FV and FVP Forum > FVP tweak: The task that "stands out" in the first active page is the first task of the chain.
nuntym:
You do realise that this doesn't actually make any difference at all (except to your own perception of what's happening)?
You do realise that this doesn't actually make any difference at all (except to your own perception of what's happening)?
August 27, 2015 at 11:47 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
@Mark Forster:
Uhm not exactly I think, but close enough. That is what I surmised both theoretically, when I first thought or it, and practically, when I was doing it. It is actually still FVP, but the perception changes.
However, what do you think, Mark? What if you don't even retain the "first page" rule and just mark the first item that stands out from the beginning of your list, regardless of what page you find it in?
Uhm not exactly I think, but close enough. That is what I surmised both theoretically, when I first thought or it, and practically, when I was doing it. It is actually still FVP, but the perception changes.
However, what do you think, Mark? What if you don't even retain the "first page" rule and just mark the first item that stands out from the beginning of your list, regardless of what page you find it in?
August 27, 2015 at 12:05 |
nuntym
nuntym
nuntym:
The basic difference between your new method and standard FVP is that when you have finished a chain (i.e. done the first task you have marked) you can start the next chain with either a task further back in the list or further down the list. In standard FVP you would have the choice of either doing the first task on the list or starting a new chain with a task further down the list.
How much practical difference do you think this makes?
The basic difference between your new method and standard FVP is that when you have finished a chain (i.e. done the first task you have marked) you can start the next chain with either a task further back in the list or further down the list. In standard FVP you would have the choice of either doing the first task on the list or starting a new chain with a task further down the list.
How much practical difference do you think this makes?
August 27, 2015 at 13:04 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
Mark - this raises a question I've had. Once the list is down to just one task, can you start the chain with ANY task below it, or do you have to start with the first task after the last one done? I'm just a little fuzzy on the "ruling" there :-)
August 28, 2015 at 2:56 |
Kyle N
Kyle N
Kyle N:
The rule in standard FVP is always the same. You can dot more tasks only from the task you have just done. If you don't understand why this is, try sorting a random list of numbers using the algorithm. If they don't come out in the right order, you're doing it wrong!
The rule in standard FVP is always the same. You can dot more tasks only from the task you have just done. If you don't understand why this is, try sorting a random list of numbers using the algorithm. If they don't come out in the right order, you're doing it wrong!
August 28, 2015 at 10:09 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
@Mark Forster: <<How much practical difference do you think this makes?>>
In practice, the difference is that, in the tweak, when I get to choose the first task in the list, I want to do it already. That is, it is either the one that "stands out" in the first page or it is the last one in the page; if it was the latter, then I want to do it just for the sake of crossing out that page. The rest of the chain are all tasks I want to do more than the first selected one, but in the end it means that all of the tasks in the chain are things I want to do.
That is not necessarily what happens In standard FVP. The first task in the list would not necessarily be something I want to do (i.e. ready to do) in the first place. Therefore, it can be jarring (at least for me) that I would be called to do by my FVP chain something quite unpleasant after I did something that I did want to do.
Now, I know that because of how FVP works I can delay doing the first task to a considerable degree, but the mere fact that I "pre-selected" it already, as per the FVP instructions, means that it is at the back of my mind. The tweak gives me the chance to at least keep the first task out of the chain looping until I am ready (i.e. I want) to do it.
Therefore, the tweak changes task-chain-making from selecting things I want to do so I delay doing something I do not want to do, to a way of ordering the tasks I want to be done. At least, that is how it feels to me.
In practice, the difference is that, in the tweak, when I get to choose the first task in the list, I want to do it already. That is, it is either the one that "stands out" in the first page or it is the last one in the page; if it was the latter, then I want to do it just for the sake of crossing out that page. The rest of the chain are all tasks I want to do more than the first selected one, but in the end it means that all of the tasks in the chain are things I want to do.
That is not necessarily what happens In standard FVP. The first task in the list would not necessarily be something I want to do (i.e. ready to do) in the first place. Therefore, it can be jarring (at least for me) that I would be called to do by my FVP chain something quite unpleasant after I did something that I did want to do.
Now, I know that because of how FVP works I can delay doing the first task to a considerable degree, but the mere fact that I "pre-selected" it already, as per the FVP instructions, means that it is at the back of my mind. The tweak gives me the chance to at least keep the first task out of the chain looping until I am ready (i.e. I want) to do it.
Therefore, the tweak changes task-chain-making from selecting things I want to do so I delay doing something I do not want to do, to a way of ordering the tasks I want to be done. At least, that is how it feels to me.
