb
But I have to say I exhaled a sigh of relief when i returned to pen and paper serial no-list last week. Seeing a list of things in Todoist made me think my thinking was done and i could go into automaton task-killer mode. But starting with a blank list and really thinking through my day just gave me a sense of peace and space in my head that Todoist, for all its impressiveness, does not. And yes, I have "Todoist" as an item to check in my no-list.
I had been using a blank composition book for this but splurged on an At-a-Glance Plan Write Remember book, with two days per page. Each day is just a block of lines I can write my tasks on; I got the desktop size so I effectively have two columns per day. My days are not busy enough to need more than that. It's also big and sturdy enough that i can stuff papers into it.
Using a dated planner also lets me send tasks to a future date (like the online training I want to do on Friday but that is not at a specific time), as Seraphim describes above.
meb
September 25, 2019 at 17:06 |
Mike Brown
Mike Brown
Oh, and at home I use a simple 5x8 spiral notebook for my evening and weekend no-lists. Nothing fancy.
September 25, 2019 at 17:07 |
Mike Brown
Mike Brown
Alan - your approach seems very similar in spirit to Serial No-List: start each day fresh, and refer to the older stuff from time-to-time.
September 26, 2019 at 1:01 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Mike Brown:
<< Seeing a list of things in Todoist made me think my thinking was done and i could go into automaton task-killer mode. But starting with a blank list and really thinking through my day just gave me a sense of peace and space in my head that Todoist, for all its impressiveness, does not. >>
This is exactly my experience also. Whenever I use a long list, I tend to let it do a lot of my thinking for me, and I get less and less engaged. Starting fresh every day keeps the list relevant, fresh, and focused.
Maybe I should rename the system Start Fresh Every Day. :-) But the acronym sounds like some kind of new prescription drug, or perhaps a new program for buying government bonds or something.
<< Seeing a list of things in Todoist made me think my thinking was done and i could go into automaton task-killer mode. But starting with a blank list and really thinking through my day just gave me a sense of peace and space in my head that Todoist, for all its impressiveness, does not. >>
This is exactly my experience also. Whenever I use a long list, I tend to let it do a lot of my thinking for me, and I get less and less engaged. Starting fresh every day keeps the list relevant, fresh, and focused.
Maybe I should rename the system Start Fresh Every Day. :-) But the acronym sounds like some kind of new prescription drug, or perhaps a new program for buying government bonds or something.
September 26, 2019 at 1:05 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I was thinking about this post - I really can't get on with the stand out process and scanning repeatedly. I go into a tail spin and can't concentrate on the task in hand as brain overloaded with all the other things I have to do. I prefer to review a task once and drop in folders of do today, do this week and then do later and just plough through with 100% concentration on only one task.
Likewise with little and often - all the brainpower used to get to grips with what to do and then have to go through the thinking process again later. I prefer to do as much as possible to a conclusion.
Anyone else experiencing any problems with the standout & little and often?
Likewise with little and often - all the brainpower used to get to grips with what to do and then have to go through the thinking process again later. I prefer to do as much as possible to a conclusion.
Anyone else experiencing any problems with the standout & little and often?
September 26, 2019 at 12:56 |
MrDone
MrDone
MrDone -
<< I really can't get on with the stand out process and scanning repeatedly. I go into a tail spin and can't concentrate on the task in hand as brain overloaded with all the other things I have to do >>
I have had those kinds of problems with Long List systems, once they get over 100 or 200 items -- which for me would generally happen in a matter of a few days. I can't keep a good sense of the totality of the list in my head, and it takes a long time to scan through all of it, and it starts to feel very overwhelming.
But it's quite different with Serial No-List. I spend ~90% of my time on the Today page, which is generally a short list of 10-20 active items. I do cycle through it a bit, but since this active list is so short, the scanning is quick and light. And quite often, especially when dealing with maintenance tasks or other one-off tasks, I do just bang through them in order.
When nothing on this page feels like it needs to be done right now, only then do I go look at the older pages, and then again, it's a fairly quick, light scan through the older pages.
<< Likewise with little and often - all the brainpower used to get to grips with what to do and then have to go through the thinking process again later. >>
Perhaps this is a misunderstanding of what Mark means by "little and often". He has written about it in two ways, as far as I can remember,
One, for recurring maintenance kinds of things, it's all about keeping batch sizes small. This enables much better flow and responsiveness. For example, clearing out one's inbox all the way to zero -- and doing in a few times a day rather than a few times a month.
