What Is The Most Annoying Thing In Your Current Setup And How Do You Deal With It?

[cfoley]

That's interesting! I was thinking about this last night and was considering how paper and electronic systems play with our sense of object permanence. With paper, the action will be exactly where and how you wrote it. So will other things like blemishes on the paper that can act as visual cues. With electronic systems, that is not necessarily the case. Pressing sort changes the order instantly. Resizing a window might change all the line breaks. Viewing on a different device will almost certainly make everything look different. A software update might change the look and feel. Then there are features like making items that are checked off disappear from view.

I concluded that paper plays better with our sense of object permanence -- but maybe that only applies to some people (people like me). Your post suggests that it works differently for you.

 

[gtdstudente]

Absolutely! I also find myself more likely to reword things for clarity.



Aaah. I've been trying to trigger my rewrite based on how messy it is all getting. I could try a monthly rewrite and see how that works.

@cfoley

Something you might GTD appreciate:

Like using digital to keep paper fresh, crispy, and clean

Like using paper to keep digital fresh, crispy, and clean

As you see GTD fit. . . .

 

[gtdstudente]

I always had a problem with the permanence of writing on paper, which led to bad effects throughout my workflow. With digital tools, I revise and reorder easily. I know there are people who combine paper and digital tools. I have no idea what the distribution of practices is. My wife is still using a color-coded Microsoft Word document, combining that with use of Things. I have no idea how she does that either.

@mcogilvie

Sounds like a marriage made in GTD heaven . . . nice . . . very nice

 

[mcogilvie]

That's interesting! I was thinking about this last night and was considering how paper and electronic systems play with our sense of object permanence. With paper, the action will be exactly where and how you wrote it. So will other things like blemishes on the paper that can act as visual cues. With electronic systems, that is not necessarily the case. Pressing sort changes the order instantly. Resizing a window might change all the line breaks. Viewing on a different device will almost certainly make everything look different. A software update might change the look and feel. Then there are features like making items that are checked off disappear from view.

I concluded that paper plays better with our sense of object permanence -- but maybe that only applies to some people (people like me). Your post suggests that it works differently for you.

I think you are absolutely correct about object permanence, although I think of it as a sense of place: for example, all my active projects and next actions are ‘here.” I find Things has a much stronger sense of place for me than OmniFocus, Todoist or Reminders. It hasn’t had an automatic sort feature since version 1 (now on v3 many years later). Its strengths lie more in quick, easy manual manipulation of lists. Some people can use a spreadsheet for their next actions, but I wouldn’t.

 

[TesTeq]

I always had a problem with the permanence of writing on paper, which led to bad effects throughout my workflow. With digital tools, I revise and reorder easily. I know there are people who combine paper and digital tools. I have no idea what the distribution of practices is. My wife is still using a color-coded Microsoft Word document, combining that with use of Things. I have no idea how she does that either.

@mcogilvie I always had a problem with the impermanence of digital storage. There's no easy way to backup Things data. You can use their cloud service but it is not a backup. It is a synchronization service which – in the event of one machine going crazy – will synchronize this craziness everywhere. How can I trust such unnecessarily complex system?

 

[TesTeq]

With paper, the action will be exactly where and how you wrote it.

@cfoley That's it what I love about paper. In Things, I know that some future actions are intentionally hidden but there's no easy way to "turn the page and see them".

 

[FocusGuy]

@mcogilvie I always had a problem with the impermanence of digital storage. There's no easy way to backup Things data. You can use their cloud service but it is not a backup. It is a synchronization service which – in the event of one machine going crazy – will synchronize this craziness everywhere. How can I trust such unnecessarily complex system?

There is a local safe of the things database it is in the private library. However this safe database is not as easy to restore as the Omnifocus one... Happily I never had trouble with things.

 

[dtj]

PEBCAK- Problem exists between chair and keyboard.

 

[mcogilvie]

PEBCAK- Problem exists between chair and keyboard.

Ah yes, the old User Headspace Error. It happens a lot.

 

[devon.marie]

That's interesting! I was thinking about this last night and was considering how paper and electronic systems play with our sense of object permanence. With paper, the action will be exactly where and how you wrote it. So will other things like blemishes on the paper that can act as visual cues. With electronic systems, that is not necessarily the case. Pressing sort changes the order instantly. Resizing a window might change all the line breaks. Viewing on a different device will almost certainly make everything look different. A software update might change the look and feel. Then there are features like making items that are checked off disappear from view.

I had to finally accept that this is how my brain works. I am 100% visual in how I orient in the world, and that goes for how I use tools. I like things to be in the same spot on my computer screen, looking the same way. I remember where things are, and if it gets moved but I don't see it there, it is lost to me. Someone will ask me about a meeting we had 4 years ago, and I'll remember which notebook I took notes in, and that they were on the bottom right of a page, and in what color ink...

