FV and FVP Forum > How does FV handle tasks that need to be abandoned?
Short Answer: As per the rules: "If at any stage you find that a task on the list is no longer relevant, then delete it."
April 7, 2012 at 19:05 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Long Answer:
I started with my original two AF lists (one for home, one for work), totaling probably somewhere between 800-1200 tasks.
One thing I quickly found: A key strength of FV is it makes you aware of your TOTAL task list: all your commitments. It's like the Weekly Review, but automatic, and better, because it engages your subconscious mind more effectively by frequent exposure. In short: after a few cycles, I was very comfortable simply deleting many of those tasks that just don't need to be done. In the overall scheme of things (of which FV made me more fully aware, through the frequent review of the whole list), these tasks / ideas / things to read / things to watch just lost their glamor. Delete.
I used to have the world-record longest AF lists. Now they are less than half their previous size, and I'm actually getting more done.
I started with my original two AF lists (one for home, one for work), totaling probably somewhere between 800-1200 tasks.
One thing I quickly found: A key strength of FV is it makes you aware of your TOTAL task list: all your commitments. It's like the Weekly Review, but automatic, and better, because it engages your subconscious mind more effectively by frequent exposure. In short: after a few cycles, I was very comfortable simply deleting many of those tasks that just don't need to be done. In the overall scheme of things (of which FV made me more fully aware, through the frequent review of the whole list), these tasks / ideas / things to read / things to watch just lost their glamor. Delete.
I used to have the world-record longest AF lists. Now they are less than half their previous size, and I'm actually getting more done.
April 7, 2012 at 19:09 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Also:
If I am not sure I want to delete something, it gets dealt with during one of my "cleanup rounds".
Here is what I mean. Sometimes when I am creating a new chain, one of the first items to get a dot is a "cleanup" item. In other words, it is a poorly worded task whose lack of clarity has been bothering me. Or it's a "Project N - what's next?" kind of thing. Or, it's some task that I think I want to delete, but I'm not sure. This tends to set the tone for that particular selection round. I dot all the things that need cleanup or clarity. I really like these cleanup rounds because they really shorten my list and make it more focused.
(Side note: I find FV to generate far more "autofocus" than AutoFocus ever did, and AutoFocus was pretty good at it!!)
So, during those cleanup rounds, stuff that I am not so sure I want to do anymore tends to say "do me before X!". So these things get dots.
As I then work through the dots, most of these things just get deleted. A few of them might get reworded, or maybe reworded and put into my tickler file to revisit in a week or a month.
If I am not sure I want to delete something, it gets dealt with during one of my "cleanup rounds".
Here is what I mean. Sometimes when I am creating a new chain, one of the first items to get a dot is a "cleanup" item. In other words, it is a poorly worded task whose lack of clarity has been bothering me. Or it's a "Project N - what's next?" kind of thing. Or, it's some task that I think I want to delete, but I'm not sure. This tends to set the tone for that particular selection round. I dot all the things that need cleanup or clarity. I really like these cleanup rounds because they really shorten my list and make it more focused.
(Side note: I find FV to generate far more "autofocus" than AutoFocus ever did, and AutoFocus was pretty good at it!!)
So, during those cleanup rounds, stuff that I am not so sure I want to do anymore tends to say "do me before X!". So these things get dots.
As I then work through the dots, most of these things just get deleted. A few of them might get reworded, or maybe reworded and put into my tickler file to revisit in a week or a month.
April 7, 2012 at 19:14 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I *really* like how this works, because with AF, I tended to build up long lists of "dismissed" items that never got processed adequately. They started to feel like big backlogs that never got attention, and quietly weighed down on my soul.
With FV, I feel much happier just deleting them, knowing that it really doesn't matter if I never see those items again.
With FV, I feel much happier just deleting them, knowing that it really doesn't matter if I never see those items again.
April 7, 2012 at 19:15 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I am really looking forward to what others have to say on this topic!! I think it's one of the most exciting features of Final Version.
