The author said they didn’t like Getting Things Done, then they almost literally reinvented Getting Things Done! Funny how sometimes an idea doesn’t click until you re-express it in your own words.
GTD asks you to figure out now the action for each thing, think about how long that will take, figure out if it will take more than 2 (or N) minutes, and if ≤ that, do it now. The "do it now"s can add up to a lot of time and distraction. DBTC is the sorting step but without the "figure out the action" step or (most critically) the "do it now" step. And there's no reflection step, either.
So it's not "literally reinvented", not even "almost".
What you've done above and beyond GTD as I noted in an earlier comment (<https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46376558>) is that you've time-blocked when you make that assessment, on the (IMO correct and insightful) notion that triage itself is expensive. That is, determining the importance and length of a task / item of email itself consumes limited cognitive resources.
Adding to what I wrote earlier, another advantage of postal mail is that it comes at fixed intervals, typically once a day (historically possibly more often especially in cities with "morning" and "afternoon" mail, making one-day responses possible, currently with curtailments in service possibly only a few days a week). This automatically batches mail processing.
Early in the corporate adoption of email a firm I worked at only polled periodically for new external email (every 20--30 minutes or so). Whilst internal email was pretty instant, this meant that at most external emails would give cause for interruption only a few times an hour, rather than at any given moment. I've given thought to reimplementing this on my own systems from time to time, perhaps even only 2--3 times a day, say, "morning email" (limited to priority recipients), and afternoon email (the Great Unwashed Masses have their opportunity).
In reality, I've adopted Inbox Black Hole, in which I rarely if ever check personal email. Circumstances make this reasonably viable, though those are decidedly atypical and most professionals would be unable to adopt a similar tactic.
I agree “literally” was too strong, but you’ve implemented the core idea of GTD inbox, which is to have a place to put stuff you don’t want to do right now, plus the confidence that you’ll look there later (which is what lets you forget about it now).
> If this message is not urgent, and if dealing with it now will distract me, and if it’s either not long, or if it’s personal, it goes straight into the folder.
How do you know if it’s urgent, or if dealing with it will distract you, if you don’t know what the action is?
Anyway, I didn’t mean it as a criticism; that sort of thing happens to me all the time so I thought I recognized the phenomenon.
