MLO is a really powerful tool. It can be used in a lot of different ways. As an example, "how people use start dates" can be done in completely opposite ways. MLO is flexible in how it can be implemented to be able to support those completely opposite approaches.
You seem to be upset that the way "you" want to use start dates is NOT the default implementation. Sorry, it wasn't built just for you. You can however, modify MLO to handle how you want to use it. Its pretty easy, in fact. Computed score is only one of many sorting methods available. It happens to be the default one. Look at sorting options in the ToDo views and choose the order of the sort the way you want to use it. Also, It sounds like you assign a start date to all tasks before you start working on it. If so, you can use the advanced filtering rules to NOT show any tasks without start dates in the ToDo views. Again, MLO can easily handle what you want to do. It just isn't the default way to handle things. And for what it's worth, I don't think how you view start dates is the majority approach. So the fact that it isn't the default approach is probably the correct one. On Mon, Dec 20, 2010 at 5:26 AM, Grant <[email protected]> wrote: > I do not understand the logic. Why would every entry I make be > default something I want to do now? I would say until I give it a > priority or a date it should be considered something I want to due in > the undetermined future, and thus default to a low priority. > > That aside, if I give something a start date, that means I want to FOR > SURE be doing it NOW so clearly that should have a higher priority > than something I have not determined a start date for. > If I give only a start date, it does get bumped up the list. But the > moment I give it due day any distance in the future it falls way down > again. Too far I think. I have to move the weight of the start date > almost to the max and that for the due date almost all the way to the > min in the Options section to correct for this. I also separately > tried increasing urgency and importance but even cranking these both > to max, did not move these items about a default entry, which I also > think is very counter intuitive. > > I know there is an article about the math behind the prioritization, > but next to not wanting to read it, I think this is intuitively > incorrect. I would be happy to get a simple logical explanation why I > am wrong. > > And lastly, lets say I do want have any tasks with a start date in the > past to be above all tasks with no dates and urgency and priority at > the default. I do not want to have to have a special sort or filter > out tasks without start dates for this, I just want the auto > prioritization to take care of it. I have entries with no date, with > various priorities, and those with start dates (and a due date), where > everything else is the same, I want to be above those without. I > mention above I can get this to work with some extreme changes in the > Options, but I am afraid that is going to have other unforsee impacts > on other entries... if not, then I am OK I guess. > > -- > 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]<mylifeorganized%[email protected]> > . > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized?hl=en. > > -- 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.