April 7, 2012 at 19:16 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I think you're right. "Actioning" a single item (usually put off until it's in the "first unactioned" spot) has a different feel than "I have to do something to one of these or I have to give up on all of them." Also, there isn't the mass dismissal. We spend a few moments focusing on one item rather than everything on a page that we don't feel like dealing with.
I recently hit a slug of unrelated high-resitance items. By the end, I was making my ladders very short: the 1st item and one or two low-resistance ones. There was real momentum going. I very much wanted to do that 1st item. It worked until I ran out of energy for the day, and next day the energy was back. Today's an off-list day. I expect the momentum to return the next work day.
I recently hit a slug of unrelated high-resitance items. By the end, I was making my ladders very short: the 1st item and one or two low-resistance ones. There was real momentum going. I very much wanted to do that 1st item. It worked until I ran out of energy for the day, and next day the energy was back. Today's an off-list day. I expect the momentum to return the next work day.
April 7, 2012 at 23:46 |
Cricket
Cricket
Seraphim,
your description of how FV deals better with dismissal than AF is spot on, that's exactly my experience. I used to have long lists of dismissed items to review, which never got reviewed, but now such items within the FV list get reviewed at the proper time and deleted or rephrased or worked on. It's brilliant!
your description of how FV deals better with dismissal than AF is spot on, that's exactly my experience. I used to have long lists of dismissed items to review, which never got reviewed, but now such items within the FV list get reviewed at the proper time and deleted or rephrased or worked on. It's brilliant!
April 8, 2012 at 0:01 |
Nicole
Nicole
Cornell, if it's not too late, I would suggest treating the old AF list as one big dismissed page. You could even highlight all the remaining items if you want. Then one of the first entries on your new FV list should be "Review old-AF-dismissed tasks." (Or "[Get] old-AF-dismissed tasks reviewed" in our new Get ___ parlance.) If the old list is long, you could just do it little-and-often, rewriting the Review task as many times as necessary until they're all crossed off and everything you want to do is on the new FV list. You could also "cheat" and scan the old list for anything urgent that you might otherwise forget to add to the new list.
A similar question will probably hit some of us soon – whether to take some minimal action on stale tasks/projects whenever they become the root, in order to keep them alive on the list, or face reality and delete them.
A similar question will probably hit some of us soon – whether to take some minimal action on stale tasks/projects whenever they become the root, in order to keep them alive on the list, or face reality and delete them.
April 8, 2012 at 0:28 |
ubi
ubi
To expand on ubi's idea, here's something that works for me. Start each day by moving the last 10 to 25 items from your old list to your FV list. Start with the LAST items because they are the freshest.
If you are doing it electronically, just copy/paste without review, and let FV do the review for you.
If you are doing it on paper, delete as many of those 10-25 items as you can, and only move over the things that are still relevant, and the things that you are undecided about. Let FV sort them out.
If you are doing it electronically, just copy/paste without review, and let FV do the review for you.
If you are doing it on paper, delete as many of those 10-25 items as you can, and only move over the things that are still relevant, and the things that you are undecided about. Let FV sort them out.
April 8, 2012 at 6:07 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
I have a "deal with old list" item. I still have a few old ones hanging around. A DIT planner with active items in April 2011. A binder with a page per room. A failed attempt to go electronic. An old "not now" list (not quite someday-maybe, but they kept getting put off). Old notebooks that I have to re-read because I don't remember why I kept them.
I copy over 10 or 20, or 30 if that will clear a page or book, and move on. There's enough variety in the tasks that the system works.
Where I find FV falters is a slug of high-resistance items that are similar in nature. One of the great things about FV is each chain has a different character. One will have a computer task as the head, another active, or filing, or for me, or for the family, or intense concentration, or light. If the head is one character, I usually get two or three of a very different character next in the ladder. I don't try, it just ends up that way.
I copy over 10 or 20, or 30 if that will clear a page or book, and move on. There's enough variety in the tasks that the system works.