August 28, 2015 at 11:01 |
nuntym
nuntym
At first I thought it was a little odd to have the first task on the chain be whatever just happens to be the first item, rather than something I actively choose. But most of the time, it works pretty well. That first position is a sort of spotlight - a special, extra motivation to do some valuable but drab thing that otherwise never quite stood out.
I might not do that first task right away, but usually I am eager to do it soon. Since it's at the top of the list, it's a fairly old task that I've been ignoring for a long time. The prospect of finally getting it out of the way is very pleasing.
On the other hand, if after several days I still haven't felt like doing that first task, or even worse if my resistance seems to be increasing (as if I feel I'm being nagged), I move it to the end of the list. There, it is out of the spotlight. I still have countless chances to do it, but I don't have to put it in the chain if I don't want to.
The good news is that not one such "renewed" task has made it all the way back to the very top of the list. All have been acted on, completed, superseded, nullified, or deleted before getting to to the top.
The bad news is that it isn't possible for any renewed task to have made it to the top yet, at the top I still have a dozen or so prehistoric tasks that date back to my first AF1 a couple of months ago, or even earlier. But FVP is helping me pick them off, one at a time, in a way that AF1 couldn't quite do.
IIRC, Nuntym (and a lot of people) don't keep as many ancient tasks on their list as I do, and their tasks probably make their way from bottom to top a lot faster than mine and therefore there is no special benefit to putting that first item in the spotlight. In which case, I can understand why it might be bothersome, annoying, weird, or otherwise not ideal to have this somewhat arbitrary thing at the head of every chain regardless of its momentary irrelevance.
Nuntym, does your tweak influence the time it takes you to act on the first task?
I might not do that first task right away, but usually I am eager to do it soon. Since it's at the top of the list, it's a fairly old task that I've been ignoring for a long time. The prospect of finally getting it out of the way is very pleasing.
On the other hand, if after several days I still haven't felt like doing that first task, or even worse if my resistance seems to be increasing (as if I feel I'm being nagged), I move it to the end of the list. There, it is out of the spotlight. I still have countless chances to do it, but I don't have to put it in the chain if I don't want to.
The good news is that not one such "renewed" task has made it all the way back to the very top of the list. All have been acted on, completed, superseded, nullified, or deleted before getting to to the top.
The bad news is that it isn't possible for any renewed task to have made it to the top yet, at the top I still have a dozen or so prehistoric tasks that date back to my first AF1 a couple of months ago, or even earlier. But FVP is helping me pick them off, one at a time, in a way that AF1 couldn't quite do.
IIRC, Nuntym (and a lot of people) don't keep as many ancient tasks on their list as I do, and their tasks probably make their way from bottom to top a lot faster than mine and therefore there is no special benefit to putting that first item in the spotlight. In which case, I can understand why it might be bothersome, annoying, weird, or otherwise not ideal to have this somewhat arbitrary thing at the head of every chain regardless of its momentary irrelevance.
Nuntym, does your tweak influence the time it takes you to act on the first task?
August 29, 2015 at 0:06 |
JulieBulie
JulieBulie
@JulieBulie:
<<I might not do that first task right away, but usually I am eager to do it soon. Since it's at the top of the list, it's a fairly old task that I've been ignoring for a long time. The prospect of finally getting it out of the way is very pleasing. >>
I envy you! That almost never happens to me when it comes to old tasks. For me, old tasks are old because they never felt "ready" to me so that I'd "want" to do them.
<<But most of the time, it works pretty well. That first position is a sort of spotlight - a special, extra motivation to do some valuable but drab thing that otherwise never quite stood out.>>
I know I am quoting you out of order here now, but I like your metaphor of shining a spotlight. If I may use it to illuminate (heh) my point further: You say "But most of the time, it works pretty well" because you realize you are getting ready to work on it; you have ignored it long enough. But what about the other times aside from "most of the time"?
What I am proposing though is to shine that same spotlight, not just on the oldest task, but the oldest tasks, that is, the tasks in the oldest page. By shining on them you are giving them all a chance to shine and you would pick the one that you feel you are ready to do, or at least more ready to do than the rest. Now it works pretty well not just most of the time but, if I dare say it, all the time.
<<IIRC, Nuntym (and a lot of people) don't keep as many ancient tasks on their list as I do,>>
I don't know about that ;-)
<<Nuntym, does your tweak influence the time it takes you to act on the first task?>>
Yes it can make choosing the first task slower, but not by much. I found myself choosing the first task surprisingly often.
