• Do you mind? Kinda busy here. •
[1 MIN READ]
Some of you SRC readers may have noticed the estimated reading durations that have been a part of my Ruminations for a few months. I started noticing durations as a thing on NewYorkTimes.com. Most of my Rums hover between 1 and 2 minutes to finish. Most NYT readings, are just little longer.
Since I started publishing Rums as blogposts on my website (iCandybyWangC), I realized that knowing the reading duration could be helpful for folks who might land on it and realize that running writing is a heck of a lot easier to digest than the typical academic article you can also find there. Oddly, even 1-2 minutes is too long for some. Thinking it was relevant to our conversation, I asked Half Caff during one SRC if he read my most recent one. His response: Too long; didn’t read.
The whole issue made me appreciate this NYT opinion piece even more because the author mentioned exactly that NYT phenomenon of adding durations (on its website). For my part, I just time my typical read. Even then, reading in my head vs. out loud can make a difference of ±25%. Big difference. I’d accept minus 25% in a race any day. One minute, this one: HC, you still there?
-CtCloser (Calvinthe) “Negative Split or Positive Splat” #dothedue
FINE PRINT
¶Text by Calvin Wang (Wäng), CC BY-NC-SA 4.0. ¶Cross-published: Facebook Shawmont Running Club (ZY Weekly Newsletter 8/26/23), Ruminations by CtCloser. ¶Based on true events. Likenesses used with permission.
iCandybyWangC 