[ SECRET POST #6043 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #6043 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.



__________________________________________________



03.



__________________________________________________



04.



__________________________________________________



05.



__________________________________________________



06.



__________________________________________________



07.

























Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 35 secrets from Secret Submission Post #864.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

07. https://i.imgur.com/JIDHToi.png

[(Anonymous)]

I almost want to check out that channel just to see if anyone in the comments offers any substantial criticism. It can happen at times (such as TechLead's channel a couple years ago).

[(Anonymous)]

I effin' hate channels like this: good at clickbait, terrible at making decent videos. Why can't the folks good at coming up with a great title get together with the people good at making videos, argh.

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah I've had to back button a few videos/channels where the premise seems right up my alley but it's a generic spew of widely known "facts" where some of them fail to be true if given a little scrutiny. If I wanted something presented like this I'd pick up a book for 4th graders???
And then I have to constantly click "do not recommend channel" when their seemingly OK video title pops up on my For You feed

[meadowphoenix]

hmm, i don't think i entirely agree. or rather I think this channel is for people who don't think about art very much, and if you think about art even slightly more, then it comes across as deceptive marketing.

like they are in fact giving you factoids, but its factoids you can find on the wikipedia page. (i also think you think there's more certainty in some art interpretation than there really are; they're not speculating, they could probably back everything up with research...that they found on the wikipedia page).

i guess i'm just thankful they don't use a robot voice to read the wikipedia page like other content farming channels.

[(Anonymous)]

Please check out Great Art Explained if this kind of content done well interests you!