Efficient inboxes are reliably drained. One way to drain them is to achieve inbox zero, a process where all items in an inbox are clarified and organized in one session. Because all items need to be processed, inbox zero encourages deferral, delegation, and deletion on the spot. This is quite a violent process that might result to regrets. However, it ensures that you close open loops more than they arrive.

According to Andy Matuschak, inbox zero only makes sense if inboxes are small and when the number of open loops arriving constantly exceeds those that are processed. If the number of arriving open loops are quite low, they can still be processed on time without inbox zero.

For Andy, inbox zero could lead to repeated deferral of tasks. An alternative to inbox zero, particularly in the context of maintaining a writing inbox is to defer processing in a tolerable time period. The number of open loops could also be lessened. It is more comfortable deferring decisions if there are very few open loops. However, this is only done through spaced repetition, where an item from an inbox is deferred but automatically returns to one's attention on a later date. While this is a good idea (and something I tried doing in the past), I've opted not to do this and just allow items in my writing inbox to arise naturally based on my current projects and interests.

References

Matuschak, A. (n.d.). Spaced repetition can lower the stakes around destructive inbox-maintenance operations. Andyʼs Working Notes. Retrieved September 7, 2021, from https://notes.andymatuschak.org/Spaced_repetition_can_lower_the_stakes_around_destructive_inbox-maintenance_operations