Also, "wall of text" generally refers to a long piece of text lacking formatting, punctuation, and separation into paragraphs and sections. This article, while long, does not have those problems.

Let's raise some specific complaints:

>So if you see "2 days 18 hours" that means "66 hours total time spent on this activity".

Completely superfluous. He goes on for 3 sentences explaining that a day contains 24 hours. WOW! AND he couldn't figure out how to keep his units, or make it unitless.

Chart 2:

>Here's how my work week tends to break down:

We break down the day into 4 time frames. Why? When does each timeframe begin and end? If the time is for a "work week" then why the hell does "monday" contain almost 200 hours? That's for 6 months, you say? Why?! It should be an average for a work week! No one intuitively knows how many hours occur on mondays over a 6 month period. Is that a lot of hours, or a few? You would have to do some mental math to even interpret this chart.

Chart 3:

>stacked bar graph

Enough said. It's impossible to comparatively interpret stacked bar graphs over time. You want to use a line graph when you want to compare things over time. Tell me, did he spend more time podcasting on 7/21, or the week after that? "Obvious!" you say, "he spent more time! It's clear!" Look again, however! The next week is 7/28, but the next label is 8/18. What? Where is 7/28? The labels are seemingly randomly distributed, with no rhyme or reason! Eventually you find 7/28 and lo-and-behold... they look about the same, but had to mouse over it to check, didn't you? Because they are separated vertically by nearly the entire chart.

And we didn't even get around to Happiness 3.0 Make a Change App Activity, which contains 41 distinct labels, and you can only read 3 of them at a time, and has all the same problems as the above... Or the Instagram chart that seems to contain the entire message as the label? Does an instagram post take 4 hours to make? What does this chart even mean?

Let's not sit here and suggest that it's "friendly advice" that a person isn't being helpful when they don't defend every statement they make. Anyone who tried to read this, actually read this, would immediately see that these charts are garbage and nearly meaningless. They probably make sense to the person who made them, but as a method of conveying information in a blog post to others, we can criticize without writing a dissertation about the mistakes here.

^ unfriendly advice

If you didn't mistate the dates, then it might even be changing its random distribution :-)

Now going back to look over the post to write this response I happened to mouse over the chart (something that I could do because I happened to be at my computer, but something I missed the first time on mobile) it actually showed me the values for each segment, and I was able to figure out what was going on. The units are days, but they are 24 hour days (since the entire post is about work schedules I would have assumed 8 hour days). That explains why the maximum tend to be ~2 (because 2 days is 48 hours). The chart would be a lot more intuitive if the duration was in hours, and no matter what the units should be labeled explicitly (in this case I would use "24 hour days").

First one is obvious.

Second one becomes quickly clear when you realize that it has to be total of hours over some period of time. Otherwise it would not make sense.

Third one is quite interesting. It is very informative and interesting to observe.

These charts could be made better naturally.

Title and short description would definitely help.

For the second one I would also include totals - for each day, for each time period and most importantly grand total that has to be the same for days and periods. Also small explanation that this is hours distribution over period of this and that.

For the third one I would fix units of the duration. Current ones are difficult to interpret. Hours scale would make the most sense probably - 10, 20, ..., 40 (a normal work week, in the middle), ... 80.

I do not think that there is nothing bad in having multiple interests. Distributing ones time between multiple interests is a difficult task to tackle but it does not make it automatically meaningless. It is actually a good idea to have some time management and good data always helps.