You Tubers are uninformed or are they??

[Specmaster]

It has been said here many times before that You Tubers are basically uninformed and therefore not worthy of watching. People who have said that type of thing before, I imploy you to watch this very short video and I think you'll have to agree that so clearly is not the case at all.

Now the story that this presenter is talking about I do know something about it and the person who owns the car being mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3LvbbDJkI0

[tautech]

Some aren't, most are therefore I follow few.
Others are only good at adding clickbait titles to their vids.....a few we know well included !

[Cerebus]

It has been said here many times before that You Tubers are basically uninformed and therefore not worthy of watching. People who have said that type of thing before, I imploy you to watch this very short video and I think you'll have to agree that so clearly is not the case at all.

Now the story that this presenter is talking about I do know something about it and the person who owns the car being mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3LvbbDJkI0

Firstly: "One swallow does not a summer make".

Secondly: You've got into an annoying habit of posting things that force people to go and watch a you tube video if they want to know what your post is actually about. It's typified by the sentence:

Now the story that this presenter is talking about I do know something about it and the person who owns the car being mentioned.

which is constructed with zero information about that's being discussed. There is nothing of substance in that sentence. If we want to know anything about the questions raised by that sentence (What story? What presenter? What subject? What car? Why should we believe that they know anything?) we're forced to watch the video. If you're trying to write clickbait for youtube videos you're doing a great job, if you're trying to communicate you're failing entirely.

Furthermore you characterise the video as 'very short'. It's actually over 10 minutes once you've got past the ads at the beginning. You're demanding that people use up 10 minutes to figure out what you're on about because you can't be bothered to spend two minutes typing.

I'll watch the video, rather than just click through to see which talking head you're trying to direct us to, and how long it really is, once you've told us, in cogent terms, why it worth spending our time watching it.

[tggzzz]

I'll watch the video, rather than just click through to see which talking head you're trying to direct us to, and how long it really is, once you've told us, in cogent terms, why it worth spending our time watching it.

That's my attitude to yoootoob vids in general.

I'm more likely to watch a video if the creator's text indicates the intended audience and what they will have learned at the end[1], plus a timeline indicating which bits I could skip to. That indicates the creator is thinking of the audience, not their own ego.

That filters out a heck of a lot of crap.

[1] the kind of thing people are told to do for any type of presentation in any medium.

[Cerebus]

I'll watch the video, rather than just click through to see which talking head you're trying to direct us to, and how long it really is, once you've told us, in cogent terms, why it worth spending our time watching it.

That's my attitude to yoootoob vids in general.

I'm more likely to watch a video if the creator's text indicates the intended audience and what they will have learned at the end[1], plus a timeline indicating which bits I could skip to. That indicates the creator is thinking of the audience, not their own ego.

That filters out a heck of a lot of crap.

[1] the kind of thing people are told to do for any type of presentation in any medium.

Well, I think we both suffer an annoyance at the prevailing trend of providing information only in video form when it is nearly always better presented in a few short paragraphs that readers can take at their own pace, unencumbered by the "pace it for the slowest mind in the audience" necessary to video production. Moreover, if the information is something one wishes to keep for future reference it's a lot easier to store text at 2k per page rather than 20Mb per minute (typically 1 page of script = 1 minute on screen), and it's much easier to skip to the information one wants in a document than it is in a video of comparable length.

[mnementh]

Let's just set fire to the internet and start all over again, with Cerebus as Supreme Grand Hegemon of All Things.

mnem
Still better than watching another minute of the current indictment shitshow...

[Specmaster]

I'll watch the video, rather than just click through to see which talking head you're trying to direct us to, and how long it really is, once you've told us, in cogent terms, why it worth spending our time watching it.

That's my attitude to yoootoob vids in general.

I'm more likely to watch a video if the creator's text indicates the intended audience and what they will have learned at the end[1], plus a timeline indicating which bits I could skip to. That indicates the creator is thinking of the audience, not their own ego.

That filters out a heck of a lot of crap.

[1] the kind of thing people are told to do for any type of presentation in any medium.

Well, I think we both suffer an annoyance at the prevailing trend of providing information only in video form when it is nearly always better presented in a few short paragraphs that readers can take at their own pace, unencumbered by the "pace it for the slowest mind in the audience" necessary to video production. Moreover, if the information is something one wishes to keep for future reference it's a lot easier to store text at 2k per page rather than 20Mb per minute (typically 1 page of script = 1 minute on screen), and it's much easier to skip to the information one wants in a document than it is in a video of comparable length.

Problem with that is that it would then come over as purely my take on things and that IS not the message that I'm trying to convey, I'm trying to put forward information for consideration and also of course if you skip over certain bits of information then the rest of the information that you consume is being taken completely out of context and then there is the ensuing debacle over that then when you appear to cherry-pick points to comment on, and you rubbish the person making the video when often the person has already mentioned the points you pick on, and they explain why it didn't work for them, but by then its completely gone straight over your head, and then it seems as if you and I are arguing and that is never my intention .

