[whpalmer4]

What, no interest in my solution to one of your requests? How disappointing. I guess I wasted that 30 seconds spent figuring out the option to do it. I do so want to be your hero ;-)

Still eagerly awaiting an example of how styling action names would make the program better.

[Flexattend]

Originally Posted by whpalmer4

What, no interest in my solution to one of your requests? How disappointing. I guess I wasted that 30 seconds spent figuring out the option to do it. I do so want to be your hero ;-)

Still eagerly awaiting an example of how styling action names would make the program better.

Do your powers of aesthetic discernment have any limits?

[whpalmer4]

Originally Posted by Flexattend

Do your powers of aesthetic discernment have any limits?

They do, which is why I seek your help in finding enlightenment.

Have you finished reformatting your multi-line action names into separate paragraphs yet, now that I've revealed the secret?

[Flexattend]

Originally Posted by whpalmer4

They do, which is why I seek your help in finding enlightenment.

Have you finished reformatting your multi-line action names into separate paragraphs yet, now that I've revealed the secret?

Yes, I have done so, applying what you said, but that's easy and but an oxbow in the GTD stream. As for enlightenment, I've set a due date for it in my Events folder, though I suppose it'll easily arrive by the time I have learned how to "orchestrate" my perspectives, ie., sequence their use, into a definable, repeatable, cyclical flow of work. My argument with "Perspectives" is that it is the one part of OF that does not allow you to get it all out of your mind. I've started using OF itself in a somewhat recursive fashion to try to define and document this desired flow of work but haven't gotten very far. I have seen no succinct summary on the Forum that addresses this.

So it is the Perspectives that render OF a less than trusted system for me. Though you might set me on the path to redemption, if you could help me figger out what in tarnation "Restore" means in the Perspectives. Puleez: do not refer me to lengthy threads elsewhere. I've seen the one that talks about "Perspective X" and his uncle, Current View. I don't wanna hear 'bout that one, cause it enlightens me not.

Restoring sounds like it could even be a good thing. I have really gotten my hopes up over it a good deal. But, then, it's well and good to talk about restoring, but what in the hell is being restored: Some window or other? The continuing upward march of the price of gold? One's self-confidence? The Hapsburg monarchy?

It would be jolly nice to know.

The vacuum of official knowledge about this supposed "feature" is a perfect example of how "laymo" the OF documentation can sometimes be. Who (other than yourself) has adequate time to perform textual exegesis on Forum postings to try to INFER what could so easily and simply be made explicitly clear, were the enlights on in Seattle.

Hey! I just thought of it! Do you think this could be a useful context?

To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing

.
I wish I could bring my ongoing war of OF reorganization to the peace table, ie., settling the endless disputes between multiple competing schemas for organizing the thousand-plus actions I have, my folders, projects, contexts, perspectives; all of them in a state of perpetual, partially realized implementation(s). They are the side-product of taking too much advice from the Forum and other Internet GTD postings about this, that or the other brand, flavor of GTD and/or OF use.

The situation kind of brings to mind the old folk wisdom that the wonderful thing about OF is that it's so flexible; and that the horrible thing about OF is that it is so flexible.

Your thots and conjugations are welcome, but what I would most merely, just simply appreciate is a single declarative, descriptive sentence on restoring, if you would -- kindly -- please; and don't start that wringin' and twistin' aND RULE-invoking diatribalism. And remember, as they say in warmer climes, it's not the heat; it's the humility that matters.