Re: Dealing with growing backlog (was: next-error for agenda searches)
Tim Cross writes: > I've also learnt to be quite ruthless in making decisions about what to > archive and what to simply delete. This is possibly the hardest > behaviour to learn. In a digital age, it is way too easy to keep > everything. However, this has a hidden cost - the quality of material > degrades and results from searching etc become less productive because > there is too much 'noise' in your data. Data, like many other things, > degrades over time. It is important to learn how to recognise when > things have passed their 'use by date' and just get rid of them. > > I'm often stunned by people who boast about the fact they still have all > their emails boing back to 1990 and are somewhat proud about having an > email archive with over 50Gb of messages. Reality is, the vast majority > of those email messages will never be read again and are of little or no > actual value. > > Knowing when to just delete old data is almost as important as gathering > it, but a much harder skill to master. I disagree about this. Sometimes, you may find yourself in a situation when you remember some link/idea because it suddenly become relevant to what you are doing now, though it looked interesting but irrelevant in the past. Then, you may try to find that link and there will be nothing to find if you deleted it. So, I prefer to keep things that caught my attention in the past saved somewhere in searchable location. On the other hand, it is not very useful to keep every single saved link in "active" search location. In daily workflows, the things you search for usually belong to the currently active areas and search results must not be polluted by links you discarded years back. So, I maintain the main notes file with the important links I search relatively regularly; and an archive where the notes/links are not searchable by default, but can be searched any time I wish so (e.g. see org-agenda-archive-mode). The archive is just like having a backup. It is usually useless until you suddenly need it. Best, Ihor
Re: Dealing with growing backlog (was: next-error for agenda searches)
Ihor Radchenko writes: > Samuel Wales writes: > >> one issue with this great thing called capture is that there is >> nothing quite so convenient that does the exact opposite. >> >> [you can regularly purge, if your life/forest is simple enough or you >> have the physical ability to do things. but you can't just >> org-doneify-lower-value-stuff-i-captured-when-wasn't-sure-of-their-value-at-the-time >> without adding energy, concentration, time, etc.] > > If I understand you correctly you are talking about ever-growing someday > list. > > My latest solution to this problem (which I am quite happy with) is the > following: > > 1. Every day/week I go through recently added someday staff and look if >it still looks useful. For ideas, I just check if they still make >sense and for links, I open each link and skim through the abstract >and sometimes link text in more details. > >When I first did the above, I was surprised that 50-80% of captured >staff is just gone because it is not as interesting as it looked >initially. > > 2. The ideas/links I mark for some day in future are scheduled using >org-learn. They will appear again in my agenda a few days later and I >can re-assess them. If still looks interesting, but someday not now - >reschedule using org-learn utilising spaced repetition. Otherwise - >archive. > >With the above approach, I only see "not sure" ideas >days->weeks->years later. Only several times a year. More useful >ideas remind about themselves more frequently and I often end up >actually using them. > >Credit of this idea: > > https://www.getdnote.com/blog/how-i-built-personal-knowledge-base-for-myself/ > > The total time needed to do the described is surprisingly small, > especially with the ability to do bulk agenda operations to postpone all > the maybe staff when you have no time/energy/mental power. > I use a very similar technique. Provided you do this type of 'house keeping" on a regular basis, it doesn't take long and the quality of material in your knowledge base increases. I've also learnt to be quite ruthless in making decisions about what to archive and what to simply delete. This is possibly the hardest behaviour to learn. In a digital age, it is way too easy to keep everything. However, this has a hidden cost - the quality of material degrades and results from searching etc become less productive because there is too much 'noise' in your data. Data, like many other things, degrades over time. It is important to learn how to recognise when things have passed their 'use by date' and just get rid of them. I'm often stunned by people who boast about the fact they still have all their emails boing back to 1990 and are somewhat proud about having an email archive with over 50Gb of messages. Reality is, the vast majority of those email messages will never be read again and are of little or no actual value. Knowing when to just delete old data is almost as important as gathering it, but a much harder skill to master.
Dealing with growing backlog (was: next-error for agenda searches)
Samuel Wales writes: > one issue with this great thing called capture is that there is > nothing quite so convenient that does the exact opposite. > > [you can regularly purge, if your life/forest is simple enough or you > have the physical ability to do things. but you can't just > org-doneify-lower-value-stuff-i-captured-when-wasn't-sure-of-their-value-at-the-time > without adding energy, concentration, time, etc.] If I understand you correctly you are talking about ever-growing someday list. My latest solution to this problem (which I am quite happy with) is the following: 1. Every day/week I go through recently added someday staff and look if it still looks useful. For ideas, I just check if they still make sense and for links, I open each link and skim through the abstract and sometimes link text in more details. When I first did the above, I was surprised that 50-80% of captured staff is just gone because it is not as interesting as it looked initially. 2. The ideas/links I mark for some day in future are scheduled using org-learn. They will appear again in my agenda a few days later and I can re-assess them. If still looks interesting, but someday not now - reschedule using org-learn utilising spaced repetition. Otherwise - archive. With the above approach, I only see "not sure" ideas days->weeks->years later. Only several times a year. More useful ideas remind about themselves more frequently and I often end up actually using them. Credit of this idea: https://www.getdnote.com/blog/how-i-built-personal-knowledge-base-for-myself/ The total time needed to do the described is surprisingly small, especially with the ability to do bulk agenda operations to postpone all the maybe staff when you have no time/energy/mental power. Best, Ihor