For some stupid and unexplainable reason, you seem to have formed the opinion that I'm anti EV and when that is so clearly not the case at all.

[tggzzz]

I'll watch the video, rather than just click through to see which talking head you're trying to direct us to, and how long it really is, once you've told us, in cogent terms, why it worth spending our time watching it.

That's my attitude to yoootoob vids in general.

I'm more likely to watch a video if the creator's text indicates the intended audience and what they will have learned at the end[1], plus a timeline indicating which bits I could skip to. That indicates the creator is thinking of the audience, not their own ego.

That filters out a heck of a lot of crap.

[1] the kind of thing people are told to do for any type of presentation in any medium.

Well, I think we both suffer an annoyance at the prevailing trend of providing information only in video form when it is nearly always better presented in a few short paragraphs that readers can take at their own pace, unencumbered by the "pace it for the slowest mind in the audience" necessary to video production. Moreover, if the information is something one wishes to keep for future reference it's a lot easier to store text at 2k per page rather than 20Mb per minute (typically 1 page of script = 1 minute on screen), and it's much easier to skip to the information one wants in a document than it is in a video of comparable length.

Dictation speed was, IIRC, 60 wpm. That paragraph has about 120 words => 2 minutes. I read it in about 20s, and I could have speed read it in 10s.

10:1?! No contest.

OK, I'm a fast reader, but that doesn't change my point nor your point. I can remember not being able to read - or more accurately my second earliest memory is of asking my father to teach me to read, which he did.

[tggzzz]

Problem with that is that it would then come over as purely my take on things and that IS not the message that I'm trying to convey, ...

The problem with that is that simply by presenting the material you are indicating that "your take" is that it is worthy of our attention. If that isn't the case then why not link to millions (literally) of other videos.

[Specmaster]

Problem with that is that it would then come over as purely my take on things and that IS not the message that I'm trying to convey, ...

The problem with that is that simply by presenting the material you are indicating that "your take" is that it is worthy of our attention. If that isn't the case then why not link to millions (literally) of other videos.

Hmm, by that token, we are all guilty then, there are simply lots of links to articles and videos posted here by others and I follow the links, read the documents or watch the videos whatever, but I don't comment on it if I found it wasn't to my liking etc, I just quietly move onto to the next post, in other words to use one of Paul's phrases, I pull my big boy pants up and move on.

I admit that I have often learned something new or changed my own views after watching a video or reading an article that somebody thought was worthy of our attention, as previously I have said, my mind is never closed to new ideas and things, that's how learning happens.

[vk6zgo]

It has been said here many times before that You Tubers are basically uninformed and therefore not worthy of watching. People who have said that type of thing before, I imploy you to watch this very short video and I think you'll have to agree that so clearly is not the case at all.

Now the story that this presenter is talking about I do know something about it and the person who owns the car being mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3LvbbDJkI0

He is seriously hard work to listen to, but the gist of the video highlights the lack of attention that some journalists apply to their profession.
It happens about a lot of things.

I remember many years ago, when we, for a short, agonising while, owned a "corner shop" (what is commonly termed a "Deli" in Oz).
Early one Sunday morning, our issues of the local Sunday rags, "The Sunday Times", & the "Sunday Independent" were dropped off.

It so happened that NASA had a fairly important launch on at the time, & the "Independent" reported that the launch had been carried out satisfactorily.
All good, except that it had been reported on the radio that due to weather conditions the launch had been postponed.

It seems that as the time came to go to press, the launch was still undecided, so the "Independent" "flipped a coin" & got it wrong!
Their competitor got it right, with a report of the postponement.

The "Sunday Times" could hardly preen themselves, though, as over the time I worked for the CH7 Network, that body, with only a few hours lead time, got their facts right, more often than the "Sunday Times" which had the best part of a week to verify things!

[tggzzz]

It has been said here many times before that You Tubers are basically uninformed and therefore not worthy of watching. People who have said that type of thing before, I imploy you to watch this very short video and I think you'll have to agree that so clearly is not the case at all.

Now the story that this presenter is talking about I do know something about it and the person who owns the car being mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3LvbbDJkI0

He is seriously hard work to listen to, but the gist of the video highlights the lack of attention that some journalists apply to their profession.
It happens about a lot of things.

And that took me 5s to read and realise that it would contain zero surprises - and therefore be a waste of my life to watch. Thank you for showing that consideration to the rest of us

[Cerebus]

That's my attitude to yoootoob vids in general.

I'm more likely to watch a video if the creator's text indicates the intended audience and what they will have learned at the end[1], plus a timeline indicating which bits I could skip to. That indicates the creator is thinking of the audience, not their own ego.

That filters out a heck of a lot of crap.

