Re: Org mode rant

[Jean Louis]

* Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> [2021-05-01 08:00]:
> Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:
> 
> > Org is so much better for writing or document preparation than for
> > management of procrastination, I mean tasks.
> 
> I like the expression "management of procrastination".
> 
> I'm using Org quite a lot and I also think it does not fix discipline,
> which is what is ultimately required for managing your tasks.
> 
> I write a blog entry about to-do lists that you might find useful, as
> it is not directly connected to Org:
> 
> https://bzg.fr/en/on-using-to-do-lists-efficiently/

I have great affinity to this type of thinking and analyzing. Nice
reference to "freedom of concern"...

It is interesting that there are people who never make any notes,
tasks, whatever written, and they are successful in life and
accomplish so many things. This should say that our success does not
necessarily depend of writing things down.

Do you mean to-do lists become your own enemy when there is much of
them or when they become not easily manageable, bringing person into
confusion?

My personal Org mode use is mostly focused on repeatable
projects. Project has its goals, purposes, operational targets and
production targets and similar, they are printed and assigned to
people who do those projects. This month maybe 50 people attended the
some of such projects and about 5-10 of them are soon to finish it.

The to-do list is thus replicated and given to people in form of a
whole assignment. In this area we have all clarity we need and want.

> Because it gives you a false sense of control, it slowly erodes your
> goals' clarity, which weakens your motivation. You end up being
> controlled by a list of things to do instead of focusing on doing
> them. You hope that your tool will help you achieve self-discipline
> instead of disciplining yourself to use it the right way.

Maybe if you tell your practical use case where you got stuck, then it
would become clearer for me as reader. I am so much interested.

There are those to-do tasks that are immediately actionable, doable,
and those that are not doable. There are those with priority and those
with less priority.

Projects and planning never eroded my goals' clarity as I write goal
in the first place as authoritative to the subordinate assignments
(tasks or to-do). That is maybe method not so much used by Org mode
users, it is like from top to bottom, first defined most important
fundamentals, then define subordinate actions to be done.

If somebody starts putting everything together, like personal tasks,
business tasks, lovers' tasks and notes in once, without having clear
separation, well that may erode totally the goals and purposes.

I wish I could understand it better how it happened to you.

> Write less to-do items and more notes. Notes and "remember" lists are
> always good. But do not blur the line between what you want to
> remember and what you need to do3. Your to-do list should be a list of
> things to do, not to remember. To-do lists should describe what you
> must do, not what you want to do, which belongs on the "remember" list
> until you really must do it.

I wish I could understand it.

If there is action item to do, it is to do, writing notes about it
will never get it done. I cannot write less actions to do then I have
it. Maybe some people never understood the distinction and they write
TODO even where there is nothing to be done.

I am sure you have got a good advise, I just miss to see it. Maybe
there need to be practical example to understand it better.

Let us say I have person to receive Western Union for me, this is my
real world and current task to-do, I click a key, assign the action to
the person and provide instructions, click another key and person is
informed by email, SMS, I could invoke a call from computer as well.

Any time later I can see which are pending tasks for which people, I
can review it. Maybe I should have visual reminders, it will come.

In that particular example I do not see how I can write less to-do
actionable items, and I cannot see how would it be useful to write
notes on the side not related to actionable item. I wish I could
understand.

There are some unfinished notes that lead to action, they have to be
finished, so they have label ACTION (same as TODO), but are not of
highest priority. They may be pending for quite some time, they need
thinkering, focus.

However, all tasks are sorted into some sets or parent nodes. Those
parent nodes can have its own priorities.

For example if I am in working time period, I will look into tasks
related to that working time period.

If I am in leisure time, I could look into tasks which do not relate
to business.

If I focus on relatives, family or friends, let us say I focus on
particular person, I will list tasks for that person as now came the
time to handle things for that particular person.

I wish to understand what you mean, but have hard time. Practical
example is welcome.

Editors are really great and fundamental tool for planning. IMHO even
simple text file, sections of text and search functions just good
enough. I study this subject last months.

In my database I keep ACTION on different types, for example type
could be WWW hyperlink. That requires me to open it up, review the
page, and maybe draw some conclusions or do something with the
information. That may not be highest priority.

There is type "Task" which has definitely higher priority than WWW
type.

There is type "Set" which can have ACTION assigned, that means all
items in the set are actionable, but grouped. If it is some list of
videos for learning on distance, then the play list could be
invoked. But overall Set can be skipped if it is not time for
learning.

I have "Org" type which is whole Org file in the database with ACTION
assigned, for example design and planning of the database system, or
equipment list for particular business site, or various notes that
need yet sorting.

