I usually don't consider myself to be task-oriented, i.e. I don't derive pleasure from checking things off a to-do list.  However, I might be changing my mind about this.  I've found that doing one big task often has the same amount of fulfillment as doing several small tasks.  Task size/importance/involvement can be broken down as follows: 

1. Everyday tasks - Cooking, doing the dishes, cleaning the counter, etc.  These are minimally fulfilling, but if done in sufficient numbers, can be more than just minimal.
2. Weekend tasks - Vacuuming, cleaning the bathroom, doing the laundry, etc.  These are slightly fulfilling, but if done in groups of 3-5, can be more than just slight.
3. Small but important tasks - Hanging up pictures, fixing the toilet, clearing stuff out of the junk room, etc.  These are pretty fulfilling, and since they only happen once in a while (and only need to happen once in a while), just one at a time can be good.
4. Large and important tasks - Cleaning the gutters, cleaning the attic, moving dirt or rocks, etc.  These tasks are very fulfilling because they happen infrequently and involve either a lot of time, a lot of effort, or large tools and equipment.

The bottom line is that the best way to get fulfillment out of completing tasks is to either do several small tasks or one large task.  The choice seems pretty clear to me. #psychology

Can we as a sports-watching human race please admit that games like the Pro Bowl and the All Star Game should no longer be played?  They're such a waste of time, money, effort, energy, and talent.  The purpose behind these games is good:  To honor the best athletes in the sport and have them compete with the other best athletes.  But no one knows who won last year's Pro Bowl.  No one keeps track of statistics or records or anything like that.  These games are simply a formality.  The important thing is knowing who was selected.  Hearing that a person was a 3-time Pro Bowl selection means a lot.  Whether or not that person even played in the Pro Bowl is of no consequence.  So instead of wasting sports fans' time by showing some meaningless, inconsequential game (after the season, no less), please just say who made it and let's collectively move on. #sports

I've decided that I like playing games.  Games like Taboo, Catch Phrase, Such and Such, Buzz Word, and other such games that usually involve cards, a timer, and much yelling (game-related yelling, not angry yelling).  I wouldn't call them board games because they usually don't involve a board like Monopoly or Scrabble, and board games are entirely different in style and level of fun ($fun = 0).  There's a subset of the aforementioned type of game that I would classify as "get to know you" games.  While any game can be a good chance to get to know the people you're playing with, certain games serve that purpose only, and game content suffers dramatically.  Apples to Apples, for example, is a meaningless game that's completely subjective.  There's no right answer.  I've come to terms with the fact that the point of playing games like this has nothing to do with winning.  It doesn't even matter if you keep score.  The purpose of such games is to yell, laugh, have fun with friends, and spend time with people.  Winning helps though. #psychology