I'm stopping contributing

Alberto Salvia Novella es20490446e at gmail.com
Thu Jun 8 03:58:40 UTC 2017


Stephen Kellat:
 > Within the strains of my civil service posting, even machine
 > translated text is easier for me to approach than video.

Before I made video-responses widespread I wanted to warrant it wouldn’t 
exclude too much people.

So I picked up a web-site which was English written, but had a wide 
diversity of people from around the world, and made this poll:

(http://girlsaskguys.com/education-career/q2272280-do-you-understand-spoken-english)

It throws that about 92% of people in an English written website will 
also be able to understand spoken English well.


Also the web-media format is incredible efficient at compressing videos, 
and watching a video response will only take as much as visualising a 
6MP photo.

At that point we can discuss that videos are longer to pay attention to, 
but that's only if you choose to do a long explanation versus a minimal one.


The idea of making video responses came out because I realised that most 
arguments which happen online, on a text basis, would never occur in a 
face to face manner.

After sending around a hundred of messages in a questions and answers 
board, where you can usually find political extremists and social 
justice warriors, it shown that very little people would answer my 
video-messages in a rude manner. Even when they usually did when 
interacting with other users, and my points were as upfront as usual.

So even when text has some obvious advantages, those things suggests me 
that video has hidden benefits. And perhaps it's far better suited for 
having discussions with people you are working with than plain text or a 
hangout, which is by far longer.

Not to say these emails takes me long time to write, compared with just 
shooting a quick video. Instead of working, I find myself spending the 
time trying to convince people of details that doesn't really matter.


Lately, when answering my latest message, I could had taken into account 
that it would be rejected anyway if it was on video. But that particular 
explanation had been way harder to understand on text, as it was about 
the disposition of elements in an interface.

I'm usually only showing you the tip of the iceberg. That something is 
short, unorthodox or casual doesn't mean it isn't well designed.

The papercuts logo, that circle with a heart origami in the middle, took 
me 30 hours to design. Imagine if I had to discuss its design in depth 
with someone. Take this email as specimen, took me 2 hours to write. I 
need my life!


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4747 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-bugsquad/attachments/20170608/c8cc50ec/attachment.bin>


More information about the Ubuntu-bugsquad mailing list