undefined

points

[-]

Totally agree — tools don’t beat rituals. A review cadence is what turns notes from “storage” into outcomes.

What I’m exploring is designing the tool around that ritual: make the review session the first-class UX, and keep everything else quiet. For example, during a scheduled review it can help you: identify the few notes worth acting on, extract 1–3 next actions, and link them to a small set of active projects—then get out of the way.

In your experience, what cadence actually sticks: daily 10 minutes, or a deeper weekly review?

Details in my HN profile/bio if you’re curious how I’m thinking about “ritual-first” design.

by tonymet2 days ago|

parent|

[-]

weekly is better since it takes a few days to solidify various efforts into something worth developing.

I encourage new tool development, I’m more calling attention to Tool optimizers who are continuously migrating task systems and obsessing over “productivity”.

A daily pen and paper journal with weekly check in would suffice.

by item0071 days ago|

parent|

[-]

Weekly is often the sweet spot because it gives ideas/time to “gel” into something worth acting on, without turning your life into a constant triage loop.

And +1 on not rewarding tool-churn. The goal isn’t a more elaborate system, it’s a simple ritual that reliably produces real output. If a pen-and-paper journal plus a weekly check-in works, that’s already the whole game.

What does your weekly check look like in practice: are you mainly pruning (delete/ignore), distilling (rewrite what matters), or committing (pick 1–3 actions for the next week)?