Well, I must admit I meant s&#x2F;talking&#x2F;any kind of direct communication&#x2F;, but if colocating works for you... :)  Just to offer the view from the other side, I&#x27;m currently working with a group that&#x27;s very embracing of remote work and fluid schedules, and still easily ranks as one of the most highly communicative and well-organized places I&#x27;ve had the fortune of experiencing.<p>It&#x27;s hard to look straight at a good situation and say &quot;why&quot; the magic is there with any certainty.  That said, from this group I&#x27;ve noticed our PMs are very focused on asking developers questions to help keep the issue tracking to reflect their work, and very rarely make any changes until discussing them out-of-band.  Doesn&#x27;t matter if it&#x27;s in person or over Slack or video Hangouts; it&#x27;s the pattern of involvement that seems to cause the spark.  It&#x27;s a habit I definitely intend to try to take with me.<p>I&#x27;m not sure user-oriented queues could be completely emulated with view filters.  Maybe it&#x27;s possible, but optional views seem to have limited impact on the overall flow of work unless <i>everyone</i> in the team agrees to use them.<p>As an aside, the abundance of optional views and filters is one of my biggest beefs with the likes of JIRA.  The first thing I do if contracting within a new group that uses JIRA is ask <i>exactly</i> which views and filters the PM uses to navigate the backlog, because otherwise I&#x27;m hopelessly lost as far as getting on their wavelength... and this makes customizable view features quite the irony to me!  Tracker mostly seems to dodge this bullet since everyone lands looking at the same lanes in the same order by default, which is cool -- that kind of informational inertia in layout and navigation is huge.  (That concept of inertia also jives well with per-user queues: someone can freely organize their own tasks in a personally meaningful way without wrecking the inertia another user&#x27;s view.)  The trick is keeping that inertia feature intact when huge amounts of info gets dumped into the system.  And I&#x27;m <i>totally</i> on board with the countpoint &quot;you just shouldn&#x27;t have that many tasks, because you&#x27;re fibbing yourself anyway&quot;, but at the same time, I really can&#x27;t recommend a big enterprise starts just haemorrhaging security tickets from the record entirely if they can&#x27;t keep their todo list short enough.<p>Perhaps length-limited per-user queues combined with different mechanisms for &quot;not on anyone&#x27;s radar today&quot; backlog grooming can find a new sweet spot?