So I've accepted that this is what I need to help ground me in the world and have leaned into it. I use a completely paper-based system now, and have for a while, with the exception of required Google Calendar use for work (but I still replicate it on paper for myself). It's more inconvenient in a lot of ways - I can't just narrate new tasks to my smartwatch like I used to, or attach files to my tasks. But the ways it works better for me vastly outweigh this. I remember if I put something on a todo list. I remember my plans for the day. I am faster at grabbing a notebook and flipping to the right page than I ever was rooting around in file structures to find what I'm looking for, after forgetting what I named the file. That, and every single piece of software I've used more than a couple of years has either gone bust on me or drastically changed or become simply cost-prohibitive, sending me adrift once again. A notebook is a notebook. The basic format hasn't changed in ~500 years.

 

[samuelethan]

I had to finally accept that this is how my brain works. I am 100% visual in how I orient in the world, and that goes for how I use tools. I like things to be in the same spot on my computer screen, looking the same way. I remember where things are, and if it gets moved but I don't see it there, it is lost to me. Someone will ask me about a meeting we had 4 years ago, and I'll remember which notebook I took notes in, and that they were on the bottom right of a page, and in what color ink...

So I've accepted that this is what I need to help ground me in the world and have leaned into it. I use a completely paper-based system now, and have for a while, with the exception of required Google Calendar use for work (but I still replicate it on paper for myself). It's more inconvenient in a lot of ways - I can't just narrate new tasks to my smartwatch like I used to, or attach files to my tasks. But the ways it works better for me vastly outweigh this. I remember if I put something on a todo list. I remember my plans for the day. I am faster at grabbing a notebook and flipping to the right page than I ever was rooting around in file structures to find what I'm looking for, after forgetting what I named the file. That, and every single piece of software I've used more than a couple of years has either gone bust on me or drastically changed or become simply cost-prohibitive taxi service near me, sending me adrift once again. A notebook is a notebook. The basic format hasn't changed in ~500 years.

I use Obsidian for notes and project support, Todoist for task management, and Google Calendar for scheduling. The most annoying part is the lack of seamless integration between them, especially linking tasks to relevant notes or project material. I often have to manually copy links or update status in multiple places, which can breakthe flow. To handle this, I use a few Obsidian plugins and some basic scripts to automate task creation and link embedding. It’s not flawless, but it reduces friction enough to keep things moving without overwhelming me.

 

[fooddude]

The most annoying part is the lack of seamless integration between them, especially linking tasks to relevant notes or project material. I often have to manually copy links or update status in multiple places, which can breakthe flow.

Why would you do all this?

 

[Allenori]

My desk wobbles like crazy. Fixed it with rubber pads and a coaster wedge. Cheap and ugly, but it works.

 

[mcogilvie]

I use Obsidian for notes and project support, Todoist for task management, and Google Calendar for scheduling. The most annoying part is the lack of seamless integration between them, especially linking tasks to relevant notes or project material. I often have to manually copy links or update status in multiple places, which can breakthe flow. To handle this, I use a few Obsidian plugins and some basic scripts to automate task creation and link embedding. It’s not flawless, but it reduces friction enough to keep things moving without overwhelming me.

Thanks, very helpful! I occasionally think about Obsidian but I only want as simple a workflow as possible.

 

[schmeggahead]

I use Obsidian for notes and project support, Todoist for task management, and Google Calendar for scheduling. The most annoying part is the lack of seamless integration between them, especially linking tasks to relevant notes or project material.

I use Obsidian for Project Support materials and notes.
I use Apple Reminders as my list manager. I have a list called Reference in my list manager where I create a project support entry with the Obsidian URL of the support page and it is tagged with the project tag I use in my list manager. One time setup at project start.

When I do my project review, I call up the project tag and see the relevant link to project support along with the project list entry, completed, available and future actions. Has worked well with minimal overhead. Since I work from the list manager project tag, it is automatically added to any action (or list entry) I create while viewing it.

Hope this helps,
Clayton

If it ain't broke, is it too much work? Is there a simpler way?

 

[Y_Lherieau]

Hi everyone!

I used GTD several years ago. But couldn't keep doing it. My toolset was cumbersome. Now I want to go back but want to set up a smoother toolset. I'm not afraid to do some coding in it too. But I want to get some tips instead of experiencing everything myself.

I see a lot of threads about what works and the different softwares that are working for people in different setups. The benefits are described thoroughly. But the drawbacks of the tools that people are using are to be read in between the lines. I think it doesn't hurt for someone like me, to know what annoying things about the working setups, are there to be expected too.

I would like you to, kindly please, describe what set of tools/softwares you use for your GTD setup. What are the most annoying things in them (for me it was usually lack of integration and therefore manually carrying "things" from one tool to the other but don't mind me. Tell me what is yours...). And please tell me how do you deal with it, if at all.

