[whpalmer4]

Originally Posted by Singleton

I must make it very clear that what the dude who was so 'sure' he had figured out what my problem was, really just has not walked a mile in my shoes.

I don't know who this dude to whom you are referring is, because reading the posts interacting with you, I only see people ASKING if this is the behavior you are reporting. Your posting style leaves a bit of room for interpretation.

ALL of the ITEMS were LINKS

does this make sense?

It makes sense that they looked like links, but one can also produce something that looks like a link by customizing the styles. Given that, I prefer not to make any assumptions about what it is.

And who ever thought of setting something from 12AM to 1159pm?
that is great idea....

That's just a precaution in case you have chosen something weird for your default start and due date/times.

why? such extra hassle? adding dates upon dates?
why tell something you are going to be doing it again tommorrow by giving it such precise numbers....sounds like NASA...ooops they forgot the metric system....or was it inches....or yards...or footcandles....I can't remember.

on iCal...I don't have to THUNK such extra baggage.
only to add the item "MEDITATE LIKE GHANDI"
repeat daily.
when you add this option of based on COMPLETION DATE? or START DATE? or was it DUE DATE? isn't that COMPLETION? whatever...
It shouldn't matter if you are making something DAILY REPEAT.
Give me an example of why you would want to set something in these two different methods of decision, and I will understand the reasoning behind the extra decision making. But, if you ask me to fill in a box checked ARE YOU SURE YOU WANT TO REPEAT? or just RE-REPEAT? there is a difference.
One creates a FEEDBACK LOOP....
the other, thinks ahead.

As I explained, OmniFocus offers a more powerful set of choices than iCal does. Some tasks want to repeat starting at the same point in time, regardless of when you finish, others want to repeat at the same interval. If you want iCal's behavior, just always choose "Assigned date" and that's what you will get.

what was happening was I was getting a REPEAT
You try to check it off
it comes right back!
no check it off!
it comes right back!
and you can't see the date....it is on the iphone...

but if you sync it back to the Desktop....

it plays TENNIS CHECK
One gets checked, as the other one is UNCHECKED...
Now you show me in your manual Harding where it says that syncing will create a feedback loop of inadequate productivity.

If you have a repeating action with a short repeat interval (less than a day) available, you can get behavior much like this if you keep checking it off. Hey, look at that, it came back! Better check it off again!

but, again, if you were NOT in my shoes...

you would be such an arrogant piece of work of pride
having already READ the MANUAL
and being such a WISE MANUAL READER.
Would have realized, that it doesn't matter what the manual says, if the INTERFACE, reacts a certain way it is BROKEN.

If the ICE MACHINE keeps pouring out ice....onto the floor.

If the ice machine pours out ice on the floor because someone doesn't understand they should stop pushing the button when the bucket fills up, does that make it broken?

You haven't shown us anything that convincingly demonstrates that OmniFocus' repeating actions are broken, despite your protestations. The forum crowd is usually pretty helpful to those who ask for help, although criticizing people who are attempting to help you for no reward but a sense of satisfaction for having helped someone is an interesting motivational tactic. Do you find it to be generally effective? Here's the last effort I'll make to help you: if you go to the Omni online storefront, search around a bit and you'll find a link to their 30-day refund policy. You did mention that you wanted a refund the other day, and perhaps you'll find a tool more suited to your unique needs. Good luck with that!

And, this was a bug.

I don't have this happening anymore since I have trashed the preferences.

Here's a helpful tip for next time: the first rule of intelligent tinkering is to keep all the pieces! Renaming the preferences file would have been quite sufficient to test the corrupted preferences hypothesis, and would allow a post-mortem comparison if the problem turned out to be the preferences file. No doubt you feel that you shouldn't have to do this, having paid your money, and I completely agree that you have no contractual obligation to do so. Think of it as your opportunity to be part of the solution rather than the problem. We might already have an understanding of what had to happen to get your program in that state, and possibly even a fix, had you simply renamed the file instead of destroying it. File this under "making it easier for others to help me"...