The time consumed in this punditry

 (0234)

Coming back to that old exam expression "show your working" or show how you came to the conclusion you did, let me do that right now ... show you what's involved in putting up a post ... here was one item among many:

Draino is a major pundit monitored by the Donald and people, so if he noted this guy FreeStateWill, maybe I should too.  Let me click the Show-more:

... and you'll see there's but one more line.  My usual is then to skim down comments, which I did, until Unherd. This site is becoming slick and problematic, run now by someone trying to "promote" it professionally. Every red flag was showing, inc. saying "click here to read more" ... click bait.

Which took me to a substack, which asked me to subscribe "for free", which is a huge red flag ... we're getting dragged into BS we don't need and because I knew by this point I'd be doing this post item at 0234,  I did click, to be greeted by a single, centre-column screed by some guy putting his view. It was nothing special, the first few paras.

Backclick and keep scrolling down through comments:

Uh huh. I vaguely know what this Juneteenth is ... some stoopid Woke left thing.  Continue:

Genuine question from supposedly "one of us" there. Continue:

That was about it. 0253 a.m. and I'm not a slow delver as a rule. See opening time again ... 0234 ... 19 minutes from read to write.  One topic. Given that I average about 23 items a day, some multiples, I can, I think, reasonably say that "processing" each item is maybe 5 mins for myself ... times say 50 items ... you start to get the idea ... about 250 minutes, just in the exploring, before the screenshooting and compiling starts. Expand 20 of those, maybe for tomorrow as well and that's 300 minutes more. 

Point of writing all this? Just to give an idea why many items I'd skim through but leave it at the Show-more line ... it conveys the main idea. But, say you, why not put in the url? Well it doesn't work that way ... it leads to an X account, not to a plain text article ... and I must so do because all the main players are on X, esp. in the US and UK. You want more? The @symbol is the opening of the moniker, sufficient to find the "conversation", if on X.

All right ... 0306 now, which gives you an idea of the time involved for a post, about to go up at OoL and N.O., hoping Julia will mention it on X later in the day ... as I shall with hers.

(0319)

Just proofing now ... am going to explore that 9-0 abortion pill ruling.

(0324)

I'll puruse that one over at N.O., not at OoL.

(0340)