Glad the ideas resonated with you! Two things you said stuck out to me: >And, setting the intention to "add," not "update" reduces friction to capturing. This

Glad the ideas resonated with you! Two things you said stuck out to me: >And, setting the intention to "add," not "update" reduces friction to capturing. This is a subtle point I felt, but failed to capture, that you expressed very succinctly. Having the primary action be adding, rather than "keeping up to date", reduces the cognitive load of capture. As a result, we remember more with adding-based tools than replacement-based ones. >Most of what's most important from personal working notes is stuff that's immediately relevant. Stuff that was probably written in the past week or so. One thing that I've been thinking about, but haven't had a chance to form into a thesis yet, is the idea of our actions / workflows making sort of tacit modifications to our workspace that make the workspace more usable. For example, in a paper-and-pen world, if I had a note on a sticky note that I access a few times every day, it would inevitably end up somewhere very close to where I work, compared to notes I rarely access, which may be stuck inside books or on a far wall somewhere. This isn't necessarily because I brought it closer because it would make me more efficient or something -- it just ended up close by as a direct consequence of how I access the note frequently. I feel like affordances/tacit modifications of our workspaces like this are much rarer in digital tools, where the default state is not to change over time. The behavior to have most recently edited notes "nearby" for example takes explicit design in digital notes. Makes me wonder what other kinds of tacit modifications to our tools/workspaces we are leaving out in software tool design.