I am trying again as more of my thread was deleted than I realised.

I asked if you knew of  don F ra ces co Ri cos sa, superior  dell'Istitu to Mat er Boni Cons ilii https://www.so daliti um.biz (Remove the spaces)

Surprisingly, no, that idea never occurred to me.
Truth is, beyond basic computer skills, I am not much of a techno geek, and because of that, I do not think I would be able to produce a very good video (graphics, splicing vids by subject within the video, music, etc.).  I know all that can be done, but I myself don’t know how to do it.

I am a pragmatist, not an idealist.
Another idea that comes to my mind to bring more hearts back to the Truth is to appreciate that we are all different in our interests, priorities and commitments.
So rather than going all out to proselytize on complex and challenging topics, you could pick simple and clear issues and become the knight in shining armour that defends them. Keep fighting the more complex issues alive but with those who understand them.
Create a double tier.
A public tier with primary goal to proselytize Catholics who are not even aware of a traditionalist wing of the Church exists.
A public tier that fights the consequences or the symptoms of Vatican II without mentioning it. The majority of Catholics do not even know what a Concile is.
This tier should fight simple and evident challenges that a larger public can clearly see, understand and abhor: dilution of traditions in schools, destruction of the traditional family, society, etc. Papal behaviours that are clearly questionable, etc. Be the knights who fight against inclusion of alien religions in our schopls and society: (for example: the crucifix. Christmas trees, saying merry Christmas...). Expose how this Pope is in not fighting to save our traditions and welcoming who facts to destroy them to the point of drastically changing our everyday life.
A technical tier with primary goal to fight modernism and, perhaps, also SSPX for those Catholics who are aware of what a Council is and its implications. A technical tier that fights the causes, not the symptoms.
If you can win large numbers of lay and common Catholics, you will fight Rome with greater authority.

I apologise if I come across as presumptuous, but I speak with the heart of an ignorant Catholic who has just awoken ...

Be assured, dear Tommaso, you have no worries with Matthew, our moderator. It's his "big brother" 8) who causes the problem. 

I am sorry, Tommaso. I was being facetious.

The expression Big Brother originates with George Orwell's book, 1984.

From Urban Dictionary:
big brother
An omnipresent, seemingly benevolent figure representing the oppressive control over individual lives exerted by an authoritarian government. 
The practical applications of Big Brother watching you today: surveillance cameras, wiretaps, tracking internet use, spychips, digital facial recognition, etc.

My search for don Ricossa and my posting here on this thread was somehow cancelled. 

Now back to the topic of this thread....

I think that a bullet point video should not address the FSSPX vs resistance question (this forum) but the wider Traditionalist vs Rome question.

If the video is catchy and widely forwarded, it will reach viewers who will investigate and study the traditionalist perspective and, like me, discover the FSSPX vs resistance question.

I believe that it is more important to win consensus to fight Rome rather than to fight the FSSPX or other fraternities/associations.

Whomever will fight the better battle against Rome, and obtain the greater audience will, inevitably, also win the resistance vs FSSPX question.

A lesser (*) enemy can be beaten indirectly, by fighting and beating a greater enemy.

(*) The FSSPX vs resistance question is lesser in audience not in importance. Today the majority of Catholics never heard of Cardinal Lefebvre and Vatican II. Even fewer heard of the resistance. If the resistance assumes its own identity (presentations) and becomes popular it will gain traction in public discourse... popularity = negotiating power with Rome, and FSSPX too.

Dear Tommaso,
Read everything of Archbishop Lefebvre that you can get your hands on, starting here with Open Letter to Confused Catholics:
http://www.sspxasia.com/Docuмents/Archbishop-Lefebvre/OpenLetterToConfusedCatholics/index.htm
The Archbishop was the great man of the Church raised up by God to lead us through this unprecedented crisis.
Once you know the Archbishop, please God you will see how his present day Society is now departing from his wisdom.
Unfaithful to what they preached for decades, they are now prepared to trust the modernist Roman authorities (once they would have said, you can trust a liberal to be a liberal) and place themselves in a situation of practical dependence upon these same authorities that are destroying the Church and crushing every remnant of Tradition they can get their hands on.
So long as the devil gives them guarantees, they will trust him! As if they knew nothing about liberals, as if they had learned nothing from the past.
The only enemies they have now, are those who resist this new direction, those who preach the old wisdom of Mgr Lefebvre.
You know someone by the friends they keep and the enemies they make.
And pray the daily Rosary!
May Our Blessed Mother be your guide.
God bless you.

The letter is interesting. Thank you.

By researching also outside this forum, I did find some incongruencies and contradictions between this letter and some present postions of the FSSPX.