Two, for long-term efforts, especially creative efforts, like writing, or programming, or developing a presentation, or working on a project. It can be better to work at it in many shorter sessions than trying to cram it all into one mega-session. "Shorter session" can mean different things to different people and in different circumstances. For me, it sometimes means a burst of 15-20 minutes of work, but sometimes it means 2-3 hours or more of focused work -- sustained as long as I can keep the flow going and don't feel pressure from other things that also need attention. Several repeated sessions like that, interspersed with whatever else is going on, generally helps keep my mind fresh, more creative, and gives me better results, rather than trying to cram it all into one 12-hour session. It also enables better overall flow and responsiveness to the totality of what's going on in my world. But everyone's different, and sometimes I still do those 12 hour sessions focused on one thing. :)
<< I really can't get on with the stand out process and scanning repeatedly. I go into a tail spin and can't concentrate on the task in hand as brain overloaded with all the other things I have to do >>
I have had those kinds of problems with Long List systems, once they get over 100 or 200 items -- which for me would generally happen in a matter of a few days. I can't keep a good sense of the totality of the list in my head, and it takes a long time to scan through all of it, and it starts to feel very overwhelming.
But it's quite different with Serial No-List. I spend ~90% of my time on the Today page, which is generally a short list of 10-20 active items. I do cycle through it a bit, but since this active list is so short, the scanning is quick and light. And quite often, especially when dealing with maintenance tasks or other one-off tasks, I do just bang through them in order.
When nothing on this page feels like it needs to be done right now, only then do I go look at the older pages, and then again, it's a fairly quick, light scan through the older pages.
<< Likewise with little and often - all the brainpower used to get to grips with what to do and then have to go through the thinking process again later. >>
Perhaps this is a misunderstanding of what Mark means by "little and often". He has written about it in two ways, as far as I can remember,
One, for recurring maintenance kinds of things, it's all about keeping batch sizes small. This enables much better flow and responsiveness. For example, clearing out one's inbox all the way to zero -- and doing in a few times a day rather than a few times a month.
Two, for long-term efforts, especially creative efforts, like writing, or programming, or developing a presentation, or working on a project. It can be better to work at it in many shorter sessions than trying to cram it all into one mega-session. "Shorter session" can mean different things to different people and in different circumstances. For me, it sometimes means a burst of 15-20 minutes of work, but sometimes it means 2-3 hours or more of focused work -- sustained as long as I can keep the flow going and don't feel pressure from other things that also need attention. Several repeated sessions like that, interspersed with whatever else is going on, generally helps keep my mind fresh, more creative, and gives me better results, rather than trying to cram it all into one 12-hour session. It also enables better overall flow and responsiveness to the totality of what's going on in my world. But everyone's different, and sometimes I still do those 12 hour sessions focused on one thing. :)
September 26, 2019 at 16:59 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
MrDone:
Seraphim has replied very well to your concerns about the concept of "little and often". This is such second nature to me that I often have difficulty understanding why other people have trouble with the concept.
When I was young (60 or more years ago), it was drilled into us that we should not leave our homework, piano practice, sports practice, etc, etc. until the last moment, but should get going on it straight away and use all the available time to produce the best result. Otherwise no matter how long we had to do it, we would still try to cram it all in at the last possible moment and produce a result that was far less than we were capable of.
Maybe that principle isn't taught these days?
Almost anything worthwhile that you want to do will be best achieved this way. It would be fair to say that one of the most important factors in a whole range of activities is REGULARITY.
Examples:
Practice for a concert
Strength training
Learning a language
Writing a major report, doctoral thesis or book
Research
etc. etc.
But it also applies to more trivial activities, e.g.
Clearing your email inbox
Keeping your office tidy
Preparing for a meeting
Writing a journal
Keeping accounts up-to-date
I hope this makes sense.
Seraphim has replied very well to your concerns about the concept of "little and often". This is such second nature to me that I often have difficulty understanding why other people have trouble with the concept.
