I do not accept the underlying assumption of this discussion, which is that reading is a skill inherent to the game. Its parallel use in chess shows that it has nothing to do, inherently speaking, with either game. It is an incidental skill that is an historical contingency, a concession to practicality. Time controls are another example of a concession to practicality. Good visual memory (the basis of reading) and quick thinking are not equally distributed in the population, hence some people are handicapped from the start just as a 5-foot player is in basketball. Moreover, most older players face decline in both visual memory and quick thinking. In view of the foregoing, I prefer to play correspondence because I prefer to play better go (better play from my opponents and better play from myself), and if that means the use of tactile analysis, so be it.
I would rather win or lose a game based on a wide range of strategy and tactics, rather than based on a memory lapse.
Yes, like Wulfenia, I record many variations (by hand in my case), although I am doing less and less of that as I progress, because I find that my opponents too often do something unexpected (and strong). LOL, I guess this means my positional sense is very weak, which just goes to show the limited value of tactile analysis.