In regards to your question, there are a couple things to keep in mind:

• Firstly, critiques from other students still require 2 agrees for the very reason that we cannot guarantee that any student's feedback is going to be without issues.

• Secondly, out of all the advice we give, some of it is inevitably going to be inaccurate and incorrect. Even when I started Drawabox, I was pretty open about the fact that what I was teaching was my understanding - and more likely, my misunderstanding of the material I had been taught. But if 75% of my advice is useful, and 25% is not and might be misleading, that's still a net positive.

• Thirdly, it's very common for students to have self-doubts, but to actually provide no solid basis. They'll come into a submission and say "oh i know this is terrible" but when you ask them to provide the specific aspects they have more trouble pointing at specific things. They may well have plenty of areas of weakness, but they're not considering specifics, they're only shielding themselves with self-doubt in a general sense. But, if you genuinely don't feel confident about giving advice in a certain area, you are not required to do so. Give advice on what you're confident about, and allow others to step in where you aren't.

Now, looking at your revisions here, while there's definitely improvement in regards to how you're approaching your additional masses, and I can clearly see that you're trying to apply aspects of what I mentioned in my previous critique in that regard, I think there are still some important points you're missing. One of the big ones, as I've shown here on your rhino, is that you still tend to use a lot of outward curves where we need more complexity (in the form of a sharp corner and inward curves) to establish how the mass we're drawing wraps around the existing one. When you fall back to using outward curves everywhere, it ends up reading more as a flat sticker rather than a 3D mass.

It's excellent that you're making such extensive use of additional masses, but you do need to take more time and refer back to the diagrams/explanations I provided previously more frequently as you think through the design of each one. Also, always avoid making a single mass do too much. For example, the two big masses on this camel's back have a ton of arbitrary complexity to them, with inward curves that are not occurring in direct response to pressing up against existing, defined structures. Along with ensuring that any inward curves are occurring in response to pressing up against existing structures, you should also be keeping an eye on situations where you're trying to make a mass do too much on its own, and break those into multiple masses that pile atop one another.

Lastly, I should mention that in my points in regards to head construction in my original critique, I provided a pretty detailed demonstration on how to apply that specific approach to a rhino - but in your own rhino construction, you appear to have made no attempt at applying it at all. In general, it does seem like you're still just trying to wing it when approach head construction - perhaps keeping some of the points I raised in the back of your mind, but not applying that approach it directly, step by step, as I requested.

I'd like you to go back over the feedback I provided previously, and give yourself all the time you require to apply it consistently and completely to your work. I'll be asking for the same revisions once again.