When I was young (60 or more years ago), it was drilled into us that we should not leave our homework, piano practice, sports practice, etc, etc. until the last moment, but should get going on it straight away and use all the available time to produce the best result. Otherwise no matter how long we had to do it, we would still try to cram it all in at the last possible moment and produce a result that was far less than we were capable of.
Maybe that principle isn't taught these days?
Almost anything worthwhile that you want to do will be best achieved this way. It would be fair to say that one of the most important factors in a whole range of activities is REGULARITY.
Examples:
Practice for a concert
Strength training
Learning a language
Writing a major report, doctoral thesis or book
Research
etc. etc.
But it also applies to more trivial activities, e.g.
Clearing your email inbox
Keeping your office tidy
Preparing for a meeting
Writing a journal
Keeping accounts up-to-date
I hope this makes sense.
October 2, 2019 at 11:12 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Seraphim:
<< I have had those kinds of problems with Long List systems, once they get over 100 or 200 items -- which for me would generally happen in a matter of a few days. >>
I'm interested to know how many tasks you would now typically have in your entire Serial No-List system at any one time. That is to say in Today's Page, Past Pages and Future Pages.
Would there be considerably less tasks than pre-SNL? Or would it be about the same?
If the answer is "less", then what would you say are the main factors causing this? For instance is it because you put less tasks on the list in the first place? or that you are more effective in clearing tasks once they are on the list? or what?
If the answer is "about the same", then what are the factors which make them easier to handle than in, say, Simple Scanning? Is it because you are happy to ignore the older tasks until the new tasks have been dealt with? Or that you enter tasks on Today's page regardless of whether they are already on older pages? or what?
<< I can't keep a good sense of the totality of the list in my head, and it takes a long time to scan through all of it, and it starts to feel very overwhelming >>
It appears you think it's important to keep a good sense of the totality of the list in your head. You used to say that you couldn't reduce the number of tasks you put on your list because you needed to be able to record and evaluate ideas. Is SNL more effective at this than, say, Simple Scanning? Or are you only putting stuff on your list now which you feel really needs to be done now? If so, what would be the effect of using the same principle with Simple Scanning?
<< I have had those kinds of problems with Long List systems, once they get over 100 or 200 items -- which for me would generally happen in a matter of a few days. >>
I'm interested to know how many tasks you would now typically have in your entire Serial No-List system at any one time. That is to say in Today's Page, Past Pages and Future Pages.
Would there be considerably less tasks than pre-SNL? Or would it be about the same?
If the answer is "less", then what would you say are the main factors causing this? For instance is it because you put less tasks on the list in the first place? or that you are more effective in clearing tasks once they are on the list? or what?
If the answer is "about the same", then what are the factors which make them easier to handle than in, say, Simple Scanning? Is it because you are happy to ignore the older tasks until the new tasks have been dealt with? Or that you enter tasks on Today's page regardless of whether they are already on older pages? or what?
<< I can't keep a good sense of the totality of the list in my head, and it takes a long time to scan through all of it, and it starts to feel very overwhelming >>
It appears you think it's important to keep a good sense of the totality of the list in your head. You used to say that you couldn't reduce the number of tasks you put on your list because you needed to be able to record and evaluate ideas. Is SNL more effective at this than, say, Simple Scanning? Or are you only putting stuff on your list now which you feel really needs to be done now? If so, what would be the effect of using the same principle with Simple Scanning?
October 2, 2019 at 12:06 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Hi Mark -
Welcome back! Lots of great questions! It's taken me all day (off and on) to write this answer.
<< I'm interested to know how many tasks you would now typically have in your entire Serial No-List system at any one time. That is to say in Today's Page, Past Pages and Future Pages. >>
I have a paper notebook which I use mostly at home, and an electronic notebook (OneNote) which I use mostly for work. Together the task counts add up as follows:
Future tasks: 16
Today's tasks: 11
Past tasks: 338
Ordinarily the Today task count would be a bit higher. I am writing this at the beginning of the day, and I woke up with a bit of a headache, so I am not starting out with as many tasks as I normally would (usually 15-20).
Also, I tend to collect a lot more older tasks in OneNote than I do in my paper notebook - it's just easier to grab stuff and throw it into OneNote. If I were doing everything on paper, the total number of tasks would probably be closer to 200, I am guessing.
<< Would there be considerably less tasks than pre-SNL? Or would it be about the same? >>
Seems about the same, based on my most recent forays into Simple Scanning and other Long List experiments.
