I was originally for a pace of two per week, just knowing my own work schedule. But if there are truly going to be 800 articles represented in the book, then one a day is the only workable solution. Do we know that the book will be broken out into something like 800 articles?
I was wrong about the number—the number is approximately 300 articles. I’m basing this on the kickstarter page for the audio version, on the sidebar under where it says “Pledge $50 or more”.
Still, 300 articles would take almost a year at 1 per day and almost 6 years at once per week.
One additional thing to note is that most of the articles aren’t that long. If you can more or less keep up with Slate Star Codex then I’d guess you should have no problem with once a day Sequences. If you missed a day or two, or even a week or two, it wouldn’t take you all that long to catch up.
Maybe we should look at a compromise: Would every other day (so about two years total) maybe work better?
Looks like it’s time for yet another poll. My, this thread is getting rather full of those.
If you split up some of the longer articles, you might be able to get it to exactly 365 days of blog posts. :)
The eBook will be organized into 26 sequences, all of similar length; so if you want to start new discussion threads, perhaps you should do one thread per sequence rather than one per blog post.
26 sequences one every other week is precisely 52 weeks = the number of weeks in a year. Not bad.
Assuming there are about 300 articles total, that comes out to about 11 or 12 articles per sequence on average, which at one every other week is a little less than once per day.
I think I’d still prefer an article per day (or every other day, as per earlier poll), but I’ll let others weigh in on this. Should I do yet another poll?
I’d sooner go for one a week; I think that’s closer to the likely reading pace and it means we quickly find out whether it works. We could easily follow it with an article-a-day presentation if that’s what we think is best after learning from the sequence-a-week presentation.
I was originally for a pace of two per week, just knowing my own work schedule. But if there are truly going to be 800 articles represented in the book, then one a day is the only workable solution. Do we know that the book will be broken out into something like 800 articles?
I was wrong about the number—the number is approximately 300 articles. I’m basing this on the kickstarter page for the audio version, on the sidebar under where it says “Pledge $50 or more”.
Still, 300 articles would take almost a year at 1 per day and almost 6 years at once per week.
One additional thing to note is that most of the articles aren’t that long. If you can more or less keep up with Slate Star Codex then I’d guess you should have no problem with once a day Sequences. If you missed a day or two, or even a week or two, it wouldn’t take you all that long to catch up.
Maybe we should look at a compromise: Would every other day (so about two years total) maybe work better?
Looks like it’s time for yet another poll. My, this thread is getting rather full of those.
What pace would you prefer?
[pollid:828]
If you split up some of the longer articles, you might be able to get it to exactly 365 days of blog posts. :)
The eBook will be organized into 26 sequences, all of similar length; so if you want to start new discussion threads, perhaps you should do one thread per sequence rather than one per blog post.
We should totally try this before doing sequence reruns—do a discussion group on, say, a sequence a week.
26 sequences one every other week is precisely 52 weeks = the number of weeks in a year. Not bad.
Assuming there are about 300 articles total, that comes out to about 11 or 12 articles per sequence on average, which at one every other week is a little less than once per day.
I think I’d still prefer an article per day (or every other day, as per earlier poll), but I’ll let others weigh in on this. Should I do yet another poll?
I’d sooner go for one a week; I think that’s closer to the likely reading pace and it means we quickly find out whether it works. We could easily follow it with an article-a-day presentation if that’s what we think is best after learning from the sequence-a-week presentation.
FYI, each sequence is (very roughly) 20,000 words.
Assuming it is slower to read than the standard 200 wpm, that’s still only a couple of hours each; seems doable!
Poll:
[pollid:837]