You review a sentence three times within the first two months: the day after you first saw it, 10 days later, and 30 days later. From then onwards, it’s only every 180 days.
Therefore, the number of times you have to review a word is
- three multiplied by the number of sentences in which that word occurs,
- or literally only three times if you play the Fluency Fast Track
if you only consider the first two months after first seeing a sentence.
In the “Fast Track”, if you see the sentence more often, you got it wrong and obviously needed the additional repetitions.
Since Clozemaster uses the database Tatoeba as its source, the real complaint of this user is that the Tatoeba database is too large, or at least that the training set that Clozemaster uses is too large.
The solution to that problem is already there, and it’s called “Fast Track”. As that particular user admitted himself/herself, after switching to the Fluency Fast Track (which contains every word only once) their “problem” of seeing that word to often solved itself.
To me, it’s a feature and not a problem that there is so much source material to study. In my opinion, testing a word only three times is not enough.
Idea: Maybe it would help if “Fast Track” were renamed to "For the impatient“.
Users are free to choose between “impatient mode” and “thorough mode”.
If a user doesn’t take up the offer of an “impatient mode” and then complains that he/she is bored “to death” by the wealth of source material, the problem is not with Clozemaster. If a user thinks he/she understood a word/sentence, the user can mark it as known. If a user thinks he/she understood, for example, the 500 most common words, nobody stops him/her from moving on to the 1000 most common words collection. Nobody is forcing him/her to take the 500 most common words collection to 100% completion if he/she doesn’t enjoy it. So much for that criticism.
I like it that there are so many sentences—because if I decide to learn a language, I want to do it thoroughly—and I don’t see the need to reduce their number if there already is “Fluency Fast Track” for the impatient.
Either way, the criticism is entirely unfounded. I think at the root of this entire topic is just the lazy approach of certain people wanting to see quick results but not wanting to do the required work. This doesn’t mean Clozemaster couldn’t improve its UX or progress visualization, but I don’t think Clozemaster needs to—or should—do anything to appeal particularly to such users, at least not if that means reducing the number of sentences within the collections or anything else that would also affect the more serious learners in any way.