<< If the answer is "about the same", then what are the factors which make them easier to handle than in, say, Simple Scanning? Is it because you are happy to ignore the older tasks until the new tasks have been dealt with? >>
I am just more engaged in current tasks. And as long as that engagement holds my attention, there really isn't any need to go look at the older tasks. I trust my intuition will take me to those older tasks when needed -- for example, by making me anxious that I am forgetting something important.
This has two primary effects:
1-- It holds my attention and engagement on the current work, without distractions. I keep cycling through the current page (the Today page) without leaving it. This improves my focus and engagement on the work that is most important to me.
2-- When a natural break occurs in the current focused work -- either because of the work itself, or because I need a change of pace, or because I am getting tired and can't focus, or whatever -- it naturally brings me to look at the other tasks.
In short, the system presents the tasks to me at the right time when I am most mentally prepared for them, automatically. This is easier for me than Simple Scanning (for example), which brings me back to the older tasks in a somewhat more disjointed manner that has more to do with the mechanics of where tasks land on the page than with my actual engagement with them.
Let me give an example. Let's say I have several pages of older tasks, and on my final active page, I have the following tasks:
Project A
Call Fred
Email
Check calendar
Call Tom
Project B
As I scan through them, I realize that I can't call Fred till I first get an answer from Tom. So I skip over Call Fred. Nothing else stands out till I come to Call Tom.
I go ahead and call Tom, get the answer I need, and move on.
I then see Project B and it stands out, so I work on it for a bit and forget about Tom and Fred for the moment.
Nothing else is added to the list in the meantime, so when I am done with Project B, the rules of Simple Scanning would take me back to the beginning of my notebook. Having momentarily forgotten about Tom and Fred, I am now presented with a whole list of things to attract my attention, before I come back to the Call Fred task.
Serial No-List would handle this differently. After working on Project B, I would immediately circle back to the top of the last page, rather than the beginning of the list. Thus I would see Call Fred again much sooner than I would see it with Simple Scanning. The time that passes between when I called Tom and when I am now prompted to call Fred is shorter. I close the loop on these related tasks much more quickly.
Perhaps it would have simply occurred to me naturally to call Fred immediately after I finished my call with Tom, and I could have done it out of order. That's fine, I do that kind of thing all the time. The point is that Serial No-List actually supports and encourages this kind of thing, by bringing me back quickly to related current tasks. It doesn't flow quite as naturally and smoothly with Simple Scanning, or any other system I've tried.
<< Or that you enter tasks on Today's page regardless of whether they are already on older pages? >>
Yes, I enter tasks on Today's page whenever they occur to me, without thinking whether or not they might already exist on the list somewhere. This might result in there being duplicate task entries here and there on the list. It doesn't seem to be a problem.
<< or what? >>
I think that covers most of it. 🙂
<< It appears you think it's important to keep a good sense of the totality of the list in your head. >>
Maybe it would have been more accurate for me to say that my intuition seems to work better when I have a good sense of the totality of my situation. If I am working with a Long List, then this means I need to have a good sense of the totality of the list in my head. But because Serial No-List is based on No-List, I don't really need a strong sense of the list -- I just need a strong "situational awareness" -- I need to be in tune with my own situation, and be able to articulate whatever my intuition is telling me. This is why it's so important to me to start the day with Serial No-List by writing down whatever is on my mind and immediately engaging with these top-of-mind concerns.
Instead, if I start by reviewing what I have already written down on previous days, my own internal "situational awareness" tends to go to sleep. Then the Long List becomes a kind of crutch, and it becomes super important to be able to have a strong sense of the total list in my mind. Otherwise I can't get a strong intuitive sense of how the different tasks and projects on the list relate to each other, and the Standing Out process doesn't work very well.
<< You used to say that you couldn't reduce the number of tasks you put on your list because you needed to be able to record and evaluate ideas. Is SNL more effective at this than, say, Simple Scanning? >>
Yes, I feel SNL is more effective because it brings the idea tasks to my attention only during the down-time when I am able to evaluate them, rather than distracting me with them when I am already engaged with other things.
