No data

This is a topic that I often return to after new year and there is very little data in our time series. It is taken from a blog I used to write in. It's about one of the more poetic book reviews I've ever come across. The book itself is interesting since I didn't really like it but can't stop thinking about it. The review goes:

I enjoyed this book. I did not enjoy it as much as some books I have read but I did enjoy it more than some other books I have read. The things that the words said happened were interesting to me. Some of the sentences were less interesting to me than some of the other sentences. Some of the sentences that were less interesting to me were less interesting to me because I had read similar things in different sentences in different books on previous occasions. During reading the pages I sometimes thought of things in the world that were not in the book. During reading the pages I sometimes thought of things that were not in the world but were in the book. I did not have to look up any of the words in the book in a dictionary. I was not confused at any point during my reading of this book. If a friend whose reading taste was similar to mine were to ask me if he or she should read this book I would answer in the affirmative, though with only limited enthusiasm.

Perhaps one should always require that the reviewer offers judgement in the same style and character as the content so that they are forced to show their knowledge of the subject. In this case it is striking how little is being said about the book in actual but so much being said about it in style. Perhaps it is the same with data, it is not so much in the numbers we gather but rather in what style we gather the numbers in that matters the most. The book and its review can be found at Goodreads and it could be worth a glance if your reading taste is similar to mine.