autofocus was Re[8]: OT sidetracked sisters

Hi Mike,

Tuesday, April 14, 2009, 5:05:29 AM, you wrote:

> Mark is from England and so English is not his first language ;-) ;-)
> Seriously, I have big problems with his instructions.  I had to puzzle it
> out and even drew a flow chart ... several others had to draw flow charts to
> understand it.  When I drew the chart I realized that I had misunderstood.
> Even after that, I STILL had some misunderstanding.  Mark does not get that
> his instructions read like Chinese instructions to connect a stereo ;-)

I think what I mostly read was the stuff up to the quick start info... I don't think he should have quick info because it is so "quick" the person doesn't understand it. There doesn't seem to be enough there.

I downloaded some of the flowcharts.

> The other thing is that it is not just a "list" but a method of processing
> and the method has to be experienced ... because how you process things
> affects your attitude toward them.  It is hard to explain ... it just has to
> be experienced.  

I think I get what you mean.

> an nutty way of looking at "going shopping".  I don't have a context list
> for @Hardware Store ... I have a shopping list!   My mind was getting all

I didn't think the context was @Hardware Store I thought it was just @Errands so when you went out shopping or whatever you would have a list of stuff you were supposed to do when you were out. You could have "return library books" on @Errands which is not shopping

some people really are messed up enough that if they have a bunch of stuff to do they will drive all over the area instead of planning their stops so they get around town in the most efficient way.

> already knew how to do that.  I knew that if I had to call someone I did not
> need to look at an @Call list ... I just picked up the phone.  Had I
> continued to try to fit myself to this system of infinitely small baby steps
> I'd have wound up drooling ;-)

Well some people might have so many people to call that they can't remember them if they don't have a list.

I think it is a good idea like he says to have a list of stuff you want to talk to the person about when you call so you do not forget what you wanted to say.

Maybe it is the difference between big picture/detail people. I am a details person.. sometimes I have a problem understanding the big picture unless I look at it from the details.

> I have always had lists ... lots and lots of lists ;-)  And they are very
> useful.  I could CALL many of them "context lists", but it is so much
> simpler to call them: "Things do do when I'm in San Francisco", "Good
> restaurants in Dallas", "Things I do every Monday", "Things I do every
> month", "Things to buy at CostCo", etc.

I think some of those could be called contexts but not most of them.

> Yeah, that is one confusion people have.  There are numerous posts in the
> forum about what, when, and how to dismiss and what to do about dismissed
> items.  Dismissed items are EXACTLY like "someday/maybe" items.  In fact, I
> prefer the term "someday/maybe" because "dismissed" conveys that they are
> gone.

I noticed some of those posts.

I think it makes more sense to call them someday/maybe but even if he knows of DA he wouldn't just want to use someone else's terms.

> Right, and that is one way in which mixing things works.  The hard thing
> looks easier than the harder thing so it is more likely to get done.  Also,
> if you are faced with a hard rule that you must "dismiss" it or do
> "something" on it, then you will most likely do "something" on it.

Yes but it would seem as you continually do the hard thing because there is a harder thing you dont want to do.. eventually all that would be on the list would be the hardest things.. and then it would be procrastination big time.

> It is not that the system is involved, as in complicated ... it is that the
> way it works on your mind is not obvious and you would not see that from the
> instructions.  So many people read the instructions and then write a post
> saying "That is stupid.  It is just a To Do list with complicated rules.

When I saw it, I was hung up on the dismissing items thing. I thought.. I don't want to write stuff and then if I don't do it when I read through my list I must "dismiss" it.. (which to me meant delete it)

I don't have a problem with following what "expert" people talk about doing... I do it the way they say at least at first. I don't just go off on my own thinking I know better when I am just learning the method.

It seems most people just go off and do their own thing and then wonder why the experts' methods don't work. (Ummm.. maybe because you are not doing his method??)

> What's the big deal?"  But it is just those rules that make it different and
> make it work.  There are many on the forum who complain it is not working
> for them with the great results others express.  When asked to describe what
> they are doing, it turns out that they are treating the whole "list" as a
> big To Do list.  Of course then they are getting the same result they got
> before.  You have to process according to the rules.

Which goes back to the fact that people are having problems with understanding the directions.

> Others jump around the list looking for "important" things to work on.
> Others prioritize the items.  Others tag them (guilty here ... I learned my
> lesson and stopped doing that ;-)  If you just do the processing exactly as
> described for a few days something amazing happens.  Things get done!

I have not tried it yet... I need to read it in depth. I have read more stuff on it but not enough to be ready to do it. (Still reading the SHE book right now. They are heavily reserved even though they are old books. Means I cannot renew them.)

> It is funny what matters and what the effect is.  Mark says that the book
> should be 30 or so lines.  What difference could it possibly make?  Well,
> after trying pages of various lengths, it became clear that size matters

I hadn't ran into that part of it... but that makes sense that it would need to be a certain # of lines.

