If you do a minimum of testing, bugs often depend on context. For example, in case of a UI bug, maybe the user zoomed in, maybe he is using a non-default font, maybe he is using a different locale, maybe he did some action without realizing it (ex: scrolling, resizing the window), maybe the time is incorrect, etc...
"I click that button and it crashed" isn't going to help you there, you know it doesn't crash, you use that button all the time...
If it is as straightforward as it looks, watching that 3 minute video is your punishment for not testing. Yes, I know, I don't test either, but don't blame the reporter for it.
I agree that a video can provide more context than text does. However, most videos I have received as bug reports in the past failed to do that. I just saw the user doing random stuff leading to random events. I'd say that often the most important thing to have is actually not a well-written bug report or a well-made video, but rather having access to the user's settings file and logs (if that exists for the application), as they often contain the explanation of why you don't see what the user sees.
If you do a minimum of testing, bugs often depend on context. For example, in case of a UI bug, maybe the user zoomed in, maybe he is using a non-default font, maybe he is using a different locale, maybe he did some action without realizing it (ex: scrolling, resizing the window), maybe the time is incorrect, etc...
"I click that button and it crashed" isn't going to help you there, you know it doesn't crash, you use that button all the time...
If it is as straightforward as it looks, watching that 3 minute video is your punishment for not testing. Yes, I know, I don't test either, but don't blame the reporter for it.