I am mainly concerned with Rome's departure from: "Thou shalt have no other gods before me", its dilution of our liturgic traditons and doctrine, its pandering to relativist and postmodern theories and its surrender to the fight that islam is bringing to our Faith, culture, ways of life and traditions.

I am ready, willing and able to fight the symptoms of Vatican II but I am not equipped to engage in cognoscenti debates on how to fight the causes. While I appreciate that it is futile to fight the symptoms of an illness, without addressing its causes, I hope and pray that more proficient, knowledgeable and authoritative souls than me, will do God's will.

I believe that not all Catholics are similarly qualified to fight the causes but all should fight the symptoms.

I appreciate your prayers for God's guidance of my research.

Sloth

One of the seven capital sins. In general it means disinclination to labour or exertion. As a capital or deadly vice St. Thomas (II-II:35) calls it sadness in the face of some spiritual good which one has to achieve (Tristitia de bono spirituali). Father Rickaby aptly translates its Latin equivalent acedia (Gr. akedia) by saying that it means the don't-care feeling. A man apprehends the practice of virtue to be beset with difficulties and chafes under the restraints imposed by the service of God. The narrow way stretches wearily before him and his soul grows sluggish and torpid at the thought of the painful life journey. The idea of right living inspires not joy but disgust, because of its laboriousness. This is the notion commonly obtaining, and in this sense sloth is not a specific vice according to the teaching of St. Thomas, but rather a circuмstance of all vices. Ordinarily it will not have the malice of mortal sin unless, of course, we conceive it to be so utter that because of it one is willing to bid defiance to some serious obligation. St. Thomas completes his definition of sloth by saying that it is torpor in the presence of spiritual good which is Divine good. In other words, a man is then formally distressed at the prospect of what he must do for God to bring about or keep intact his friendship with God. In this sense sloth is directly opposed to charity. It is then a mortal sin unless the act be lacking in entire advertence or full consent of the will. The trouble attached to maintenance of the inhabiting of God by charity arouses tedium in such a person. He violates, therefore, expressly the first and the greatest of the commandments: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind, and with thy whole strength." (Mark 12:30).

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14057c.htm

Ascanio has professed his ignorance, requested help, been spoonfed Magisterium, and then plays "Cafeteria Catholic," rejecting the inconveniences of the Faith while begging for more spoonfeeding. He spends much time posting here while professing he is too short of time to read what has already been recommended, especially sources that oppose his strong and poorly-formed opinions.

Sloth

One of the seven capital sins. In general it means disinclination to labour or exertion. As a capital or deadly vice St. Thomas (II-II:35) calls it sadness in the face of some spiritual good which one has to achieve (Tristitia de bono spirituali). Father Rickaby aptly translates its Latin equivalent acedia (Gr. akedia) by saying that it means the don't-care feeling. A man apprehends the practice of virtue to be beset with difficulties and chafes under the restraints imposed by the service of God. The narrow way stretches wearily before him and his soul grows sluggish and torpid at the thought of the painful life journey. The idea of right living inspires not joy but disgust, because of its laboriousness. This is the notion commonly obtaining, and in this sense sloth is not a specific vice according to the teaching of St. Thomas, but rather a circuмstance of all vices. Ordinarily it will not have the malice of mortal sin unless, of course, we conceive it to be so utter that because of it one is willing to bid defiance to some serious obligation. St. Thomas completes his definition of sloth by saying that it is torpor in the presence of spiritual good which is Divine good. In other words, a man is then formally distressed at the prospect of what he must do for God to bring about or keep intact his friendship with God. In this sense sloth is directly opposed to charity. It is then a mortal sin unless the act be lacking in entire advertence or full consent of the will. The trouble attached to maintenance of the inhabiting of God by charity arouses tedium in such a person. He violates, therefore, expressly the first and the greatest of the commandments: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with thy whole heart, and with thy whole soul, and with thy whole mind, and with thy whole strength." (Mark 12:30). http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14057c.htm

Pride

Pride is the excessive love of one's own excellence. It is ordinarily accounted one of the seven capital sins. St. Thomas, however, endorsing the appreciation of St. Gregory, considers it the queen of all vices, and puts vainglory in its place as one of the deadly sins. In giving it this pre-eminence he takes it in a most formal and complete signification. He understands it to be that frame of mind in which a man, through the love of his own worth, aims to withdraw himself from subjection to Almighty God, and sets at naught the commands of superiors. It is a species of contempt of God and of those who bear his commission. Regarded in this way, it is of course mortal sin of a most heinous sort. Indeed St. Thomas rates it in this sense as one of the blackest of sins. By it the creature refuses to stay within his essential orbit; he turns his back upon God, not through weakness or ignorance, but solely because in his self-exaltation he is minded not to submit. His attitude has something Satanic in it… http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12405a.htm