<< Or are you only putting stuff on your list now which you feel really needs to be done now? >>
No, I still capture whatever ideas happen to come to mind. I just write them on the Today list with everything else. If they are immediately pertinent to my current focus area, then they get picked up immediately and incorporated into whatever I am doing. If they are not, and need more time to percolate, then they just roll onto the older pages and wait for an appropriate time to assert themselves (or to declare they are ready to be deleted).
Welcome back! Lots of great questions! It's taken me all day (off and on) to write this answer.
<< I'm interested to know how many tasks you would now typically have in your entire Serial No-List system at any one time. That is to say in Today's Page, Past Pages and Future Pages. >>
I have a paper notebook which I use mostly at home, and an electronic notebook (OneNote) which I use mostly for work. Together the task counts add up as follows:
Future tasks: 16
Today's tasks: 11
Past tasks: 338
Ordinarily the Today task count would be a bit higher. I am writing this at the beginning of the day, and I woke up with a bit of a headache, so I am not starting out with as many tasks as I normally would (usually 15-20).
Also, I tend to collect a lot more older tasks in OneNote than I do in my paper notebook - it's just easier to grab stuff and throw it into OneNote. If I were doing everything on paper, the total number of tasks would probably be closer to 200, I am guessing.
<< Would there be considerably less tasks than pre-SNL? Or would it be about the same? >>
Seems about the same, based on my most recent forays into Simple Scanning and other Long List experiments.
<< If the answer is "about the same", then what are the factors which make them easier to handle than in, say, Simple Scanning? Is it because you are happy to ignore the older tasks until the new tasks have been dealt with? >>
I am just more engaged in current tasks. And as long as that engagement holds my attention, there really isn't any need to go look at the older tasks. I trust my intuition will take me to those older tasks when needed -- for example, by making me anxious that I am forgetting something important.
This has two primary effects:
1-- It holds my attention and engagement on the current work, without distractions. I keep cycling through the current page (the Today page) without leaving it. This improves my focus and engagement on the work that is most important to me.
2-- When a natural break occurs in the current focused work -- either because of the work itself, or because I need a change of pace, or because I am getting tired and can't focus, or whatever -- it naturally brings me to look at the other tasks.
In short, the system presents the tasks to me at the right time when I am most mentally prepared for them, automatically. This is easier for me than Simple Scanning (for example), which brings me back to the older tasks in a somewhat more disjointed manner that has more to do with the mechanics of where tasks land on the page than with my actual engagement with them.
Let me give an example. Let's say I have several pages of older tasks, and on my final active page, I have the following tasks:
Project A
Call Fred
Check calendar
Call Tom
Project B
As I scan through them, I realize that I can't call Fred till I first get an answer from Tom. So I skip over Call Fred. Nothing else stands out till I come to Call Tom.
I go ahead and call Tom, get the answer I need, and move on.
I then see Project B and it stands out, so I work on it for a bit and forget about Tom and Fred for the moment.
Nothing else is added to the list in the meantime, so when I am done with Project B, the rules of Simple Scanning would take me back to the beginning of my notebook. Having momentarily forgotten about Tom and Fred, I am now presented with a whole list of things to attract my attention, before I come back to the Call Fred task.
Serial No-List would handle this differently. After working on Project B, I would immediately circle back to the top of the last page, rather than the beginning of the list. Thus I would see Call Fred again much sooner than I would see it with Simple Scanning. The time that passes between when I called Tom and when I am now prompted to call Fred is shorter. I close the loop on these related tasks much more quickly.
Perhaps it would have simply occurred to me naturally to call Fred immediately after I finished my call with Tom, and I could have done it out of order. That's fine, I do that kind of thing all the time. The point is that Serial No-List actually supports and encourages this kind of thing, by bringing me back quickly to related current tasks. It doesn't flow quite as naturally and smoothly with Simple Scanning, or any other system I've tried.
<< Or that you enter tasks on Today's page regardless of whether they are already on older pages? >>
Yes, I enter tasks on Today's page whenever they occur to me, without thinking whether or not they might already exist on the list somewhere. This might result in there being duplicate task entries here and there on the list. It doesn't seem to be a problem.
