Autofocus: Q&A

What's revoltionary to me about Autofocus (AF)? Surely a single list of next actions is nothing new and sounds much too simple. You may ask what about:

Writing tasks on paper versus putting them into a computer?
My Outlook Tasks list tracks tasks that I need to do in front of the computer. (It's also many times easier and faster for me to convert actionable e-mails into Outlook Tasks than to write them down.) My AF notebook tracks all other tasks, plus tasks that are faster for me to write down instead of creating a new Outlook Task.

Tasks in different contexts?
I have just two contexts: work and non-work. These seem to serve me well enough.

Tasks with a due date?
These get moved to my calendar, which I review each morning to see if any need to go back onto my day's list.

Blocked tasks (waiting for someone or something)?
For my AF notebook, I put a "!" in the margin as a visual clue why it's not done, and then I write after the task what I need to have happen in order to resume work on it. For my Outlook Tasks list, I tag it with a "Blocked" category and append to the title what I need to have happen in order to resume work on it.

Projects (multi-tasks)?
Projects are my exception to the one-list method in that each project gets its own mini-list. For my AF notebook, I start a new page for the project and list out the related tasks there. For my Outlook Tasks list, I create a new Category with the project's name, and then I create related tasks and tag each of them with that category. (My Outlook Tasks list view is displayed by category, with non-project-related tasks having no categories attached.)