Where I find FV falters is a slug of high-resistance items that are similar in nature. One of the great things about FV is each chain has a different character. One will have a computer task as the head, another active, or filing, or for me, or for the family, or intense concentration, or light. If the head is one character, I usually get two or three of a very different character next in the ladder. I don't try, it just ends up that way.
April 8, 2012 at 20:18 |
Cricket
Cricket
Nicole: "I used to have long lists of dismissed items to review, which never got reviewed, but now such items within the FV list get reviewed at the proper time and deleted or rephrased or worked on. It's brilliant!"
Just to verify my understanding of the system... A task can only be re-entered at the end if it is rephrased or has been worked on, right? In other words, it is not allowed to review the task, decide it still has to be done, and re-enter it at the end without rephrasing or working on the task. Right?
So... this is basically the dismissal process of FV. When a task gets auto-selected because it's the first task on the list, you HAVE to take action on it, either by rephrasing it, deleting it, or working on it.
Correct? Or am I missing something? Please verify!
Just to verify my understanding of the system... A task can only be re-entered at the end if it is rephrased or has been worked on, right? In other words, it is not allowed to review the task, decide it still has to be done, and re-enter it at the end without rephrasing or working on the task. Right?
So... this is basically the dismissal process of FV. When a task gets auto-selected because it's the first task on the list, you HAVE to take action on it, either by rephrasing it, deleting it, or working on it.
Correct? Or am I missing something? Please verify!
April 12, 2012 at 17:19 |
TijlK
TijlK
TijlK - I do something similar, although if realistically I won't do anything on it in the next week or 2, I move it a tickler to review next month (or later).
April 12, 2012 at 17:50 |
Lillian
Lillian
Besides Final Version lists (which I try to keep rather short - tasks to do in 1-2 weeks), I have two additional lists: (1) I have one txt file where I put all "someday/maybe", "future" etc tasks. I group these tasks by areas, projects, subprojects...-as best suited for my orientation. Sometimes, when I want to remove task from FV but I want to do it much later, I move this task into this projects/areas file. (2) I have tickler file where I put all future tasks which I want to do for sure, and which are not appointments (I use Things app.). When I decide that I do not want to start something before specific day, I move the task from FV to this tickler file.
April 12, 2012 at 19:19 |
Daneb
Daneb
Tijlk:
<< Just to verify my understanding of the system... A task can only be re-entered at the end if it is rephrased or has been worked on, right? In other words, it is not allowed to review the task, decide it still has to be done, and re-enter it at the end without rephrasing or working on the task. Right? >>
To paraphrase Mark, thinking about a task counts as taking some action.
<< Just to verify my understanding of the system... A task can only be re-entered at the end if it is rephrased or has been worked on, right? In other words, it is not allowed to review the task, decide it still has to be done, and re-enter it at the end without rephrasing or working on the task. Right? >>
To paraphrase Mark, thinking about a task counts as taking some action.
April 12, 2012 at 23:41 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
Seraphim: "To paraphrase Mark, thinking about a task counts as taking some action."
Hmm... so what exactly is stopping me from procrastinating on some task by just re-entering it every time it becomes the first task?
Hmm... so what exactly is stopping me from procrastinating on some task by just re-entering it every time it becomes the first task?
April 13, 2012 at 14:11 |
TijlK
TijlK
on one hand, nothing.
on the other hand... sooner or later, common sense (or curiousity) kicks in with a "why am I just re-writing this for the 8th time?" Then it either gets some progress, dismissed from the list, moved to a tickler file to think about later, delegated to someone else, or just copied over again :)
At least, that what's I've noticed on my list.
on the other hand... sooner or later, common sense (or curiousity) kicks in with a "why am I just re-writing this for the 8th time?" Then it either gets some progress, dismissed from the list, moved to a tickler file to think about later, delegated to someone else, or just copied over again :)
At least, that what's I've noticed on my list.
April 13, 2012 at 15:15 |
Lillian
Lillian
Since my mind is not quite as powerful as that of some other people's I know, I do not permit thinking to count as actioning a task.