Welcome back to GTD! Your question really resonates with me. I’ve gone through the same cycle: early enthusiasm, tool fatigue, eventual burnout… then a renewed attempt, but this time with clearer expectations.

Let me start with a counterintuitive thought.

Running the 5-step GTD workflow “on autopilot” is not lean.

From a Lean Six Sigma standpoint, it actually creates a lot of friction and defects.

As a human being, no matter how disciplined I try to be, I will never flawlessly execute the thought cascade:

“What is this? Is there a next action? What’s the desired outcome? Where does it go?”

The triage of 6 possible outcomes for every input just doesn’t scale well when I am tired, rushed, or sidetracked. And GTD requires consistency.

That’s why along my GTD journey, I’ve been building automations — not to replace the process, but to stay as close as possible to what GTD is meant to be.

My Current Toolstack:

1. Todoist – for all actionable items
   → Why: clean syntax, recurring tasks, mobile sync
   → Labels for @Waiting For, @Agenda, and filters for Weekly Review
2. Outlook (desktop + IOS Mail/calendar) – for email capture and calendar
   → All my “stuff” flows in here first
   → Add-ins like “Todoist for Outlook” used sparingly because not natively triggered on email sent
3. Custom PowerShell + VBA automations
   → For: delegation tracking, automatic project labeling, email triage (built my own Outlook Todoist addon)
4. OneNote – for reference material and project support private, TheBrain for pro stuff
   → Every GTD Project has a matching project support structure
5. Microsoft Teams + Planner – for team-based execution
   → Shared context via Planner buckets and task comments

On Working With Others:

Over the past couple of years, I’ve noticed a clear shift: collaborative work is now the norm, even in domains that used to be very individual. No matter how perfectly tuned my solo GTD cockpit was, I had to downgrade some of my processes just to be able to operate with others.

I’m not a fan of duplication or fragmentation, but the reality is: collaboration today often means having project-related bits and pieces outside of my cockpit — in shared Teams/Slack channels, CRMs, shared documents, Planner boards, and so on.

This adds a real layer of complexity when trying to keep a full and trusted Next Actions list. I’ve had to accept a hybrid setup: centralized where possible, but linked out to distributed collaboration zones.

I used to think my GTD system was bloated because I had too many tools. But now I believe:

Bloat comes from tools doing too many roles, not from having many tools.
One place for Actions, one for Reference, one for Time. Automate the bridges between them.

A Final Friction Point: The LLM Gap

One of the most frustrating limitations today is the inability to fully leverage AI LLMs to do the heavy lifting inside the GTD system.

I’m currently prototyping the introduction of digital agents at every corner of the GTD workflow — from Inbox clarification, to action tracking, to reviewing — but it’s clear that no out-of-the-box solution exists yet. Microsoft isn’t there. Google isn’t there. Even Todoist has only taken baby steps with features like Smart Email, which can break down an email and suggest a next action… but it’s isolated. There’s no holistic, agent-powered GTD cockpit available.

So for now, it’s DIY or nothing, which is both exciting and annoying. But I believe we’ll get there — and I want to be ready when it happens.

 

[fooddude]

“What is this? Is there a next action? What’s the desired outcome? Where does it go?”

The triage of 6 possible outcomes for every input just doesn’t scale well when I am tired, rushed, or sidetracked. And GTD requires consistency.

Your post seems to be a harsh condemnation of the system, but this stuck out to me. GTD weekly review handles this well. The whole system is designed to overcome this one issue. Just capturing what has your attention is the perfect holding bin for when you do have the mental capacity to process it.

 

[Y_Lherieau]

Your post seems to be a harsh condemnation of the system, but this stuck out to me. GTD weekly review handles this well. The whole system is designed to overcome this one issue. Just capturing what has your attention is the perfect holding bin for when you do have the mental capacity to process it.

Just to clarify, my post wasn’t meant as a condemnation of GTD at all. On the contrary, I have deep respect for the method and its robustness — especially the Weekly Review, which is indeed a powerful ritual to restore alignment and catch what slipped through.

That said, what I was trying to highlight is more from a systems and execution standpoint, especially when viewed through the lens of Lean/6 Sigma or automation:

GTD is conceptually elegant — but relying solely on human consistency to execute every capture → clarify → organize → review → engage loop without deviation introduces points of failure.

In my own setup, I’ve found that when fatigue, fragmentation, or context-switching kicks in, even the perfect capture bin doesn’t guarantee timely processing. And the issue compounds when you’re collaborating, jumping between inboxes, or switching devices.

That’s why I’m actively prototyping automations and digital agents to support the GTD workflow — not replace the human brain, but reduce the cognitive overhead and tighten the handoffs. I still believe GTD is the best framework we have. I just think the tooling ecosystem hasn’t fully caught up with what’s possible today in terms of supporting it dynamically.