There is FOLLOW-UP type which means I have to follow specific people,
this may be done regularly at specific time intervals.

As TODO items are separate by its types, by its sets or groups, by its
priorities it becomes easy to make intersections.

Intersections help in clarity.

> Take extra care of your agenda. Agendas are necessary, scheduled
> tasks and deadlines are useful. But do not schedule a task unless it
> really needs to be done on a specific date, refrain from using
> deadlines if nothing requires them. Over-scheduling is another way
> of mixing what you want to do and what you need to do. If your
> agenda is growing with many tasks, that's an sign that you should
> rethink if they really need to be scheduled or to have a deadline.

Good advise, understandable, clear. Thank you.

Most of tasks I have I don't schedule, because they are so imminent
that I have to do it right away.

Assigned tasks are almost never scheduled, I let people do it at their
own pace and availability and it works very well apparently. But if
specific task has to be done on Monday, it would tell in the
description. Using scheduled attributes is definitely very useful.

Sometimes I had about 180 appointments in year, appointment could be
scheduled for months in advance, that requires tracking and using
calendar.

Like you said, it is good to minimize confusion.

> Don't overload tasks with details, don't overload your agenda with
> tasks and don't mix notes and tasks—that's basically it.

Yes, sure, but this probably applies to Org mode or text based
stuff. Not to really well structured objects. The database is mixing
everything, but its presentation, queries and views give the precise
clarity.

I can for example say to computer, give me list of people in groups
created after 2021-05-01, who already started on the project I have
assigned them, and provided me their email address, while all others
have only phone number.

As with SQL databases that type of query becomes possible. With text
only, that becomes tiresome and requires programmers to code and code
and code.

That is why I cannot recommend Org mode for some more professional
use, unspoken for collaborative use.

Unless Org mode itself is stored in the database. As that solves those
problems.

I really hope that my breaking down of your article will not bother
you, myself I want to learn more about principles of note taking, it
is my special subject of study now.

> Writing self-contained tasks reinforces your sense of clarity4,
> keeping a minimal agenda lets you in control, and richer notes will
> nurture your motivation, while a minimal list of tasks will help
> boosting your sense of achievement.

Self-contained tasks are understandable, that is how I write
tasks. All instructions are inside. Task is a note too, but "Task"
represents rather type of a note.

Agenda should have those necessary tasks or whatever appointments, and
goal should be to attend those scheduled objects and do them, not to
minimize them. I can only vague idea on what is meant with minimize. I
would not like minimizing my agenda. Maybe you assume that too many
people will decide on their agenda in too broad manner, so to say to
write scheduled items even when they are not necessary. When I have to
meet somebody on Sunday, I have to, I cannot minimize it. Or if I have
to visit some office at Monday, I have to, I wish I could minimize it,
but life obligations are quite strict.

> Now I suspect we are all very bad at using to-do lists. Why?

Oops. Do you really think so?

I have met some elder women who gave so much good value to other
people and society and they never missed an appointment or similar. I
know one close to me, she never put anything on paper, but never
forgets what is to be done, a virtue that was so much common and
present in times before the access to computers and devices.

Then I can remember times when I was using exclusively written lists
for a week, and I have accomplished all of them, or maybe few were
left not done, and were moved to the next week.

I like your article, I wish I could find more of it, some things I did
not understand as for those maybe I do not have or do not find
personal correlation.

Org mode files I have been using mostly to assign tasks related to
people, each person had an Org file. It was quite easy to see who did
what, when, how. And I had money transactions inside. I have not been
writing those Org files, I just made a function, press key, and Org
file is generated with its title, sections, table of transactions,
like template. With number of people growing, that became tiresome,
transactions, instead being on one central place becomes scattered all
around.

That I have moved to database work, invoke function or key, then I say
transaction is from person Happiness to Jean, this much money in this
currency, finished. Instead on focusing on formatting the Org table, I
just enter numbers. If I wish to produce Org table out of the
database, I guess that can be created. But working with structured
data on a meta level seem to give me more organization then working on
non-structured and digitally unrelated data in multiple Org files,
even in one Org file, objects are mostly not digitally related to each
other (they are related in our mind).

Tasks assigned to people, if managed in a central database, avoid the
Org to look for numerous Org files on the system. One can invoke a
key, list people who have pending tasks and list those assignments for
each person separately.


Jean

Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
https://www.fsf.org/campaigns

Sign an open letter in support of Richard M. Stallman
https://stallmansupport.org/
https://rms-support-letter.github.io/