I have to agree with @fleshdaddy. The explainer page itself looks like slop. I haven’t seen the original project but I’m afraid this makes me less interested, not more.
So funny, I didn't even expect the page itself to be such a blocker/issue!
I replied to another sibling: Based on your feedback, I scrapped it all and started over with the actual, unredacted Claude Code transcript plus a personal letter.
Thank you as well, just wrote below to the same point.
And I agree with your impression.
My goal here is to understand how can I demonstrate that I did in fact put work and care into the "thing" (video in this case).
Basically show that I did spend energy over time, that the final product took a few dozen iterations with a lot of dead ends (as opposed to a lazy one-shot "make good video, no mistakes")
So I do think this route can have merit given there is actual work, but how would a page like this look if the current one is not yet giving you a trustworthy vibe?