<< or what? >>
I think that covers most of it. 🙂
<< It appears you think it's important to keep a good sense of the totality of the list in your head. >>
Maybe it would have been more accurate for me to say that my intuition seems to work better when I have a good sense of the totality of my situation. If I am working with a Long List, then this means I need to have a good sense of the totality of the list in my head. But because Serial No-List is based on No-List, I don't really need a strong sense of the list -- I just need a strong "situational awareness" -- I need to be in tune with my own situation, and be able to articulate whatever my intuition is telling me. This is why it's so important to me to start the day with Serial No-List by writing down whatever is on my mind and immediately engaging with these top-of-mind concerns.
Instead, if I start by reviewing what I have already written down on previous days, my own internal "situational awareness" tends to go to sleep. Then the Long List becomes a kind of crutch, and it becomes super important to be able to have a strong sense of the total list in my mind. Otherwise I can't get a strong intuitive sense of how the different tasks and projects on the list relate to each other, and the Standing Out process doesn't work very well.
<< You used to say that you couldn't reduce the number of tasks you put on your list because you needed to be able to record and evaluate ideas. Is SNL more effective at this than, say, Simple Scanning? >>
Yes, I feel SNL is more effective because it brings the idea tasks to my attention only during the down-time when I am able to evaluate them, rather than distracting me with them when I am already engaged with other things.
<< Or are you only putting stuff on your list now which you feel really needs to be done now? >>
No, I still capture whatever ideas happen to come to mind. I just write them on the Today list with everything else. If they are immediately pertinent to my current focus area, then they get picked up immediately and incorporated into whatever I am doing. If they are not, and need more time to percolate, then they just roll onto the older pages and wait for an appropriate time to assert themselves (or to declare they are ready to be deleted).
October 3, 2019 at 2:51 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I just re-read your SNL Rules http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2745678 , Seraphim.
Looks like I've been falling into SNL habits for past year or so. I've been tracking my tasks with a daily simplified chronodex [1] in my A7 paper notebook, and squeezing in a daily task lists in remaining spaces. I've put a few pixs of my notebooks in a photo album [2].
Ref:
[1] http://lifehacker.com/track-your-time-with-a-colorful-chronodex-to-get-more-d-1673235700
[2] http://photos.app.goo.gl/utPRMv4hGGjHTYXy8
PS: I took too long and was logged out, and just noticed those not logged in will not be able to confirm and post here.
Looks like I've been falling into SNL habits for past year or so. I've been tracking my tasks with a daily simplified chronodex [1] in my A7 paper notebook, and squeezing in a daily task lists in remaining spaces. I've put a few pixs of my notebooks in a photo album [2].
Ref:
[1] http://lifehacker.com/track-your-time-with-a-colorful-chronodex-to-get-more-d-1673235700
[2] http://photos.app.goo.gl/utPRMv4hGGjHTYXy8
PS: I took too long and was logged out, and just noticed those not logged in will not be able to confirm and post here.
October 3, 2019 at 7:18 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
sabre23t -
Interesting. Do you basically cycle through the current page till nothing stands out, then go back through your older pages? Is that what you mean by "falling into SNL habits"?
Seems like it would be pretty easy and fast, since there is only a handful of tasks written down each day.
Interesting. Do you basically cycle through the current page till nothing stands out, then go back through your older pages? Is that what you mean by "falling into SNL habits"?
Seems like it would be pretty easy and fast, since there is only a handful of tasks written down each day.
October 4, 2019 at 15:18 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
«Do you basically cycle through the current page till nothing stands out, then go back through your older pages?»
Yes. Though I do also cycle/scan through older pages when I have a niggly feeling that I forgot something. I usually list only a handful of tasks at the start of the day, since tasks like "Prez OAD" have its own detailed digital tasks list [1]. I've been using Checkvist for my digital outlining & task management since about 2011 [2].
Ref:
[1] http://checkvist.com/p/mXeEXVkUX005wdtkmXk4ew
[2] http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/1494088
Yes. Though I do also cycle/scan through older pages when I have a niggly feeling that I forgot something. I usually list only a handful of tasks at the start of the day, since tasks like "Prez OAD" have its own detailed digital tasks list [1]. I've been using Checkvist for my digital outlining & task management since about 2011 [2].
