View Single Post
It seems that 'The David' and his followers think that either the phone calls can be made in any order (so pick the top one if you like) or if they can't that its easy to think about which one should be made first by just looking at the items. I don't think that it always turns out that way. Read on.
Choosing which phone call to make first can be a very complex decision. Having made that complex decision the decision would in my opinion be better stored because the reasoning which led to the decision may not be able to be recalled in detail.
To give you a feeling, let's imagine a set of 4 phone calls:
1. You want to ask Bob to a party but you don't want to ask him unless you know that Jill is coming because Bob doesn't get on with your grandmother (more on her in a sec) and will need to have Jill to talk to. So you delay the call until Jill has replied.
2. You need to call up a caterer to ask for food and the amount of food you order depends on whether both Bob and Jill are coming.
3. You need to call your wife to tell her the final arrangements, including who is coming and how they (including the grandmother) are going to be getting to you.
4. You need to call up a taxi for your grandmother but she will only need one if Bob is not coming because if Bob is coming you won't need to call the taxi.

I have made these 4 phone calls off the top of my head but can you not see that real life requires some very complex sequencing decisions to be made and that the rationale that eventually governs the order can be difficult to recall? I therefore want my to do program to STORE the final decision regarding the order and I want to empty my head of the rationale that led to the sequencing decision until I decide that circumstances require it to be reexamined.
Yet a program like Omnifocus seems (and "The David"?) seem to fail to recognise that there are times when it's not so much about WHAT needs to be done (the tasks may be small and similar - all phone calls for example) but rather in WHAT ORDER to do things so that unnecessary complication (and even embarrassment - what if Jill doesn't come but you asked Bob before you knew? - awkward!) occurs.
To me this is the battle and challenge of my day. A to do program should help me to not only not drop the ball on areas of responsibility or aspiration (by having an effective review process) but also help me to carefully distill the results of decisions made relating to the SEQUENCE of various actions.

The situations can be much more complex than the one described above. What if the phone calls are to different time zones or what if you only have Bob's work number and his work day is about to end? Do I need to provide more real life complexity or are you getting it?

If I have failed to explain the need to STORE complex sequencing decisions when it comes to a phone call context, what about a project that might be in Omnifocus' own copy of Omnifocus - called "Releasing Omnifocus 2"? Surely making correct sequencing decisions in how to write the code for this new version would be the difference between agony and smooth workflow? And surely the final decided sequence would be so detailed and complex (like many life projects) that the sequence would be difficult to recall.
Of course the example above is really a project called "Dinner Party" and such a project is already sortable within Omnifocus. But if I had included a second complex project in my example there would have been a need to ensure that when completing actions within a phone context that the order of the items completed be as crucial as the one I have described above and therefore that the phone context need its own sorting.

Last edited by usertech; 2013-02-13 at 11:14 PM..