3 ms·

Can you really claim inbox zero if you've just moved the workload from the inbox to the starred folder? Seems like the same problem with a different name.

mpyne 14y ago
It's actually addressed a bit in the article, when the author talks about the cognitive load of mixed messages. I think the point is that not everything in the inbox warrants being a "Todo". When you're done you have a list of action items to be accomplished, which isn't quite what you started out with.
colinloretz 14y ago
I used to use my actual inbox as my to do list. As the author mentions, we all are guilty of it on some level. The issue for me was that the original couple items I "marked as unread" that needed later action soon were being buried by new email and even with triage, 4 unread/actionable emails turned into 10, then 20 and so on to the point where I'd have to do deep email triage or declare inbox bankruptcy and start over. This was tedious and mentally exhausting. The shortcuts in the post are a huge help. I always knew they were there but never thought about how they would work in a process as described in the OP. I'm going to try using the web UI with those now instead of Sparrow.
- Dylan16807 14y ago
  How exactly is starring emails going to keep them from piling up? I don't see the gain here.
cwp 14y ago
The problem with using your inbox as a todo list is that anybody in the world can write to it. (citation needed.) The point of putting todo messages in a separate place is to separate the activities of doing stuff (ie, the items on your list) and deciding what needs to be done (processing your inbox and building your list). When you're looking at starred messages, you know that a) you've already read the message, and b) there's an important task you need to do. Your job is to remember what you wanted to do and get it done. When you're in your inbox, you know that your seeing new information and your job is to decide whether or not its important. This distinction may sound trivial, but it makes a huge difference. Think of it this way: When you read a message and then mark it as "unread," you're throwing away all the work you've already done in reading and evaluating it. Next time you encounter the message you're starting from scratch. By starring it and taking it out of your inbox, you give yourself enough of a cue to quickly resume processing the message where you left off.
- TillE 14y ago
  But you can star something without moving it out of your inbox. It then moves up into a separate list at the top; the delineation is very clear, and I don't have to bounce between different screens. Things you don't want to see again should absolutely be archived. But if you're using the Gmail web interface, you don't have to slavishly adhere to a literal interpretation of "inbox zero".
  - cwp 14y ago
    It's not about the label "inbox zero". In fact, I rarely have an empty inbox. Usually there's a handful of unread messages and maybe a couple that are read, but I haven't decided whether they need action. What is important is limiting the distraction caused by new mail. If you're working through your todo items and new messages are getting added to the list, they'll distract you even if you don't read them. Of course, you probably will read them, which is even more of a distraction. By keeping todo items on a separate list, you can keep your attention on your work, rather than on new messages. Then you process the inbox only when you choose to direct your attention to it.

mpyne 14y ago

It's actually addressed a bit in the article, when the author talks about the cognitive load of mixed messages. I think the point is that not everything in the inbox warrants being a "Todo". When you're done you have a list of action items to be accomplished, which isn't quite what you started out with.

colinloretz 14y ago

I used to use my actual inbox as my to do list. As the author mentions, we all are guilty of it on some level. The issue for me was that the original couple items I "marked as unread" that needed later action soon were being buried by new email and even with triage, 4 unread/actionable emails turned into 10, then 20 and so on to the point where I'd have to do deep email triage or declare inbox bankruptcy and start over. This was tedious and mentally exhausting. The shortcuts in the post are a huge help. I always knew they were there but never thought about how they would work in a process as described in the OP. I'm going to try using the web UI with those now instead of Sparrow.

Dylan16807 14y ago
How exactly is starring emails going to keep them from piling up? I don't see the gain here.

cwp 14y ago

The problem with using your inbox as a todo list is that anybody in the world can write to it. (citation needed.) The point of putting todo messages in a separate place is to separate the activities of doing stuff (ie, the items on your list) and deciding what needs to be done (processing your inbox and building your list). When you're looking at starred messages, you know that a) you've already read the message, and b) there's an important task you need to do. Your job is to remember what you wanted to do and get it done. When you're in your inbox, you know that your seeing new information and your job is to decide whether or not its important. This distinction may sound trivial, but it makes a huge difference. Think of it this way: When you read a message and then mark it as "unread," you're throwing away all the work you've already done in reading and evaluating it. Next time you encounter the message you're starting from scratch. By starring it and taking it out of your inbox, you give yourself enough of a cue to quickly resume processing the message where you left off.

TillE 14y ago
But you can star something without moving it out of your inbox. It then moves up into a separate list at the top; the delineation is very clear, and I don't have to bounce between different screens. Things you don't want to see again should absolutely be archived. But if you're using the Gmail web interface, you don't have to slavishly adhere to a literal interpretation of "inbox zero".
- cwp 14y ago
  It's not about the label "inbox zero". In fact, I rarely have an empty inbox. Usually there's a handful of unread messages and maybe a couple that are read, but I haven't decided whether they need action. What is important is limiting the distraction caused by new mail. If you're working through your todo items and new messages are getting added to the list, they'll distract you even if you don't read them. Of course, you probably will read them, which is even more of a distraction. By keeping todo items on a separate list, you can keep your attention on your work, rather than on new messages. Then you process the inbox only when you choose to direct your attention to it.