> start to turn on you ;-)  Imagine putting off an item 100 times before you
> have to come to grips with it!  It would really have teeth and be snarling
> by then, no?  So by experiment he found that 30 was about right.  I

I like that description :-) If I don't do the thing I need to do, it could turn into a monster. For some reason that sounds better than saying it will "turn into a fire" to me...

> confirmed that is about right as well.  My problem is that my lifestyle is
> such that I need to carry the list in my pocket ... so my list is a 3"x5"
> spiral bound vertical format book (10/$4.00 at Sam's Club).  

Not sure if it would help you any.. not sure how many pages you need to carry.. but have you heard of pocketmod? there were some posts on it a while back. It lets you turn 1 piece of 8x11 paper into 8 pages.

> Another thing that changes the way it all works is where you start in the
> morning.  The instruction is to start where you left off.  

Good points

> I thought I never would!  Years ago I kept something called a "Seven Star
> Diary" ... a small ring binder with daily pages.  Later I read Alan Lakien's
> book and did all of my life's goals planning and used his A,B,C 1,2,3
> priority system in conjunction with a calendar.  Better, but I kept
> looking.  I read Covey and liked his Quadrants and kept that part but hated
> his religion and roles and crap.  I read Roger Dawson's system and added it
> to what I had, using an 8x11 ring binder with 43 dividers (J-D, 1-31) plus
> reference sections.  Then from some other guy I picked up the "grass
> catcher" idea as well as numeric filing and a bi-weekly calendar page and
> added those things.  (I ditched the numeric filing as it was to complex for
> me ... alphabetic is good enough for my needs).  I used that for many years
> at IBM and it worked well because I was in an 8x11 environment ... at my
> desk, in a plane, in meetings, etc.  When I retired I became more mobile and
> needed to work out of my pocket ... I hate to carry things in my hands and I
> no longer needed a brief case.  I also no longer needed a complex scheduling
> system because I had no more deliverables to worry about or endless meetings
> to schedule.  I also did not need lots of reference material and memos at my
> fingertips ... so a simpler system was in order.  Then came GtD.

I am not familiar with most of the things you mention above. Anyway this conversation made me think it would be a good idea to have an article about all the different methods so people could check them out.

> I liked some of the concepts but missed prioritizing.  I missed "time
> blocking" to work on big projects.  I though contexts made sense but they
> did not.  Next Actions sounded good but wound up being too dumbed down for
> me. I mostly work on a "project" not "actions".  If I'm going to build a
> deck I'm going to get all dressed up and go out and do "deck building".  I'm
> not going to "get nails", then go back to my list to see that I'm going to
> have to "get hammer".  Just silly.

I think it depends on the person. Some people wouldn't realize that they needed to get the hammer, nails etc unless they wrote it all out. They cannot think without writing it out first that they first need to research building the deck. If you go out all dressed up.. but don't have your materials.. you can't just go to the hardware store. You won't know what to buy. (Well if you had already built decks before maybe you would...)

>   With AF you put anything at all into
> it.  You could put "get nails" but for me it makes sense to put "work on
> deck" and then just KNOW what to do next.  I really can figure things out.
> LOL ;-)

probably because you put in an earlier mail to research it first.. but I bet you most people forget this step. I think they get to the hardware store and have no idea what wood to buy or how much they need.

I know people in my family end up making mistakes because they don't think the project through before they start it. All they are thinking about is how to get it done quickly. For example... my uncle was supposed to fix the horse fence. It is a special fence that is meant to fall down if the horse gets caught in it. He would not look at the info we had.. "I know how to build a fence".. so he made it so that it now cannot fall down like it was designed to do. That is the kind of thing that can happen when a person thinks they know how to do something and they don't need to write out the steps.

> So for me AF is ideal.  I have only ONE master list.  I put things of any
> granularity on it.  I do them when it seems right to do them.  I doubt I'll
> find a better system ... this one does all I want.  (Well, as I have it
> modified for me with planning done in my computer files and using a calendar
> and lists of repetitive items, and planning (blocking) time for big
> projects, etc.)

Glad you found something that works

> Because I thought the idea was good when I read it.  It SHOULD work ... it
> just does not work.  For me, at least.  And it took me trying to fit them
> into my life to find that they failed.  Some of his ideas do work.
> "Someday/maybe" is a great idea.  Contexts suck.  Processing the inbox to
> empty frequently is good, but not obsessively.  Writing things on slips of
> paper and dumping them in the inbox is stupid.  That is what lists are for!

Well probably every system has some stupid stuff in it.

> As to why I'm on the list ... too lazy to unsubscribe, I guess.  ;-)  I
> ditched the bigger GtD list because I could not deal with the nut who runs
> it.  This list has so few posts that it has not gotten in my way.  One day
> I'll purge the remaining GtD related lists, I suppose.

yes it seems many lists are ruined by the people who run them

I have not been using gtd but I am still on the list...