[1] the kind of thing people are told to do for any type of presentation in any medium.

Well, I think we both suffer an annoyance at the prevailing trend of providing information only in video form when it is nearly always better presented in a few short paragraphs that readers can take at their own pace, unencumbered by the "pace it for the slowest mind in the audience" necessary to video production. Moreover, if the information is something one wishes to keep for future reference it's a lot easier to store text at 2k per page rather than 20Mb per minute (typically 1 page of script = 1 minute on screen), and it's much easier to skip to the information one wants in a document than it is in a video of comparable length.

Problem with that is that it would then come over as purely my take on things and that IS not the message that I'm trying to convey, I'm trying to put forward information for consideration and also of course if you skip over certain bits of information then the rest of the information that you consume is being taken completely out of context and then there is the ensuing debacle over that then when you appear to cherry-pick points to comment on, and you rubbish the person making the video when often the person has already mentioned the points you pick on, and they explain why it didn't work for them, but by then its completely gone straight over your head, and then it seems as if you and I are arguing and that is never my intention .

For some stupid and unexplainable reason, you seem to have formed the opinion that I'm anti EV and when that is so clearly not the case at all.

I wish you could learn to read what is in front of you. Did I mention EVs? No. I'm complaining about "Here is this video, watch it!" with nothing, nada, zilch to tell us why we should watch it.

Let me do a Graham:

Now the stories that this presenter is talking about I do know something about it and the kind of people being mentioned. (Do you have any idea at this point what the video I'm linking is about?) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mskXKR6Na04

[Specmaster]

It has been said here many times before that You Tubers are basically uninformed and therefore not worthy of watching. People who have said that type of thing before, I imploy you to watch this very short video and I think you'll have to agree that so clearly is not the case at all.

Now the story that this presenter is talking about I do know something about it and the person who owns the car being mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3LvbbDJkI0

He is seriously hard work to listen to, but the gist of the video highlights the lack of attention that some journalists apply to their profession.
It happens about a lot of things.

I remember many years ago, when we, for a short, agonising while, owned a "corner shop" (what is commonly termed a "Deli" in Oz).
Early one Sunday morning, our issues of the local Sunday rags, "The Sunday Times", & the "Sunday Independent" were dropped off.

It so happened that NASA had a fairly important launch on at the time, & the "Independent" reported that the launch had been carried out satisfactorily.
All good, except that it had been reported on the radio that due to weather conditions the launch had been postponed.

It seems that as the time came to go to press, the launch was still undecided, so the "Independent" "flipped a coin" & got it wrong!
Their competitor got it right, with a report of the postponement.

The "Sunday Times" could hardly preen themselves, though, as over the time I worked for the CH7 Network, that body, with only a few hours lead time, got their facts right, more often than the "Sunday Times" which had the best part of a week to verify things!

When it comes to the main stream media if its newspapers about the only thing you be sure of is correct, is the date, with TV and radio, especially these days they have to broadcast and report just what they are told to. We have all witnessed just much politics these days and wealthy moguls are manipulating the MSN.

[tggzzz]

It has been said here many times before that You Tubers are basically uninformed and therefore not worthy of watching. People who have said that type of thing before, I imploy you to watch this very short video and I think you'll have to agree that so clearly is not the case at all.

Now the story that this presenter is talking about I do know something about it and the person who owns the car being mentioned.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g3LvbbDJkI0

He is seriously hard work to listen to, but the gist of the video highlights the lack of attention that some journalists apply to their profession.
It happens about a lot of things.

I remember many years ago, when we, for a short, agonising while, owned a "corner shop" (what is commonly termed a "Deli" in Oz).
Early one Sunday morning, our issues of the local Sunday rags, "The Sunday Times", & the "Sunday Independent" were dropped off.

It so happened that NASA had a fairly important launch on at the time, & the "Independent" reported that the launch had been carried out satisfactorily.
All good, except that it had been reported on the radio that due to weather conditions the launch had been postponed.

It seems that as the time came to go to press, the launch was still undecided, so the "Independent" "flipped a coin" & got it wrong!
Their competitor got it right, with a report of the postponement.

The "Sunday Times" could hardly preen themselves, though, as over the time I worked for the CH7 Network, that body, with only a few hours lead time, got their facts right, more often than the "Sunday Times" which had the best part of a week to verify things!

When it comes to the main stream media if its newspapers about the only thing you be sure of is correct, is the date, with TV and radio, especially these days they have to broadcast and report just what they are told to. We have all witnessed just much politics these days and wealthy moguls are manipulating the MSN.

The revealing phrase there is "main stream media".

[Cerebus]

The revealing phrase there is "main stream media".

[tggzzz]

I did have a pleasant experience with a banks CSR where I told him plain vanilla browser up to date no plugins only used for banking - and he apologised for having to skip through his screen prompts because i had already addressed the points.

I was pleased to thank him