Years ago I learned from a book (Lakein's How To Get Control of Your Time and Your Life) that thinking (for me) doesn't count. WRITING, on the other hand, does.
So, if I write something, anything, about the task, then I consider it actioned. I find that what Lillian said is true: each time I write or act, I am shaving a very thin slice off the item. Sometimes it takes a lot of slices, sometimes not. But forcing myself to take some slice each time is the core of little and often.
One of the maxims of time management is something like, "Touch each piece of paper once." I have found that, for me, this is terrible advice. This is certain to create more procrastination and avoidance for me. The Mark Forster maxim of little and often tells me that it is OK if I have to touch the same piece of paper 10 times.
Forget about time management for a second. How do I learn anything new? If I tell myself that I have to learn some new software in the first pass, I am setting myself up for failure. When I learn something new, I might decide to read a chapter in a relevant book many times.
Each time I make a new pass, I gain a deeper understanding.
Years ago I learned from a book (Lakein's How To Get Control of Your Time and Your Life) that thinking (for me) doesn't count. WRITING, on the other hand, does.
So, if I write something, anything, about the task, then I consider it actioned. I find that what Lillian said is true: each time I write or act, I am shaving a very thin slice off the item. Sometimes it takes a lot of slices, sometimes not. But forcing myself to take some slice each time is the core of little and often.
One of the maxims of time management is something like, "Touch each piece of paper once." I have found that, for me, this is terrible advice. This is certain to create more procrastination and avoidance for me. The Mark Forster maxim of little and often tells me that it is OK if I have to touch the same piece of paper 10 times.
Forget about time management for a second. How do I learn anything new? If I tell myself that I have to learn some new software in the first pass, I am setting myself up for failure. When I learn something new, I might decide to read a chapter in a relevant book many times.
Each time I make a new pass, I gain a deeper understanding.
April 13, 2012 at 16:29 |
moises
moises
Moises, I agree with you -- little and often to an extreme is as bad as anything else taken to an extreme. It becomes short-sighted and mutates.
In the past, well before I discovered AF, I would rewrite the same thing onto my daily list for weeks with no other action. Now, my absolute minimum before rewriting is noting how long it's been hanging around, and copying a brief history, so next time it comes up I can see "Jan 2008, Feb 2009, Apr 2009, Sept 2011". Eventually, that chain encourages me to do more than recopy it yet again.
I'm still struggling with little and often. Usually I do little and skip the often, so of course it doesn't work. I'm finding, though, that it works for more things than I expected. I'm keeping momentum with many bucket list projects that would normally be boom-or-bust (mostly bust).
I hear you about multiple passes. I'm currently reading a big, famous, popular book that's been on my bucket list since high school. Little and often is the only way I could do it.
As for touching each paper only once? Go to kitchen for knife, open envelope, realize it's a bill, come back to office, turn on computer, pay bill online, record payment in accounting program, go downstairs, open cabinet, find file, file it -- all without putting it down -- close cabinet, then repeat for the next paper. It's easier to take a batch of papers through each step. Open all the envelopes. Sort them. Pay all bills. Update the records properly. Leave paper in "to be filed" tray. Take stack downstairs and file them.
In the past, well before I discovered AF, I would rewrite the same thing onto my daily list for weeks with no other action. Now, my absolute minimum before rewriting is noting how long it's been hanging around, and copying a brief history, so next time it comes up I can see "Jan 2008, Feb 2009, Apr 2009, Sept 2011". Eventually, that chain encourages me to do more than recopy it yet again.
I'm still struggling with little and often. Usually I do little and skip the often, so of course it doesn't work. I'm finding, though, that it works for more things than I expected. I'm keeping momentum with many bucket list projects that would normally be boom-or-bust (mostly bust).
I hear you about multiple passes. I'm currently reading a big, famous, popular book that's been on my bucket list since high school. Little and often is the only way I could do it.
