Daily NA lists are ok, IMHO, as long as you understand what part of the process they are. If the making of a daily task list is the combination of collecting, processing, organizing, and doing, then it fails. A daily task list is ok when it's clearly part of the "doing" phase. That is, you're taking things from an existing list, and deciding to do them that day if you have time.

The other key here is a healthy understanding of renegotiating these commitments. I think David Allen dislikes the daily task list because it lends itself to not being able to renegotiate commitments. At the end of the day, it's too easy to say to yourself, "Oh, I only did 4 of the 6 things I said I was going to do today. I left myself down." As long as you don't let the daily task list rule you, then it should be fine. Sounds like you have the right attitude about it, but I would go even further (although it might just be the example you used). If I got nothing on the task list done, I ask myself why. Did too many emergencies come up? Did I have too many things that were actually time-specific, so I had no discretionary time? Did I not have enough time or energy, or the right context to do what I said I would do? As long as you approach the daily NA list as what it really is, discretionary tasks, then it should be ok.

All it really does is add one step in the decision-making process. When you have discretionary time, you first whip out the daily list and ask if you can do anything on that, given your context, time, and energy. And if you can't, then move on to the rest of your lists.