From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "David A. Thompson" Subject: Re: specifying priority with template expansion Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:42:57 -0800 Message-ID: <4CF97271.2020803@gmail.com> References: <4CF94C56.2060307@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=54159 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1POeLF-00046i-6h for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 17:43:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1POeLE-0002Dz-3u for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 17:43:01 -0500 Received: from mail-pz0-f41.google.com ([209.85.210.41]:47948) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1POeLD-0002Ds-Vd for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 17:43:00 -0500 Received: by pzk27 with SMTP id 27so4018278pzk.0 for ; Fri, 03 Dec 2010 14:42:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Cc: Jeff Horn On 12/03/2010 12:40 PM, Jeff Horn wrote: > Can you give us a better idea of the use case? As I understand, > unprioritzed todos count as "B" by default. Since most of my tasks > have a priority of B, I've never found setting priorities to be > helpful until I sit down to review my work for the day. > > I prioritize items that are important (or urgent) with A at the > beginning of the day (no more than a couple, usually). Most items are > "B" and rarely more than half of those get done. > > If I want to "sink" an item but keep it scheduled, it gets a priority of "C". Most of my todos are neither associated with deadlines nor are they scheduled. Schedules and deadlines have seemed a more time-intensive way to go relative to setting priorities (but perhaps this is a 'Green Eggs and Ham' thing?) > These are often things I do not know when recording an item. I guess the main difference is that I generally am typically able to recognize, when recording a todo, whether it's in the 'urgent/asap' pile (A), the 'try-and-get-it-done-sometime-soon' pile (B), or in a 'sure-would-be-nice-to-get-it-done' pile (C). Given that, it seemed both logical and more efficient to immediately prioritize the item rather than going back later and prioritizing the item. Thanks for any additional thoughts/suggestions... - Alan >