Would love some honest thoughts on whether it seems like there is something actually interesting here or not. (or tips on how to improve). My biggest "improvement" to date has been using canva to make half decent thumbnails haha
So you have several videos on mock interview questions, but instead of being able to skim the video titles and knowing which ones are that the word "mock interview" appears at a seemingly random place in the video's title.
Valid Parentheses (LC 20) Mock Interview - No Decision
VR Mock Interview- Nearly Sorted Array - Success
Coin Change - VR Mock Coding Interview - #3
Honestly the titling is just outright bad. I don't know what "LC 20" means and I didn't realize that "VR" was in reference to the animation style, and don't understand why that's important or relevant.
Putting: Success, No Decision, #3, etc in the title isn't clear what it is, or why I'd want to watch these where the candidate did NOT succeed. The whole format is just strange.
Bigger issue is I cannot read the handwriting in particular in this one:
Dam, this is awesome, concrete feedback.
I'm only realizing right now how crappy the titles are, going to address this asap.
WRT the handwriting: I may end up switching to a typed format since its supported in workrooms and everything is remote nowadays anyway.
My thoughts with watching the failures: it helps to see what doesn't work during an interview.
Ex. So many people jump straight into coding before even thinking about the problem or asking clarifying questions. This is a big red flag during interviews. It might make the value prop clearer if I add some commentary over the failures to explain what went wrong and why.
I'm still trying to suss out whether it makes sense to post the failure vids, so thanks for pointing that out
I can't read anything written and it doesn't seem scripted making getting through it difficult.
Technical people want concise, easy to digest, easy to search (text! not video) reference materials. A combination of long form articles with white boarding videos that were clearer in both visuals and scripting would go a long way to adding value.
It's definitely not scripted, these are actual mock interviews I'm conducting in a VR setting.What I'm taking away from this is that trying to recreate an in person environment isn't the goal, the goal is to create an awesome video thats easy to consume. Makes complete sense, thanks for the feedback
I’ll offer a different perspective. If I’m looking for an answer I want a concise and straight to the point explanation.
If I’m trying to understand about the dynamics of an interview or even understand how people smarter than me get to a solution, I might want to go through the whole journey.
I guess this part comes down to an editorial decision: are you trying to offer technical solutions or are you trying to do something else?
Knowing the answer to that question might help you decide what path to take.
Why don’t you use a keyboard to type the text and make it actually readable?
The content might be interesting but the barrier to understand it seems unnecessarily high to the point I don’t want to invest time to figure out if it’s worth it or not.
I was trying to recreate the in person white boarding experience, but that probably isn't the move here since the candidates are having a ton of trouble writing legibly, making the coding portion almost useless for the video. I can't read it myself even when I'm in the environment.
I'm probably going to NIX the actual whiteboarding portion and lean more into a text based approach based off all the feedback here.
Would love some honest thoughts on whether it seems like there is something actually interesting here or not. (or tips on how to improve). My biggest "improvement" to date has been using canva to make half decent thumbnails haha