However in my mind it is not the choosing of the first task that is important but the speed of crossing out of the oldest pages, and to be honest I see no difference with standard FVP as of yet. I am not surprised by this, and in fact I expected it, since I and then Mark Forster noted it changes the mechanics of FVP only little. But then I have only a small notebook with 21 lines per page so I do not know if that contributes to it.
<<I might not do that first task right away, but usually I am eager to do it soon. Since it's at the top of the list, it's a fairly old task that I've been ignoring for a long time. The prospect of finally getting it out of the way is very pleasing. >>
I envy you! That almost never happens to me when it comes to old tasks. For me, old tasks are old because they never felt "ready" to me so that I'd "want" to do them.
<<But most of the time, it works pretty well. That first position is a sort of spotlight - a special, extra motivation to do some valuable but drab thing that otherwise never quite stood out.>>
I know I am quoting you out of order here now, but I like your metaphor of shining a spotlight. If I may use it to illuminate (heh) my point further: You say "But most of the time, it works pretty well" because you realize you are getting ready to work on it; you have ignored it long enough. But what about the other times aside from "most of the time"?
What I am proposing though is to shine that same spotlight, not just on the oldest task, but the oldest tasks, that is, the tasks in the oldest page. By shining on them you are giving them all a chance to shine and you would pick the one that you feel you are ready to do, or at least more ready to do than the rest. Now it works pretty well not just most of the time but, if I dare say it, all the time.
<<IIRC, Nuntym (and a lot of people) don't keep as many ancient tasks on their list as I do,>>
I don't know about that ;-)
<<Nuntym, does your tweak influence the time it takes you to act on the first task?>>
Yes it can make choosing the first task slower, but not by much. I found myself choosing the first task surprisingly often.
However in my mind it is not the choosing of the first task that is important but the speed of crossing out of the oldest pages, and to be honest I see no difference with standard FVP as of yet. I am not surprised by this, and in fact I expected it, since I and then Mark Forster noted it changes the mechanics of FVP only little. But then I have only a small notebook with 21 lines per page so I do not know if that contributes to it.
August 29, 2015 at 2:45 |
nuntym
nuntym
Update on the tweak:
Almost a week of using this tweak and I am liking it more and more. Being able to initially ask myself "What do I want to do?" followed by "What do I want to do more than that?" is really empowering. The kind of initial task I choose also seems to guide me on what kinds of tasks I choose next for the chain, sort of like how "Dotting Power" works but in a more subconscious way.
As for the speed I close older pages: interestingly, I seem to be getting faster in closing them than in standard FVP. This might be because my chains seem to be shorter than before, which means I get to start chains more frequently and thus tick off old tasks faster.
I will report more in the upcoming days if I continue using it.
Almost a week of using this tweak and I am liking it more and more. Being able to initially ask myself "What do I want to do?" followed by "What do I want to do more than that?" is really empowering. The kind of initial task I choose also seems to guide me on what kinds of tasks I choose next for the chain, sort of like how "Dotting Power" works but in a more subconscious way.
As for the speed I close older pages: interestingly, I seem to be getting faster in closing them than in standard FVP. This might be because my chains seem to be shorter than before, which means I get to start chains more frequently and thus tick off old tasks faster.
I will report more in the upcoming days if I continue using it.
August 31, 2015 at 17:10 |
nuntym
nuntym
Heh, my notebook has 22 lines per page. :-)
Nuntym's question: But what about the other times aside from "most of the time"?
I said that on those occasions I renew them (rewrite at the end of the list) if they hang around for too long. Granted, I could just scan down the page and start my chain with something else; but then it would be a long time before task #2 could get the spotlight.
If a task is so resistible that even the spotlight doesn't help, then hopefully after I renew/reformulate it, seeing it "out of context" (on that new page, with different neighbors) will help. So far, it actually has helped with some of the stubborn tasks. But I'm sure that some will be stubborn enough to rise to the #1 spot a second time. I'm not sure what I'll do when that happens, but I KNOW I won't give them a third chance.
Most likely I will dismiss any task that makes two full trips up the list, and wait for the eventual "crisis" that makes it "stand out" on its own.
As for why I don't put the spotlight on some other old task: For me, the spotlight works in part precisely because I'm not choosing where to shine it. The old tasks on page one have never "stood out." Odds are, they never will. I'll reiterate that these are the "broccoli tasks." They are the "should" tasks. I've been looking at them for so long that by now, they are almost invisible. Or they seem like an indistinguishable moldy mass. But when one of them enters the spotlight, I can focus on just that one and ignore the rest of them!
Nuntym's question: But what about the other times aside from "most of the time"?
