Quote:
Originally Posted by BwanaZulia
I cannot believe this conversation is still going on.
|
I can’t believe that you’re still complaining that people want a feature which, if implemented, will be transparent to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BwanaZulia
I have read all his books (multiple times), listened to hours of his podcasts, his other CDs and recordings and it always comes down to priority being something that is way to flexible to capture in a tool.
Priority changes, day to day, hour to hour, minute to minute. To spend all your time, capturing, updating, changing and setting priority would be the total opposite of productive and getting anything done.
|
That is oversimplifying to an extreme. No one spends “all their time”*changing and setting priorities, any more than you spend “all your time”*setting contexts, creating next actions, and reviewing tasks. Priorities do NOT change all the time. This statement is ludicrous on the face of it.
Doing the dishes will always be more important than alphabetizing my DVDs, so I would like to make sure that “Doing the dishes”*bubbles up to the top. And since GTD task lists are not sorted in any particular order, why not allow some extra information to sort by? Sure, I could scan the entire list and see what tickles my fancy at a certain point in time, but why not save myself some time and have more-important tasks near the top?
Personally, I think that David Allen is a little too absolute when it comes to GTD rules. For example, why does OmniFocus show tasks that are overdue? According to GTD, you should only set a due date when the task MUST BE completed by that date, and is worthless after that. So if OF is strict GTD, it should hide overdue tasks. But it doesn’t. Why? Because OF is MORE FLEXIBLE than strict GTD. Adding priorities is another way that OF could be more flexible and more useful to more people.