Get Everything Done

I like it, but have the same problem I had withthe original FV, and a problem that Mark warns about, my list it too big to get through on one go.

My solution for today is to start at the first item of yesterday, which is what I had done with my random AF setup. I am also trying to keep my chains to no longer than 5 things to see if that helps as well in getting stuff donw and not bogged down on the long list.

After completing my first week of original AF, I'm not ready to jump into a new system just yet. But, it'll probably be just a few more weeks before I begin to drift; I've already identified some variations (DWM, SF, etc.) that I'll be excited to try.

But something about original FV put me off: "what do I want to do before I do X." I can't seem to stick with a sequential plan, unless the sequence is reinforced by geography (for errands) or other factors. I could see myself wasting a lot of time building new chains.

At first (a mere seven hours ago when I first saw it), I thought FVP's "what do I want to do" approach would solve that problem. But as I study the algorithm, it appears that the odds against the first item ever getting done are astronomical, because the new algorithm so strongly favors items at the end of the list.

That's not a problem in the example, because we're not adding new items. However, in practice, I think I can easily come up with enough new tasks (especially with the re-entry of enjoyable but unfinished tasks) to avoid ever having to look at that first item again unless I force myself to restart frequently. Even then, the first task will likely get buried no matter what it is.

Granted, if the first item becomes urgent, I will do it regardless of the list. But I'm more concerned that this system is inherently biased against the earliest entries no matter what they are. This is harmless for people who don't jot down their every fleeting whim, but it could be difficult for people like me who "need" to put everything on their list. The first few items I think of will likely be more important but less exciting than the whimsical, frivolous stuff I'll come up with later on. But because this version favors freshness, I'll drown in the whims of the day.

AF prevents this by keeping the each page active until I'm no longer willing to work on any of its remaining items when I first look at that page. Then I have to dismiss everything on that page. I can take that seriously! But I don't see any dismissal rules for FVP at all, so after a while, I'll be so used to seeing (and ignoring) the first item that it will become meaningless. (Maybe the problem goes away if if I re-enter that first item at the end of the list, but will I do that if I don't have to?)

Or am I missing something? Does FVP deal with only one page at a time, so that most pages are static and not subject to the problem I described?

I've been using it today with great success. The biggest surprise is that it's helping get some things done that used to have an "ugh-field" associated with them, like fixing my window shade.

The other surprise is that I'm getting meatier, more important tasks rather than the smaller, 'urgent' tasks that tended to get done more with FV. With FV, I'd often check email and other tasks that had empty inboxes because it was quick and easy, rather than work on Big Project, even though, really I wanted Project X done more than I wanted to check email.

It took a while to get the hang of the algorithm, but it makes sense: Basically, you're scanning through the list with the goal of finding what you want to do the most. It kinda reminds me of selection and some other approaches where you can say "Well yes, this part is already 'in order'" and then just work on the new part.

I haven't had a 're-prioritize' (wipe out preselected things that haven't gotten touched yet) as of this evening. I guess that would be a good time to 'audit' those things and see why they weren't getting done.

@Mark: My idea of starting on the first item from yesterday assumed that when selecting and at the end of the list, you go back to the beginning and go through the list, i.e. you read the whole list regardless of where you are when yo make a selection (unless you get to item where you know it is the item youMOST want to do?

Did I misunderstand?

First day, first thought and first tried
+
§ I am happy that it is a FV system. My list is fully clean and operational
§ I kepts a tips that really help me which is dividing my list per day, so I can see what happened per day immediatly.
-
§ Like in FV there is no dismissing it is sad because I feel reluctant for some items so I did it as with AF1 it is so perfect to decide about things.... Later....
§ The question What do I want to do more than is very complicated to translate in French (I am French) - Finaly what do I want to do before X was easier for me.
§ About the algorythme the ping pong system is tiring for me I felt bloqued on acting about many items.

For the moment I realy prefer my way like I explained in another post with a part of wooba system about selecting the items. But it is just the beginning. I will give a fair trial to the system but if it doesn't work with me I will go back to my system.

Thanks Mark I did not mean this. In my mind it is more
What do I want = Qu'est ce que je veux faire
More than = avant tout autre chose
This = La tache en cours

=> priorities or pleasure or necessity or feeling to do or just for fun or.....

But when I asked
What do I want to do before X it was simple
What do I want = qu'est ce que je veux faire
before X = avant telle ou telle tache

=> = it is in my mind just an urgency or a real necessity

So I just feel the new question more confusing (sorry about this)

It would be great if there would be a FAQ with a proper translation for the selection question in other languages (german, ...), too. It's hard to gather the exact meaning of a question if it is not in your native language.

I thing I did understand the querstion, but I have problems finding a "nice sounding" german translation for it.


"Was will ich lieber machen als X ?" -> this has a strong emphrasis on "like to", so I guess this does not match very well
"Was will ich vor X machen ? -> strong emphrasis on "want to do before", so this does not fit well, this was my question for FV
"Was will ich eher machen als X ?" -> might have an slight emphrasis on a "want to do before", but might be a good match


Maybe someone else has another good suggestion?