> And BTW, don't get me wrong.  I don't think GtD is a bad system for
> everyone.  It obviously works for some people who live certain kinds of
> lives and who's minds work in certain ways.  Just as I acknowledge that AF
> is too unstructured for some people.  It is probably the case that people
> who need the structure of GtD will not feel at ease in the unstructured
> world of AF.  "What do you mean, scan the page until some item 'stands
> out'.  What does 'stand out' mean?  And 'Build Deck' is not an 'action' at
> all ... it is a project and has to be on a 'project list'."  It is pretty
> clear that some people would not be at home with that ;-)

I saw some post somewhere where someone was talking about writing stuff on their AF list and then later needing to break it down so they would not resist doing it.

I would be someone who would want to write out.. get nails get hammer.. not because I am "that dumb" but because listing out the details helps me to understand the big picture. Actually its not dumb because I am sure you probably need multiple kinds of nails, bolts etc to make a deck.. you can't just go to the hardware store and grab a handful of random nails. they have to be the right size weight etc. If you just bought wood because it "looks nice" you might have bought the wrong wood. If you bought the wrong nails, they might split the wood when you try to hammer them in. 

> And for them I would advise several approaches.  I certainly would write
> things down ... for more reasons than just remembering, in fact.  But I'd
> also advise trying to honor your mind not insult it, as it were.  Remember
> that before there was writing, there were wandering story tellers who sung
> the news from town to town.  They could sing for hours.  The Iliad was sung
> before it was written.  They had incredible memories ... everyone did.  Then
> we started writing and our memories languished.  Now we no longer write ...
> we post, email, blog, etc.  You can just watch attention span dwindle.

Yes I think that if you stressed too much to "write everything down because you can't remember it"... you are going to create the problem in the person.

I saw a demo once where the person told the volunteer "TRY to hold your arm up when I push it down." The person could not. They they just said the same thing and left out the word TRY and the person could do it. Saying the word "try" implanted in the person's mind that it could not be done.

> Exactly.  And worse, if you tell YOURSELF you can't do it.  Just awful.  It
> is odd that many people who subscribe to this attitude have kids and would
> not dream of undercutting THEM.  Why do they do it to themselves?  Very odd.

Well people in America at least think it is funny if they can't remember stuff.. calling it a senior moment or whatever. I think that is bad. Young people do the same types of things... for example forgetting that you are wearing your sunglasses on the top of your head. The older person laughs and says senior moment.. and that plants in their mind that their brain is deficient. That they are inferior because they are "old".

> As for him, it seems he was into drugs for a long time so maybe he can NOT
> remember.  He might have messed his brain up.  That would also explain the
> whole Next Action thing ... another good sounding idea that really makes
> less sense when you try to implement it.  If his brain is now fuzzy from
> drug use and his short term memory is shot, he might HAVE to figure out the
> next step and do it before he goes back and figures out the subsequent
> step.  Who knows.  It is interesting that his reason for Next Action is to
> move planning to the front and leave ONLY execution to the end.  That
> implies that he can't jump around easily from planning to execution.  And it
> really leaves one having to go back to planning again and again, rather than
> start working on the project and just keeping working on it until a lot has
> gotten one.  The Next Action thing kind of enforces a mental fragmentation
> (as well as perhaps being the result of one).  To me, nothing fragments my
> mind more than making 10 phone calls about different things just because I
> happen to be near a phone.  For me, focus demands that I stick with one
> project, not one TYPE of action.  I've never seen anyone successful who did
> not focus on what he was doing.

I did not know he was into drugs.

I could see where doing a lot of totally unrelated calls just because you are near a phone is bad. But it could be that the person is a salesman and the 10 calls are basically the same type of call. I would personally hate to call 10 different people in a row no matter what the topic was..

I don't know that it is because he can't think of the next action until he does the current one. but it has been a long time since I read the book. I can think of lots of actions for building a deck... even if I did not make a list I would still know I needed to get the hammer, nails, etc. But I would still feel better to write it all out so I knew i was not forgetting something.

> Yes, I do that too.  But today I need to work on taxes because I've let it
> go because I did not WANT to do it.  So now it is more important (urgent,
> really) so it will knock off other things I'd planned to do.

yes I waited until apr 15 to do my taxes even though there was no reason to do that. 

> "Dismissing" is a HORRIBLE term.  "Someday/Maybe" is the better term ... by
> far.  The term must have a different connotation in England.

I bet it is the proper term to use.. because when you dismiss someone they eventually come back. But he still needs to state it in a better way. I bet if I looked it up in the dictionary, I would see it was the proper term.

> Humm ... maybe that's the connotation?  I don't know.  I still like
> "someday/maybe"  it is an inspired term that perfectly captures the status
> of these things.  "I want to do this thing.  I don't know when I'll do it
> ... or if I will actually ever do it at all ... but I don't want to simply
> forget about the idea so I'll keep it in my files until I finally decide its
> fate for good."  "Dismiss" just does not capture all of that.

Dismiss might be the proper term but it does not help the person understand what is going on.

-- 
Brenda