Thanks for clarifying what you think he means. That explains why you don't disagree with him about it. If that's what he meant, I don't think he made it clear in the newsletter.
Originally Posted by mcogilvie
Just to clarify: I was taught an ABC method years ago and used it for a while (doing it daily); I'm not using it now. Now, I have context next-action lists, and when I add something to one of these lists, the position I write it on the page is a function of priority, and of time-and-energy. That way I don't have to read the whole list every time. I also do a "list of priorities for the weekend" and other systems.
I also find the newsletters very repetitive -- different from the books. What he seems to be aiming for in the newsletters is to leave out unnecessary details so that a person reading fast will focus on and retain a single memorable point which is emphasized. I think he overdoes this, almost achieving the ideal of having zero meaningful content. This is just my impression. I tend to feel frustrated by the newsletters -- I'm looking for something to learn or re-learn and not finding anything interesting.
Originally Posted by supergtdman
Yes, I would say that's a way of prioritizing. I think that's similar to my "list of priorities for the weekend". I wonder: if you're going to do that, then maybe you don't need separate context lists, but can keep all your actions on one big list? Or maybe you use the context lists, e.g. if it's a weekend day you just look at the home list to pull items from onto your punch list, etc.
Originally Posted by Barb
Presumably your priorities don't usually change so fast that you would need to re-do the punch list several times a day. I find that for me, almost all the time, priorities don't usually change much. For example: whether or not it's a good time to do an aerobic workout will change depending on whether I just ate and stuff, but what I consider its priority -- that is, its relative value compared to other actions -- doesn't change measurably. If something urgent comes up it jumps to the front of the line, but the relative priorities of other things in the line as compared to each other doesn't usually change when that happens. For some people, e.g. an emergency-room physician, priorities may often change a lot.
Maybe David Allen means something different when he talks about "priority". To me, something's priority is a separate quality from whether now is a good time to do it.
Inability is an abstract thing involving comparison with alternate universes; it cannot be experienced.