@Björn S.

Für mich persönlich ist die Frage ganz klar: "Was tue ich jetzt lieber als X?"

Wie Mark schon schreibt, nicht zu kompliziert machen.

Google translate?

eg

https://translate.google.co.uk/#auto/fr/What%20do%20I%20want%20to%20do%20more%20than%20x%3F

=

Ce que je veux faire plus que x?

When working through FVP on paper, what to do with the list when re-selecting? ie: my list already has dots, but I want to re-go through it. Erase the dots? Re-write the list?

Any apps seem helpful for phone implimentation?

Tommy: my list has no outstanding dots, except the dots in my current preselection. Once I finished working on a task that has a dot on it, I put a line through the whole task, dot and all. If the task isn't completed, I rewrite it at the end of the list where it's open for preselection again. So the only dots I see are dots that have been crossed out with a line -- unless I've banged my head or something!! :)

Some early observations:
First, I can't emphasize enough Mark's advice about trying it before tweaking it. It's wonderful so far.
Just one observation - FV had never really worked for me before. Here's something really odd: Whenever I finished a task with FV I kept scanning ahead to see what I wanted to do before I did the next task on my preselected list. But I'd feel guilty about it because I wasn't using FV correctly, and I interpreted it as a failure to use the system on my part. So I'd stop myself from scanning the list and literally force myself to do the preselected task first, which created a significant amount of psychological drag on the system. This was the problem I had with FV, I just wasn't able to use it, so I eventually abandoned it. How ironic was that? Had I just allowed myself to go ahead and scan the list, I would have hit on something very close to FVP!
Anyway, what I like about this system is that there's no drag on it, I feel very free with it and I'm getting lots of stuff done. It does favour more recent tasks, but only if I let it. I have one early task that I'm procrastinating on, but I don't think the world will come to an end if I don't do it yet. I trust the system, when I'm ready, it'll get done.
So far so good.

Got it.

"Got it" was referring to our response to Tommy. Good question, doesn't happen often with me, but only because it happens that I finish my dotted tasks at the end of the day so far. I guess I'd just scrawl through the dot as well.

@Tommy

Or use that epochal invention, the pencil with attached eraser. Nabokov and Steinbeck supposedly wrote their novels with pencils.

For erasing dots, sometimes I scribble over it like Mark said, and sometimes I use correction tape like this: http://www.amazon.com/Tombow-Mono-Original-Correction-4-Pack/dp/B000UGJO3I/

So far so good.

1) I agree with Paul MacNeil: I feel free with FVP. When I want (yes, because of the "want" in FVP question), it focuses more on urgent tasks, when I want, it focuses more on important tasks... When my mood changes, the "want" changes also... I like many simultaneous levels which are included when I say this "want" word (both rational, emotional and intuitive...) and I like the interplay among them and how I feel that these compounds still change - sometimes my emotion is more prominent, after a while I base my "want" on more rational basis.

2) I like more frequent review of newer tasks (tasks which tend to be at the end of the list) than with FV.

3) With FV I knew: When my preselection is set, I cannot (usually) dot other tasks in the list (unless they become really urgent), that would be against the rules. With FVP, there is much more freedom for psychological readiness (intuition). What I find interesting (and understandable) is, that previously unselected tasks to which I suddenly want to switch after completion of preselected task (= I am psychologically ready to do something new, my mood changes...), tend to be towards the end of the list, so that I CAN very often choose them in FVP.

4) Although, when something is really important/urgent, it is touched and (when tasks is not finished) is rewritten at the end of the list, which means more frequent reviews = higher probability to be chosen.

Perfect algorithm!

My only concern is how FVP will handle longer list (my list has less than 40 items so far). We will see.

Did a real try today. I wrote on paper the all MF sample. Did things one by one. Then I took my own list and did the same. The result is incredible. Will tell you more in one week or so...

Okay. Please bear with me, sometimes I'm slow to "get it"!

Let's say I have a list:
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i

I pre-select items as:
>a
b
c
>d
>e
f
g
h
>I

I do I, then do e (as there is nothing under previously done task I). Then do I ask "what do I want to do more than d, starting under e? Or do I just do d, as there was no items between d & e?

I have a greater feeling of control and am completing more tasks (although that may in part be due to "new system" enthusiasm). FVP certainly deals with the one drawback I perceived with FV - high "priority" tasks being "blocked" for the duration of a chain by higher priority tasks earlier in the list .

I use AF1 at home, and FV at work (previously AF2) as it handles urgency better (I'm a senior IT exec in financial services, with large, geographically diverse teams). The only thing I miss from FV (so far) is the feeling that, once a chain was established, I no longer had to think about what to do next for a while. There was a certain mental ease in just working through a list of tasks that an earlier me had preselected - even if I knew there were tasks towards the end of the list which I might "want" to do more.

Correct! Used AF2, then FV, now FVP.