Re: Re[2]: OT sidetracked sisters

Hi Brenda,

On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 6:30 PM, Brenda <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> > cards (Jan-Dec, 1-31).  Interestingly, that was really a 43 folders
> system
> > ... so there is really nothing new on the Internet    I also carried a
> > pocket pack of cards held together with a "bear clip" and that set held
> some
> > reference material as well as my TO DO list.
>
> Actually they recommend much more than 43 folders. For example they
> recommend Sunday-Saturday, how to do your addresses, how to track what you
> have put in storage boxes, etc.


Oh, don't get me wrong, I was only pointing out that the concept was far in
advance of the 43 folders thing on the Internet.  Yes, they had a whole lot
of other advice and tips and tricks.


> They admit in their book where the idea for the card file came from... one
> of the places where one of them worked. (It was heavily modified from that.)


I don't even remember that part.  In any case, they had a whole bunch of
layers on the basic system.  And I liked that they advised NEVER EVER going
out without blank cards and a pen ... and the advice to never buy clothing
without pockets ;-)


>  > would note that the Sidetracked system has as little to do with GtD as
> 3x5
> > cards do.  It is just putting tasks on cards.
>


> The reason I said that the sidetracked system is like GTD is because it is
> file it and forget it.. it will come back. (Actually in GTD it won't come
> back unless you do your weekly review. In the SHE system it will come back
> as long as you look at your cards every day. You won't be doing a weekly
> review. In the AutoFocus system it won't come back unless you can remember
> it or it was one of the ones you rewrote.)


Well, those are different aspects of things.  The weekly review is more for
planning purposes.  I do that no matter what system I am using.  I have
always done reviews to keep myself on track with my goals.  In the SHE
system, it is more about repetitive tasks than it is goals ... though you
can clearly do a goal review and put tasks on cards and file them according
to date ... you can also make things one-time or repeating.  In AF proper,
there is no review or planning or goals (Mark seems to be anti-planning for
some oddly bizarre reason ;-) but I don't see AF as a stand alone thing ...
I use it in conjunction with a calender and planning sessions for goals,
etc.  In fact, I don't view any of these as "complete systems" ... I use
them more like tools.  I mix and match to find a combination which works
best for me.  IOW, *I* am the "system" ;-)


>  > Today I use a system called AutoFocus which you can read about here:
>
> > http://www.markforster.net/autofocus-system/
>
> Thanks for the link. I checked it out.


Welcome.


> I could never do this system.


With respect, you don't really know that.  It is not just a long list, it is
many short closed lists, to use other terminology.  I can only suggest that
if you don't try it you will never know.  I know this is a lot like saying
you can't know if drugs are bad until you take them ... but this really is a
different thing.  It has to do with how you interact with the items on the
list by following the flow the list.

That said, do what you think best.  I'm only here to offer my suggestion and
you can take or leave it based on how sensible I may seem as you read my
posts.



> This list does not allow someone to have a "mind like water" like DA
> recommends.


That is a bit of drug induced crap, so far as I'm concerned.  ;-)  One
achieves inner peace in so far as one connects with one's inner self.  A
better TO DO list is not going to get anyone there.  But I suppose it sells
books.


> You won't have a list of all you need to do. You will only have a list of
> stuff you have to constantly rewrite or forget about.


The list is indeed all one needs to do.  If you use the system, you write it
all down there ... except appointments.


> One of the main reasons I want to do stuff electronically is because I do
> not want to be constantly rewriting my to do list.


You do not "rewrite the list".  You rewrite tasks that are partially
completed.  And it is that very action that makes the system work.  And, to
call it what it is ... four seconds to write two or three words ... not a
big thing.  And the rewriting itself is a micro-review.  One usually rewords
the item as it is rewritten because one has learned something by starting
it.


> I know that some people only list a few things so this would be workable. I
> am someone who could list hundreds of items.


There are people on the form discussing how they are managing 300 pages of
30-50 items per page ... several thousands of items and hundreds added
and/or done each day.  Others have only a few open pages.  It is not the
size, it is the nature of the items on the list that has an impact.

All of that said, I was just giving you a heads up.  I've been down the GtD
road, and the hardware software road.  Take the advice for what it is ...
and my advice is surely worth what you paid for it ;-)

-- 
Cheers,
Mike


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]