I said that on those occasions I renew them (rewrite at the end of the list) if they hang around for too long. Granted, I could just scan down the page and start my chain with something else; but then it would be a long time before task #2 could get the spotlight.
If a task is so resistible that even the spotlight doesn't help, then hopefully after I renew/reformulate it, seeing it "out of context" (on that new page, with different neighbors) will help. So far, it actually has helped with some of the stubborn tasks. But I'm sure that some will be stubborn enough to rise to the #1 spot a second time. I'm not sure what I'll do when that happens, but I KNOW I won't give them a third chance.
Most likely I will dismiss any task that makes two full trips up the list, and wait for the eventual "crisis" that makes it "stand out" on its own.
As for why I don't put the spotlight on some other old task: For me, the spotlight works in part precisely because I'm not choosing where to shine it. The old tasks on page one have never "stood out." Odds are, they never will. I'll reiterate that these are the "broccoli tasks." They are the "should" tasks. I've been looking at them for so long that by now, they are almost invisible. Or they seem like an indistinguishable moldy mass. But when one of them enters the spotlight, I can focus on just that one and ignore the rest of them!
August 31, 2015 at 17:24 |
JulieBulie
JulieBulie
nuntym:
<< Now, I know that because of how FVP works I can delay doing the first task to a considerable degree, but the mere fact that I "pre-selected" it already, as per the FVP instructions, means that it is at the back of my mind.>>
I don't really like the idea (expressed by several commenters) that FVP consists of a series of pre-selected chains each starting with the first task on the list. This makes it sound too much like FV.
As I've said several times in earlier threads, FVP works on an entirely diffferent principle from FV. It is an algorithm for putting tasks in the best order, according to whatever definition of "best" you want to use. The algorithm will sort any series into a defined order. The most obvious is sorting numbers. If you apply the FVP algorithm to a series of random numbers it will sort them into numerical order.
Now suppose that you are sorting a list of numbers into ascending numerical order and it just happens that the first number on the list is also the highest number. That number is going to be "preselected" for the entire sort - only going to its correct place at the end of the sort. Therefore the fact that the first number is preselected means nothing except that, like every other number, it will eventually get sorted to the correct place in the sequence.
<< Now, I know that because of how FVP works I can delay doing the first task to a considerable degree, but the mere fact that I "pre-selected" it already, as per the FVP instructions, means that it is at the back of my mind.>>
I don't really like the idea (expressed by several commenters) that FVP consists of a series of pre-selected chains each starting with the first task on the list. This makes it sound too much like FV.
As I've said several times in earlier threads, FVP works on an entirely diffferent principle from FV. It is an algorithm for putting tasks in the best order, according to whatever definition of "best" you want to use. The algorithm will sort any series into a defined order. The most obvious is sorting numbers. If you apply the FVP algorithm to a series of random numbers it will sort them into numerical order.
Now suppose that you are sorting a list of numbers into ascending numerical order and it just happens that the first number on the list is also the highest number. That number is going to be "preselected" for the entire sort - only going to its correct place at the end of the sort. Therefore the fact that the first number is preselected means nothing except that, like every other number, it will eventually get sorted to the correct place in the sequence.
September 1, 2015 at 1:16 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
JulieBulie:
<< On the other hand, if after several days I still haven't felt like doing that first task, or even worse if my resistance seems to be increasing (as if I feel I'm being nagged), I move it to the end of the list. >>
In theory this should make no difference to when you do the task - as you can see if you think about what I have just written in response to nuntym.
<< On the other hand, if after several days I still haven't felt like doing that first task, or even worse if my resistance seems to be increasing (as if I feel I'm being nagged), I move it to the end of the list. >>
In theory this should make no difference to when you do the task - as you can see if you think about what I have just written in response to nuntym.
September 1, 2015 at 1:19 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
I know it's not the same as the FV chain, but don't know another name for it. I tried calling it "the selection" for a while, but that's really ambiguous. And "currently dotted tasks" is cumbersome.
September 1, 2015 at 1:20 |
JulieBulie
JulieBulie
Interesting. In practice I find that I don't pay any attention whatsoever to the items already preselected on my list. I spend most of my time toward the end of the list. It's always a pleasant surprise to return to those earlier items to find them still relevant and ready to be done.
September 1, 2015 at 4:22 |
Seraphim
Seraphim
@Mark Forster:
<<As I've said several times in earlier threads, FVP works on an entirely diffferent principle from FV. It is an algorithm for putting tasks in the best order, according to whatever definition of "best" you want to use. The algorithm will sort any series into a defined order. The most obvious is sorting numbers. If you apply the FVP algorithm to a series of random numbers it will sort them into numerical order.>>
Well, I did what I should have done in the beginning when I thought of this tweak: I tried using it on a series of random numbers. I used http://www.random.org/sequences/ to randomize 1 to 48 and printed three copies of it on the same paper, side by side in columns. I then divided the sequences to four to represent four pages with 12 items each.
