So, it may be just me being old and slow, but .. 1. I've not been following #CCL5VVBAN videos reliably, and some of the above seem to assume I/we are up to speed with your work and know what you're doing already; maybe start from the beginning? 2. I know it's only 2 minutes, but you've got 52 weeks a year to play with, so how about slowing down a bit - or maybe over-running to 2:59 ;o] - so we can all have a chance to actually grasp what's going on in your show? On the plus side, you've got my attention, @Ivan Reese - great idea! 😄

There was a big discussion in #C5T9GPWFL a few days ago: https://futureofcoding.slack.com/archives/C5T9GPWFL/p1586714499350400 In it, we covered a lot of thoughts about format. I'll try to summarize the consensus. • These videos are meant to give the audience a taste of what the various projects in this community look like. It's to move the focus away from just sharing links to stuff we find, and more toward our communal effort to actually build the future of programming. We're probably going to do more things like this over the next few months (like, say, a wiki with info about all our projects), so this is just one piece of an emerging puzzle. • It's not super important that these videos show lots of context. They're not primarily meant to help people come to an understanding of what the project is or what ideas are behind it. If folks want to provide that context within the two minute limit, they can, but it's probably better handled in longer videos or on web pages that can be linked to as needed. • Another reason that big context is a nice-to-have but not a necessity is that new folks coming to the community should not be expected to re-watch all the past videos. As we do more of these videos, we'll get better at figuring out how to show things in a way that's comprehensible to newcomers but not repetitive to folks following along from the start. And credit where due — this was mostly @Mariano Guerra coming through with yet another great idea, and @Kartik Agaram and others generating lots of careful consideration and feedback. I just did the admin stuff :)

each video generated questions that provide the context as needed, I guess with time we will build the context for the FAQs of the project. I do believe more context is good to know what we are watching, but I find that I'm more interested on the context once I see a 2 min video than before 🙂

Speak for yourself, @Mariano Guerra...

probably, but I've seen more videos posted in a few days in wto-minute-week than months on feedback 🙂

Novelty effect, I suspect 🙂 Another potential cause is the explicit call for a weekly cadence. It didn't occur to me before that it was ok to spam #CCL5VVBAN every week. Then again, weekly may be too much for me. Lobste.rs has a weekly "what are you working on" thread, but I only seem to post every 5 weeks on average. That's still more than on #CCL5VVBAN, though.

if it removes the gray area of how much is too much then it's a good thing, also the cadence may invite people to "not break the chain" https://lifehacker.com/jerry-seinfelds-productivity-secret-281626

Let me put it another way: I thought @Ivan Reese did a great job of clearly explaining from the start what he was doing. So sadly I'm not likely to view any more of these videos myself now, because I've just no idea what's going on in them. I've haven't been 'hooked'.

Speaking for myself, I tried to give a really quick overview in my first video; and I figured I could expand on things later on. It is also not quite clear to me which things to talk about (or even if my project in general is of interest to folks here). For example; I plan on integrating Fe and doing generation of GUI from code, and that probably is of interest to FoC users. But what if I add, for example, an FFT display of audio (as I plan to this week). It's part of the project, but it probably isn't FoC relevant? Anyhow, I really enjoy getting feedback and publishing work that is often a lonely enterprise (until I get to Alpha 1 on get everything on github, anyway 😉

Yeah soz, @Chris Maughan just went and watched your video: it certainly gets interesting quickly, I originally stopped watching when I saw a text editor with tiny text and you saying it's "live coding"!😅 I'm now hooked and will look out for your next installment!

@Duncan Cragg I didn't take offence at all; but it is interesting that you stopped before I got to the good stuff 😉 I will consider how to make the videos interesting up-front! Maybe that's all part of the learning process.

My lesson from this thread is to add a picture of a rainbow or a pony at the start of my video, just to suck @Duncan Cragg in. After that I can start showing my terminal without scaring him away 😛 More seriously, I'm watching https://www.infoq.com/presentations/power-144-chip now, and I'm pausing through this 45-minute talk literally every 2 seconds, so I can digest what he says before I move on. So there seem to be two modes for consumption: * Who the heck are you? I can't spend more than 2 minutes on this shit at the moment. * I know who you are, and I'm choosing to slow down and imbibe. (Maybe I also want to backtrack, choose directions, ask questions? Maybe we need a new medium here. InfoQ is pretty decent with the video and slideshow separated. Can we make them tree-like?) The presumption with 2-minute video is that if it doesn't hit, nobody's going to spend time trying to understand why. But at least you get to expose a whole bunch of people and see if anybody sticks.

I agree, I've found that my long overviews are the least seen videos and they have an engagent cliff of >80% before the second minute. Maybe different formats work for different authors/audiences, we have to keep looking for what works, I don't think a single format works for all, a mix of them should maximize the effect

(Aside — that 144-chip talk is fantastic.)

Don't wanna 🌈 or a 🐎, I wanna 🌈🦄 😠

@Kartik Agaram i hope you’re posting notes on your blog!

@Garth Goldwater this was my top take-away: https://mastodon.social/@akkartik/104026894131133154

thanks!