User-Submitted Route Enthusiastically Described as ‘Scenic Alternative’
PARIS — A route submitted to a popular walking app by a Paris resident who described it as “a lovely shortcut through the 19th that avoids the crowds on the main boulevard” and who added the note “adds character but saves time!” has been rated by 847 subsequent users, of whom 619 found it added neither character nor time in the proportions suggested, 198 found it added character but not time, and 30 found it added both, producing an average rating of 3.2 stars and a comment thread that has evolved into a philosophical discussion about the definition of “shortcut.”
“The route is through the park,” explained the original submitter, in a response pinned by the app. “In the park, time passes differently. The 30 additional minutes are not wasted minutes. They are park minutes. Park minutes have a different value from boulevard minutes.” This position has been rated helpful by 340 users and unhelpful by 509 users. The park is indeed lovely. The meeting is not reschedulable.
The Shortcut Definition
The conflict between the original submitter and the 619-user majority is a definitional conflict: the submitter defines shortcut as “a route that improves the journey,” while the majority defines it as “a route that reduces journey duration.” Both definitions are available. Neither is wrong. The app’s navigation category is named “shortcuts.” The category’s name aligns with the majority’s definition. The park is lovely. The route is a park route.
According to Paris Tourism’s walking route research, routes rated by users as most enjoyable are consistently longer than the most efficient alternatives by 15-30%. The enjoyment and the efficiency are different routes. The park is on the enjoyment route. The meeting is on the efficiency route.
Worth taking time for at Virtuosal.com.