On the left column I did standard FVP using the question "What is greater than x?"
On the middle column, to simulate someone using the tweak who scans the whole first page to find a task that "stands out", I used the questions "What is the greatest number in the first page?" followed by "What is greater than x?"
On the right column, to simulate someone using the tweak who scans down from the top to mark the first task that "stands out", I used the question "Scanning down from the top, what is the first number I will encounter greater than 24 before I get to the end of the first page, or if I cannot find one what is the greatest number in the first page?" followed by "What is greater than x?"
I did all three in parallel, at the same time.
What I found was [[there was no difference in the sequence of tasks done for all three]].
I doubled the size of the simulated pages, dividing the columns into two "pages" of 24 items each. Still the same result.
To be honest I am surprised by the results, and that probably means that the observations that I posted yesterday may have been a placebo effect of some sort since I never did start again from scratch.
I probably should have listened to you when you said: <<You do realise that this doesn't actually make any difference at all (except to your own perception of what's happening)? >>
But then I am glad I kept up using this tweak. My outlook on standard FVP may still be wrong, yet what I am using now theoretically works as well as FVP. Couple that with my delight of having series of pre-selected chains each starting with a task I want to do, resulting with all of them being tasks I want to do but in varying degrees, and it really feels like I am having cake and still eating it.
<<As I've said several times in earlier threads, FVP works on an entirely diffferent principle from FV. It is an algorithm for putting tasks in the best order, according to whatever definition of "best" you want to use. The algorithm will sort any series into a defined order. The most obvious is sorting numbers. If you apply the FVP algorithm to a series of random numbers it will sort them into numerical order.>>
Well, I did what I should have done in the beginning when I thought of this tweak: I tried using it on a series of random numbers. I used http://www.random.org/sequences/ to randomize 1 to 48 and printed three copies of it on the same paper, side by side in columns. I then divided the sequences to four to represent four pages with 12 items each.
On the left column I did standard FVP using the question "What is greater than x?"
On the middle column, to simulate someone using the tweak who scans the whole first page to find a task that "stands out", I used the questions "What is the greatest number in the first page?" followed by "What is greater than x?"
On the right column, to simulate someone using the tweak who scans down from the top to mark the first task that "stands out", I used the question "Scanning down from the top, what is the first number I will encounter greater than 24 before I get to the end of the first page, or if I cannot find one what is the greatest number in the first page?" followed by "What is greater than x?"
I did all three in parallel, at the same time.
What I found was [[there was no difference in the sequence of tasks done for all three]].
I doubled the size of the simulated pages, dividing the columns into two "pages" of 24 items each. Still the same result.
To be honest I am surprised by the results, and that probably means that the observations that I posted yesterday may have been a placebo effect of some sort since I never did start again from scratch.
I probably should have listened to you when you said: <<You do realise that this doesn't actually make any difference at all (except to your own perception of what's happening)? >>
But then I am glad I kept up using this tweak. My outlook on standard FVP may still be wrong, yet what I am using now theoretically works as well as FVP. Couple that with my delight of having series of pre-selected chains each starting with a task I want to do, resulting with all of them being tasks I want to do but in varying degrees, and it really feels like I am having cake and still eating it.
September 1, 2015 at 12:24 |
nuntym
nuntym
nuntym:
My most important bit of advice has always been "If you find something that works for you then stick to it".
My most important bit of advice has always been "If you find something that works for you then stick to it".
September 1, 2015 at 17:56 |
Mark Forster
Mark Forster
No wonder Nuntym and I see this so differently. I see the first-page tasks as broccoli. Nuntym sees them as cake. :-)
September 1, 2015 at 19:07 |
JulieBulie
JulieBulie
I was about to joke about broccoli cakes, but it was too horrible to even think about >,<
Thanks Mark!
Thanks Mark!
September 2, 2015 at 19:47 |
nuntym
nuntym
1. As said in the title, scan the first active page until a task "stands out".
2. Mark this task, then treat it as the first task in your task chain making. Ignore the tasks above it.
3. Do the task chain as usual for FVP
I like this tweak because the first task now feels more relevant, and yet it does not adversely affect the lack of need of FVP for a dismissal procedure. In fact, once there is only one task in the first page I usually do it right away because I am more eager now to close that page and do the next one!