> > Hi Lisa, my objection to these unnecessary properties just > relates to clarity. Everyone uses MLO in different ways of > course, but what's the point of assigning a folder to be a > 'goal' if you can't complete it? Shouldn't a folder just > really be a label, with some additional features (such as > categories etc). If you're using the Week Goal function as a > booster, then maybe (again for clarity), Andrey should > introduce a separate tick-box that does precisely this - call > it maybe "Short Term" or "In Focus". >
I have a folder to which I have assigned the Week Goal for this very reason - namely to boost the priority of the tasks that are sub-tasks within this folder. I agree that the term 'Week Goal' is not helpful in this context. But rather than remove the boxes), I would favour making them 'soft' - ie you can rename the tick boxes and choose to have different boosts applied. But generally, I am with Lisa - not a good idea to remove functionality because you never know how it is being used. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MyLifeOrganized" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
