That's not the point. They're still human and humans still react better to faces than to words. I had the same complaints. I think GNUStep is a great project, but I watched the video expecting to learn what made the developers excited about it and instead I got a powerpoint.
I don't. I have no interest whatsoever in what your face looks like, whereas I might be interested in your ideas. In this case I actually skipped the video and just read the text summary, expecting it to have better information density. My suggestion for improvement would be a little more discussion of what concrete benefits would be provided by the availability of the proposed software, and evidence that the work can be done for such a small sum of money.
Just because someone's an engineer doesn't magically make people throw money at their project. It's _understandable_, perhaps, that an engineer might overlook the need for good marketing, or not know how to go about marketing something well - after all, for probably the vast majority of software engineers (or other types of engineers!), marketing is just not something they do often. But that doesn't make it 'lame criticism' to point out why such a campaign may do poorly; hopefully the author of the campaign uses this criticism to improve on the campaign so that it might succeed.
>> Just because someone's an engineer doesn't magically make people throw money at their project.
No one said that. It is a lame criticism - focus on whether there is a need for the project, is it possible in the time frame, etc. Substance over style, please.
