View Single Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weasel
I agree with GeekLady here. I see the need of having priorities after trying OF for roughly a month now. Also, as far as I understand GTD, priorities are a part of it even if only the least of it.
Priority is a part of GTD, but priorities change as circumstances change. Ignoring this reality is a certain step to failure which is why the GTD framework summarily rejects arbitrary priority numbering systems. I just see no value in trying to predict priorities ahead of time (which is all assigning a priority in OF would amount to) when I'm perfectly capable of deciding what on my current list of action items (after I've already narrowed it down by context, time available and energy available) is the highest priority right now. The whole point of GTD is to train your mind to make better choices in the moment (when most choices end up being made anyway, all planning ahead aside) so that your decisions effect your life positively rather than arbitrarily. Relying on priority assignment systems ultimately undermines that goal.

I think you're asking for OF to facilitate a broken system rather than taking the (admittedly scary) plunge into GTD the way it's meant to be used. That's fine as a personal choice. I'm by no means a pedant when it comes to pure GTD implementation, but I don't expect non-GTD-like features to show up in GTD-specific applications.

If it can be done in such a way that not only is it optional, but it can be completely hidden, then I see little harm in adding this feature to OF. I think it could be the start of feature creep. I think it could encourage new GTDers to use the priority field as a crutch that ultimately stands in the way of them really understanding the usefulness of the next action list. I think it could slow down the release of OF 1.0. And I think it's borderline pointless if you can order your tasks in the list anyway to mimic a priority feature.

But on a personal level, as long as I can turn it off, it won't interfere with me.