How is what a person ought to do over a period of time related to what they ought to do at some given point in that period of time? The 'Procrastinate' case bears on this question in a way that has led to a good deal of debate. I look afresh at the case in light of the distinction between what agents objectively ought to do versus what they ought subjectively or expectively ought to do, and in light of some of the ensuing debate. I will not presuppose knowledge of the Procrastinate case.