Ref:
[1] http://checkvist.com/p/mXeEXVkUX005wdtkmXk4ew
[2] http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/1494088
October 7, 2019 at 3:19 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
MrDone,
What stands it really depends on the question you ask. Sometimes I ask is there anything in this unwieldy long list that I have to finish by Friday? I will copy those things onto a list of things to do before Friday, and happily ignore the rest of the list until then. If I ask Is there anything I would like to do before Friday? or If anything's annoying me? I get a much longer list, way too long to focus on. On Thursday I only have to look at the list I made at the beginning of the week and any notes I made since then. Everything else can wait.
I often do this at a monthly level as well. Everything I need to do this month gets copied to the month page, and when I plan the fourth week of the month I only have to look as far back as that month page.
Every time I fill a notebook, every two to four months, I copy all open tasks to the beginning of the book, rephrasing, deleting, rethinking each line as I go. In theory. Sometimes I just blindly, or optimistically, copy everything. I'm going to try starting the notebook migration a bit earlier next time, so I don't have to rush to get everything copied the day my old book runs out.
What stands it really depends on the question you ask. Sometimes I ask is there anything in this unwieldy long list that I have to finish by Friday? I will copy those things onto a list of things to do before Friday, and happily ignore the rest of the list until then. If I ask Is there anything I would like to do before Friday? or If anything's annoying me? I get a much longer list, way too long to focus on. On Thursday I only have to look at the list I made at the beginning of the week and any notes I made since then. Everything else can wait.
I often do this at a monthly level as well. Everything I need to do this month gets copied to the month page, and when I plan the fourth week of the month I only have to look as far back as that month page.
Every time I fill a notebook, every two to four months, I copy all open tasks to the beginning of the book, rephrasing, deleting, rethinking each line as I go. In theory. Sometimes I just blindly, or optimistically, copy everything. I'm going to try starting the notebook migration a bit earlier next time, so I don't have to rush to get everything copied the day my old book runs out.
October 7, 2019 at 15:36 |
Cricket
Cricket
After filling my last notebook, where I was adding new pages in reverse order, I decided to try doing Serial No-List with a dated journal. I've been using it for about three weeks.
The basic rules are the same as usual: http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2745678
But I've been making more and more use of the DIT-like principles that I described here: http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2745088
In other words, it's the standard rules, with one modification -- "3B", below:
1- Start each day by doing a brainstorm of everything on my mind, and writing it on today's page: Write down whatever is top-of-mind, whatever you need or want to do, whatever needs to get done.
2- Scan through the Today page repeatedly, working on whatever stands out.
3- When you stop working on a task, cross it out. If you aren't finished with it yet, re-enter it at the end of the Today page.
3B- However, if you really don't want to see that task again today - such as for daily (or less frequent) recurring tasks, or for a follow-up task that you really don't expect to need to do for at least a day - you can enter the task on tomorrow's page or some other page in the future.
4- As new tasks come up through the day, add them to the end of the Today page.
5- Keep cycling through Today’s tasks until nothing stands out.
6- When nothing on today’s list stands out, cycle back through the older pages -- most recent pages first -- working on whatever stands out, till you eventually come to the beginning of the notebook. Then repeat from (2).
(3B) helps in several ways:
-- It helps to keep today's list cleaner and relevant and focused.
-- It defers future tasks to the time when I need to see them again, but not before - I can just forget about them and trust they will come back when needed.
-- It tends to populate future pages with several must-do maintenance tasks (as I described in detail here: http://markforster.squarespace.com/forum/post/2745088 ). It's nice having these kinds of tasks grouped together. I can bang through them when I have some down-time, such as in between meetings or when I am starting to get tired in the afternoon.
To be clear, the default for re-entering tasks is always the Today page. The point is not to make you think about where tasks should be re-entered. The point is to allow you to re-enter tasks in the place that makes the most sense, to reduce mental clutter and increase focus. In practice, it's very simple. I just re-enter on Today's page, unless I already have a strong inclination not to see that task again till tomorrow or later.
Using a dated journal makes this much simpler. Without the dates, I could only really defer to tomorrow. With the dates, I can defer to any arbitrary future date. It gives me more control. It's great for handling recurring tasks that need attention on a biweekly, weekly, monthly, or other schedule. It's also great for follow-ups on future dates, such as when waiting for someone to return from vacation, or when expecting an important shipment.
Another advantage of the dated journal is it makes me less reliant on electronic reminders. Spending time on my phone is a migraine trigger for me, so the more I can get away from it, the better.
Well, that's it for now. Is anyone else still using Serial No-List?