Priority of tasks with a Start date and place on the Active Tasks list

[Grant]

Hi,

(I did search for an answer but most threads where quite old and not quite what I was interested in)

Relates to the Windows desktop version of MLO

I want to know if its correct that a task with a start date only goes toward the top of the list but the same task with the same start date that has a due date later than today goes all the way to the bottom.

I have tried pushing the importance of start date in calculating priority all the way to the right, with no affect on this positioning

This does not make sense to me if its correct.  When I have a task, and look at my Active Task list on what to do next, I wan to know that I have to start on a task today...even if due another day. At this moment those with a start and a due date are way at the bottom of my priority list, even when today is the Start Date, which does not reflect the reality of their priority.

Any help in assuring, with out a lot of juggling for each task ro having to use separate views, to get tasks with a start and due date to the top of the standard Active Tasks list would be appreciated.  Would be nice if it views the same in in Android and iOS too..

[Christoph Zwerschke]

Am 17.10.2017 um 13:55 schrieb Grant:
> I want to know if its correct that a task with a start date only goes
> toward the top of the list but the same task with the same start date
> that has a due date later than today goes all the way to the bottom.
> I have tried pushing the importance of start date in calculating
> priority all the way to the right, with no affect on this positioning

This is a problem of the "computed score" which is one of my major
painpoints regarding MLO. Tasks with no due date are treated like tasks
with due date today, wich is simply wrong. They should be treated like
tasks with due date "infinity". Similar with start date. Unfortunately,
this cannot be modified in the settings.

-- Christoph

[Dwight]

Hi, Grant. I believe that you are discussing the configuration and adjustment of computed-score. Disclosure: I don't use computed score any more, it was too complicated to try to make it do what I wanted.

I am working from memory and may not have this 100% right, but it should give you a clue.

Like so many aspects of MLO, blank Due Dates mean different things for different people. For some of us, it means that there is no particular date after which this particular task cannot be completed. There is no deadline. For other users, a blank date translates to NOW, meaning get on it or this will be overdue right away. I am in the first group where blank-no deadline. I know that a lot of other users are also in that group, maybe most of us, maybe even all of us. Computed Score is optimized for the second group, the blank = deadline is NOW.

If someone from the first group uses Computed-Score, then all of the tasks with no due date become urgent because the due date has arrived. Anything that has a due date later than today is less urgent and comes later.

There was a suggestion a few years ago to create a user setting that would select blank=now versus blank=far future. It did not go anywhere.

My suggestion would be to change your sort sequence and don't use computed-score. Sort on due date first, then start date, then importance or maybe starred.

[Grant]

Christoph, Dwight,

Thanks for your thoughts.

Today,  if I see the items that where at the bottom yesterday - the ones that started yesterday and have a due date this Friday, are now at the top!  It looks like a past Start Date greatly increased the prioritization (but does do so on the actual start date). So I tried adding Time to the  Start Date so its before I start work on the Start Date and 'suprise!'  the task, with a Start Date of today, and Due Date of Friday is now at the top of the list!

It does not really make sense that it works this way, but its a relatively easy way to work around what I think is a bug. 

We will see if the MLO team will reply, and offer an explaination/solution/bug fix (but often bugs are in the eye of the beholder... ;-)

Cheers,

[Christoph Zwerschke]

Am 18.10.2017 um 02:36 schrieb Dwight:
> For other users, a blank date translates to NOW, meaning get

> on itor this will be overdue right away. I am in the first group
> where blank-no deadline.

And I still think the second kind of usage with no due date = today
makes little sense. The majority of my tasks is *not* due today -
otherwise I would not need software, but could keep everything in my
head. Also, in that case I wonder why there is a button "today" which
sets the due date explicitly to today if it is empty. Yes, there would
be another subtle difference with an empty due date and one of today in
that tasks with empty due date would never be overdue, but I'm not sure
if that is what you really want.

The situation is more controversial with "start date". The first meaning
would be "the first day when the task theoretically can be tackled". For
the most tasks this would be today, so the default would be "today" or
"-infinity". In that meaning, it would only control whether the task is
considered active or not, and should not influence the computed score
very much. The second meaning would be "the first day when I *intend* to
start working on the task, i.e. the start date would be used more like a
"scheduled date". This makes a lot of sense, and I'm now using it that
way since MLO lacks a dedicated scheduled date. In that meaning, the
default (emtpy) value would be also "+infinity" (not scheduled yet), and
it should influence the computed score very strongly.

My point is: Depending on which meaning you use, the software should
also treat the fields differently, regarding empty values, default
values, sorting, computed score, determining active tasks etc.

Currently the values are treated inconsistently in different places,
which serves none of the groups very well.

So there should be a setting to elect one of these meanings, and the
software should adapt the default values, sort order etc. according to
the meaning the user wants to give to a field. Alternatively, the
software could assume a fixed meaning, but then the documentation should
explain exactly which meaning is anticipated, so that users don't give
the fields a different meaning that doesn't harmonize with the meaning
the software assumes and then wonder why they don't see what they expect
in their lists.

-- Christoph

[Dwight Arthur]

I agree with your statement of the problem but not your solution.  I don't think that the MLO usrrs, who are an innovative and independent bunch, would be prevented from coding a "planned start date" in Start by documentation stating that it should be "first feasible date". Or vice versa.

Also, I do not think a system wide setting will do as I believe that many parole interpret the dates differently for different tasks. Household tasks will tend to show due date as last feasible date; step in producing a time-sensitive customer deliverable will tend to show planned completion.

I understand that it would be a large and expensive change for developers as well as users but in my opinion this issue will not go away until the two dates, start and due, are replaced by  four dates. First feasible,  Planned start. Planned completion, last feasible.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MyLifeOrganized" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to mylifeorganiz...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to mylifeo...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/mylifeorganized.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/mylifeorganized/b6086d57-7b02-dc57-d19b-1b28dad0b874%40online.de.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Christoph Zwerschke]

Am 18.10.2017 um 15:46 schrieb Dwight Arthur:
> I understand that it would be a large and expensive change for
> developers as well as users but in my opinion this issue will not go
> away until the two dates, start and due, are replaced by  four dates.
> First feasible,  Planned start. Planned completion, last feasible.

Right, but entering all these dates would become too cumbersome. I tend
to avoid entering absolutes dates unless there really is a deadline
which may not be missed, but rather indicate when I want to do something
through the goals of week and month. In the weekly/monthly review, I
adapt goals and then choose start according to them.

There is another issue that could be improved. Currently, "goal",
"urgency" and "due date" are all treated independently of each other,
though they are interdependent. I would merge goal and urgency into one
field, where e.g. 100% = today, 75% = week, 50% = month, 25% = year, 0
% = someday/maybe. When a due date is set, this field should be set
automatically. Something like that.

-- Christoph