[paulduv]

Yes, but it's still breaking the system by design, is it not?

So many people argue that there shouldn't be prioritizing in OF, because it doesn't fit in GTD. (I don't have an opinion on whether those who would use it should have it, but for me, the GTD framework, and how OF implements it, is fantastic.)

Well, this system is actually a prioritizing system, like priority 1,2,3... but much, much worse. When you're consulting OF for what's available, it turns out you've been forced to rank your actions in all of two possible ways:

• something you can do next
• oblivion

You're saying that the Show Next Actions view is meant to show only a small list of possible actions to take... What could possibly be the justification for that?! The length of that list should be totally up to me. When I have 20 next actions, of course I want to see 20 next actions.

And, by the way, I would expect to have at least that number at any one time, in my life, and I'd like to trust the list. If that list is too much for me, then OF shouldn't just not let me see more, I should absolutely see them all, and drill down and fix things, if I choose. Hiding them doesn't mean their not there. So it's actually just making it harder for me to deal with many available tasks, not easier by any means.

Again: is it me?! This seems to be about as clearly broken a behaviour as one could hope to find (or not find). There are a lot of threads, it seems, where people say, "let me explain to you why you don't really want that". Those opposing views very often have some merit, and they're often to do with keeping OF as simple as possible. However, this is in a different class. I can't see how it's logically defensible this is a key, fundamentally inconsistent, utterly broken way of handling (let's not forget) parallel projects.

Don't mean to be huffy, I'm not! I'm trying to be totally clear: by the very definitions of parallel versus sequential projects, as well as their reason for existing, is this not, quite simply and exactly wrong to omit all but the latest task in a parallel list?