View Single Post
Originally Posted by laura View Post
Some of us can actuall evaluate tasks and know which ones are the most important for the day, and not based on how long they take (which strikes me as a ludicrous idea).
Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but GTD does call for prioritization. The difference is that they're not explicitly recorded in the system because, by David Allen's reckoning, priorities are ephemeral, frequently changing, and entirely relative to the other actions on your list and the situation you're in.

So once you've established your context, and have a reasonably-sized list of items that can be acted upon, you scan down the list and prioritize them on the spot. Merlin Mann did a nice job explaining this approach at the recent OmniFocus Meetup in San Francisco. I think he called it the "Hair on Fire" system. :)

Given a reasonably-sized list of options, the human brain is very good at making these impromptu judgments. And this approach is much more flexible than rigidly recording arbitrary priority assignments with a numerical or alphabetical value on your list. And without recording priorities, they never need to be managed or updated in the system.

I think that's the reasoning behind the current implementation in OmniFocus. And I've actually found it quite liberating to get away from traditional priority tracking.

Originally Posted by laura View Post
Me, I need more, and I guess my investment on this app was wasted in the battle against dogma.
If you *must* have traditional, Franklin-Covey style priority tracking, then maybe a GTD app is not the right tool for the job.

Blaming dogma, however, is a straw man argument. I don't think anyone claimed there's only one way to do this. Arguing against priorities is no more dogmatic than arguing for priorities.

OmniFocus was inspired by the GTD methodology. It says that clearly on the product's web page. I don't think it should be a big surprise that the app actually favors that approach over others.