As for touching each paper only once? Go to kitchen for knife, open envelope, realize it's a bill, come back to office, turn on computer, pay bill online, record payment in accounting program, go downstairs, open cabinet, find file, file it -- all without putting it down -- close cabinet, then repeat for the next paper. It's easier to take a batch of papers through each step. Open all the envelopes. Sort them. Pay all bills. Update the records properly. Leave paper in "to be filed" tray. Take stack downstairs and file them.
April 13, 2012 at 17:42 |
Cricket
Cricket
Cricket: "Moises, I agree with you -- little and often to an extreme is as bad as anything else taken to an extreme. It becomes short-sighted and mutates."
Sorry, I was not being clear. So far, I have not had any experiences to support the notion that L&O can be bad if taken to an extreme. It might be bad, but I have no evidence to show that it is.
My first point was that I do not count thinking as actioning. To me, the word "little" requires doing something, and I do not include thinking in doing. I do include writing in doing.
One of the side benefits of Evernote, is that I can write my thoughts right into the body of the task. As I write, inevitably I refine my ideas.
Sorry, I was not being clear. So far, I have not had any experiences to support the notion that L&O can be bad if taken to an extreme. It might be bad, but I have no evidence to show that it is.
My first point was that I do not count thinking as actioning. To me, the word "little" requires doing something, and I do not include thinking in doing. I do include writing in doing.
One of the side benefits of Evernote, is that I can write my thoughts right into the body of the task. As I write, inevitably I refine my ideas.
April 13, 2012 at 18:56 |
moises
moises
It is logically possible to imagine a case where L&O would be bad. In this scenario, I would spend 20 seconds on everything, barely enough time to get oriented, before changing to something else.
I don't believe that it is probable that this could happen to most people.
From what I've read, people who are trained to use little windows of time, tend to do much better in things like job performance, than those who were not trained and do not use those little windows.
I have been finding that it is fine to spend 5 minutes on something; It keeps it fresh and it seems to incubate in my unconscious.
I don't believe that it is probable that this could happen to most people.
From what I've read, people who are trained to use little windows of time, tend to do much better in things like job performance, than those who were not trained and do not use those little windows.
I have been finding that it is fine to spend 5 minutes on something; It keeps it fresh and it seems to incubate in my unconscious.
April 13, 2012 at 22:29 |
moises
moises
Moises wrote:
<< I do not permit thinking to count as actioning a task ... So, if I write something, anything, about the task, then I consider it actioned >>
I consider thinking an FV action, if I can crystalize it in writing; such as rephrasing the task, logging action done, or exploring options to choose. Notes body in Evernote or "long notes" in other task apps are perfect for this.
Thinking that can't be crystalized into writing is just dreaming.
Dreams are appropriate on a different list, perhaps a "Dismissed" list? ;-)
<< I do not permit thinking to count as actioning a task ... So, if I write something, anything, about the task, then I consider it actioned >>
I consider thinking an FV action, if I can crystalize it in writing; such as rephrasing the task, logging action done, or exploring options to choose. Notes body in Evernote or "long notes" in other task apps are perfect for this.
Thinking that can't be crystalized into writing is just dreaming.
Dreams are appropriate on a different list, perhaps a "Dismissed" list? ;-)
April 14, 2012 at 2:05 |
sabre23t
sabre23t
One thing I've been wondering about is how well it can deal with items that I should decide to drop. The AF systems filtered through tasks and some tasks would be consciously removed from the list after review. I know I tend to want to do more than I have time to do and often feel that I should be doing more than I know how to manage. This results in long lists of tasks being entered on the list that cannot possibly all be dealt with in an adequate way. At some point I will need to decide that some tasks just are not important enough to ever get done.
But I don't see any "automatic" way this system will get rid of them. So I'm a bit hesitant to enter my entire previous list on my FV list as that might just clutter the list and "force" me to start all kinds of projects that I just shouldn't be starting because they should have been "autofocused out" in the first place.
Mark's gives this warning in the instructions:
"The best way to sink any time management system is to overload it right at the beginning. FV is pretty resilient, but at this stage you aren't."
I'm not, so how do I get the system to help me handle the long list I created before starting on FV? Any thoughts?