You don't find video reviews of writing samples useful?
That's not the point, from my perspective. The signal-to-noise ratio (or ratio of useful, meaningful, enlightening content versus puff and padding material measured in minutes and seconds) in video reviews put me off. It may contain the one gem of useful information that cannot be had any other way, but I'm not going to sit through ten or fifty minutes of a video review to come across it three-quarters of the way in, then sit through the rest not knowing whether more useful information awaits. If that single morsel of "useful" information in a video is going to make the win-or-lose difference in a million-dollar investment; I'd sit through it. Hell, if I'm getting paid my professional rates to sit through an hour-long meeting that is boring, I'd sit through it sufficiently attentively. But the average video review of pen, ink or paper online delivers/offers much less at stake.
There are those who enjoy video reviews as "pen porn" and/or entertainment with which to while away the time. I don't; I'd rather be napping, shopping, out running around the Sydney Opera House for physical exercise, or even watching actual pr0n. However, I don't question any of my fellows' prerogative to prefer otherwise. It's just not my style to be spoon-fed information and "entertained" along the way; I prefer something that either tests the viewer's or learner's endurance to mindfully extract useful information akin to finding needles in a haystack, so that the more attentive and astute wins (materially), or a Q&A format where a questor spends hours formulating, distilling and wording a 500-word query, and get a 30-word expert response that cuts through all the noise and distractions to shine a light on the nub of the matter, so that the questor can then send a few more hours understanding the advice and focusing his/her attention on further (or revisited) research.
I can't recall too many occasions where hours (or minutes) of research and formulating a query warrants the equivalent in response of time spent or words published. Video reviews seem to demand far more from viewers than the bits of information that is actually useful to the individual.
However, this is going all very off-topic.
I wished they talked more about price and value and comparables.
Personally, that's something I'd just above never do, because I think it alludes to "worth" and/or business analysis. (Just to be clear, I was a business analyst in most of my professional career, by whatever position title that was accorded or trendy at the time.) I want people to get what they want, even though they may have to pay a price they don't want to pay; or alternatively accept they're choosing to forgo what they want eyes wide open for economical reasons. Optimising for what the individual could get for what they're prepared (or find "affordable") to spend is one of the last things I would ever want to be concerned about or address.
Edited by A Smug Dill, 07 July 2020 - 11:24.
As always: 1. Implicit in everything and every instance I write on FPN is the invitation for you to judge me as a peer in the community. I think it's only due respect to take each other's written word in online discussion seriously and apply critical judgment. 2. I do not presume to judge for you what is right, correct or valid. If I make a claim, or refute a statement in a thread, and link to references and other information in support, I beseech you to review and consider those, and judge for yourself. I may be wrong. My position or say-so carries no more weight than anyone else's here, and external parties can speak for themselves with what they have published. 3. I endeavour to be frank and truthful in what I write, show or otherwise present when I relate my first-hand experiences that are not independently verifiable. If it is something you can test for yourself and see the results, I entreat you to do so.