Zettelkasten Statistics v2021.1

Will

I'm making changes in my journaling, and I see the value of reviewing what I was working on last year. The time is arbitrary, but annual seems appropriate for a review. I could have chosen last week, last month, or some other time frame, but a year is what I used in my old journaling workflow—sort of titillation of spaced repetition. I created a Keyboard Maestro macro (Historical Review Links) that created variables called history2019 and history 2020 and I call them into my Zettelkasten Statistics macro. These variables have the number of zettel created, the date one year ago and 2 years ago, and a link that does a search with the Omni Bar and then populates the Note List correctly.

This is becoming all too complicated and requires each zettel to have a unique UID.

I reviewed the 16 notes I created on this day in 2019. They spurred me to reflect on my prior self, and I iterated, with improvements, some of the notes. This feels great.

Zettelkasten Statistics
       ★★★★★
1701 - total number of notes
312392 - total word count
       ★★★★★

9 notes in the INBOX

2 new notes created yesterday.
27 notes modified in the last 24 hours. 
29 notes total newly created or modified in the last 24 hours.

**[2 notes created on 01/03/2020](thearchive://match/›[[20200103)**
**[16 notes created on 01/03/2019](thearchive://match/›[[20190103)**


01/03/2021 :: [DL January 3, 2021 ](thearchive://match/202101031010)  
01/02/2021 :: [Five Principles Of Concision](thearchive://match/202101021802)  
01/02/2021 :: [Things About Writing Short](thearchive://match/202101021754)  
etc.

zk_1000

hi @Will,

thanks for sharing this. It made me think that i might want to start something similar. Perhaps an arbitrary time period is a feature, not a flaw? Intuitively, the amount of ongoing processes that are not reflected is disturbing, but in the long run it provides a good reference for the average behaviour. Maybe the arbitrary time behaves somewhat like a control unit?

I didn't understand how your tracking works. Your report shows an overview for 3th Jan 2020 and 2019. Today is 4th Jan so it would show 4th Jan 2020 and 2019?

Which time period do you use for 01/03/2021, etc?

Will

@zk_1000, I agree that using an annual timeframe is arbitrary.

I think anything that stimulates ongoing review and refactoring of ideas is a win. No matter how little it seems, wins accumulate.

Looking at the volume of activity in the past references to prior "behavior" in a snapshot. Still, it lacks a trend line, which I feel says more about overall behavior than either a snapshot or an 'average" does. I'm still thinking and working on the way to having more and more meaningful review stats. For example, I'd like to rank my note clusters by the time spent creating, reviewing, and refactoring

@zk_1000 the report is run each day as part of my template for journaling, and the time period is incremented each day. So for today, 4th Jan 2021 - the report looks like

Zettelkasten Statistics
       ★★★★★
1702 - total number of notes
312805 - total word count
       ★★★★★

9 notes in the INBOX

1 new notes created yesterday.
17 notes modified in the last 24 hours. 
18 notes total newly created or modified in the last 24 hours.

[0 notes created on 01/04/2020](thearchive://match/›[[20200104)
[12 notes created on 01/04/2019](thearchive://match/›[[20190104)

——
01/04/2021 :: [Better Than Spaced Repetition](thearchive://match/202101040552)  
01/03/2021 :: [DL January 3, 2021 ](thearchive://match/202101031010)  
01/01/2021 :: [5 Cs As Story Scaffolding](thearchive://match/202101012056)  
12/12/2020 :: [• Compelling Dialogue](thearchive://match/202012122047)  
08/22/2020 :: [ZK Didactics](thearchive://match/202008220529)  
04/02/2020 :: [• Coding Hub](thearchive://match/202004020722)  
01/03/2019 :: [Don't be sheep](thearchive://match/201901031449)