Off-topic: I love reading articles that use 2-column format. I think it should be done more often. Although I wished the font would have been a "seriffed" one.
I think it's a bit weird to have to scroll down and up again. Doesn't make a ton of sense to me, especially if the article gets really long.
In this particular case it's also not responsive, which makes it a pretty bad experience on mobile. I would be curious if there's a good version of a 2-column layout; but I don't think this is it.
I hate 2-column format on screen, so I guess that's a matter of taste. Printed is ok though, maybe because you generally keep paper closer to your eyes than screen.
Not sure about the down votes here. I think columns are acceptable in digital as long as they are responsive (e.g. 1 column mobile, 2 column normal, 3 column wide).
Why columns?
Good-length columns minimize your eye movement and make it less tiring to read.
More than about 10 words per line require you to move your eyes too much horizontally or vertically and you can lose a train of thought etc.
> Not sure about the down votes here. I think columns are acceptable in digital as long as they are responsive (e.g. 1 column mobile, 2 column normal, 3 column wide).
Which is not the case here. Resizing the browser keeps the same number of columns.
I meant in the general case of course. This specific site design, which appears to be from the early 2000s, is older than phones using the "real" internet so perhaps you can forgive them for not making a responsive website.
In this particular case it's also not responsive, which makes it a pretty bad experience on mobile. I would be curious if there's a good version of a 2-column layout; but I don't think this is it.