It just doesn't work for me - the fact that you have broken one activity down into more steps and to a deeper level doesn't automatically make those individual tasks more important if you boost their common parent. If they are more important/urgent, I can go in and make adjustments at that level, I don't want MLO )or anything else) doing it for me.
For me, boosting a parent's urgency/importance should leave the relative ordering of the tasks under that parent exactly as it was. All the tasks should move up the overall list together but keep their ordering as before. On Jul 16, 2:59 pm, chuckdevee <[email protected]> wrote: > I guess I can understand that one, if indeed it is the case that lower > level tasks get an extra boost.. > Imagine 2 projects with the same importance/urgency scores... the CSA > will work to try to get both done at the same time, other things > equal. > So if you have 5 levels of subtasks for Project A, and only 3 for > Project B, you will tend to see more Project A tasks cropping up until > you are at broadly equal levels of depth.. > And if you feel that Project B is more important, you can presumably > negate/lessen this effect by giving it a higher importance score..so > that it gets done ahead of Project A. How well this works depends on > the extent of the recursive boost to lower level tasks.. I might try > a test to see how this would actually work.. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
