[eatmytag]

Originally Posted by rdjong

Why doesn't it belong in a project, say "social stuff"? You can make that a parallel project with its tasks ordered by importance, priority or urgency.

There is a thread in this forum where single projects are discussed (http://forums.omnigroup.com/showthread.php?t=3548) and there are both voices in favor of having ordered tasks, and having tasks unordered (all equal priority) as they can truly be done in any order.

Originally Posted by rdjong

The big advantage of limiting the number of *projects* is that it guarantees that you will not be swamped by endlessly many next actions. There can be no more next actions than projects. Note that "folders" or "project groups" don't do this for you.

An effective way to restrict the amount of projects is to make them not too small compared to other projects. If you allow 10 minute tasks to become top level goals (projects), you easily may become overwhelmed by next actions, and the method degrades worst case to a plain todo list.

I can see the point of reducing the number of choices when viewing my next actions. But I still find myself not trusting my ordering/wanting to get an overview of what I have to do. This might not be GTD, but this is where I am now and I believe others with me. I think such a level of freedom is not outside the scope of the current feature set provided by omnifocus?