The response Jake and Ryan asked for concerning "why not use vulgarity?"

[KurtR]

Nothing pisses me off more is edited music if I wanted to listen to some fairy shit i would put taylor swift on

 

[Will_m]

My dude, I draft arguments and briefs for a living. My average day is filled with drafting pages and pages of persuasive argument on dense technical gobbledygook. Lengthy writing is rarely indicative of good quality. Writing something well that is cogent in 3 pages takes far longer than to spew out 13 pages of convoluted drek.

That's good to hear. Do more of that.

Yeah, this. If it took you 13 pages to make the argument, the argument sucks. Maybe three paragraphs.

Is “sucks” a bad word?

 

[FLS]

Too much and you just sound dumb. Same for bro or dude. The podcast is usually entertaining, some more than others. If I’m not interested in what they’re talking about, I just don’t listen.

 

[Turkeytider]

"if you don't like it , don't listen to it". I tried listening to the podcasts but the constant profanity turned me off. I spent decades in the military (Infantry), paper mills, construction and swear myself - but the constant profanity wore me down to the point I could not dig the value of the podcast out of the noise.

I’m 77 years old and have much the same background as you. Like you, I’m sure I’ve heard them all, and admittedly used more than I should have most probably. It’s been in pretty selective situations, though, and I was trained to not use profanity as my primary means and vernacular when it comes to communicating a thought or idea. Having said that, and not knowing how old Jake and Ryan might be, if the internet is any indication, IMHO it appears that the use of profanity in the, say, 20-35 year old contingent is normal and routine. Many seemingly do not possess the ability to express themselves without the liberal use of some derivative of the expletives “ s&#t “ and “ f@$k”. How and why this devolution of the use of the English language has occurred, I can’t say. Perhaps, like so many other things in life, it goes back to how one is raised. That, and the general decline in our public education system.

 

[bozeman]

Something else that will make me turn off a podcast just as quickly....using the word 'like' over and over. Like did you like see the elk that like jumped over the fence from public to like private..... urghhhh. Not trying to get off topic, but that drives me insane. Remove the 'likes' and the vulgarity, some podcasts would be cut 30-40% short in length. To me, that is not substance, its just noise. Like really.

 

[Customweld]

t

That was exactly where my thoughts went to ! Hi Squidward, how the f are you?!

 

[LongWayAround]

They probably listened to too much of that damn rap music as children.

 

[JGRaider]

When I hear folks with a chronic profanity problem, they immediately announce to the world that they have a very poor command of the English language, followed by pretty low moral standards and very low class.

 

[Chris in TN]

Yeah, this. If it took you 13 pages to make the argument, the argument sucks. Maybe three paragraphs.

Is “sucks” a bad word?

Why does everyone assume he made *one* argument? A proper apologetic for a moral stance will likely be multifaceted and while brevity is always appreciated, so is thoroughness, at least amongst civil men.

I suspect that a lot of people here have never read Bunyan's Apology for Pilgrim's Progress.

https://acacia.pairsite.com/Acacia.Vignettes/Author.s.Apology.One.html

 

[I'M A TERRIBLE SHOT]

They probably listened to too much of that damn rap music as children.

View attachment 926938

That's a slappin single

 

[doc holiday13]

I don't think S2H podcast has ever claimed to be family friendly. Full stop. I can get on board with the concept "asking a platform if they'd consider doing XYZ". Sometimes it might behoove(is that the right word?) a platform to clean up some things to appeal to a wider range of audience and sponsors

Unless Jake and Ryan are claiming some sort of moral high ground/religious high ground, its their podcast. They make no bones about being affiliated with RS or UM. Its certainly not the Rokslide Podcast. If anything it is the UM podcast

I will say if an individual has issues with content and they've asked the content creators to change XYZ and they weren't a Karen about it; they also have the option of not listening to it. Nobody is forcing you to expose yourself to content you find offensive. Plenty of other podcast out there.

 

[nagibson1]

Yeah, this. If it took you 13 pages to make the argument, the argument sucks. Maybe three paragraphs.

Is “sucks” a bad word?

There are different kinds of writing. Technical writing should be short. sure. And most books that are 340 pages could be 80-120. But the more counter cultural an argument is, or the more misunderstood premises, or the more ignorance of the relevant data, or the more bigotry against it- the more argumentation may be needed to clear the ground. Most legal arguments can be made in three paragraphs and yet the included data has to make briefs hundreds of pages.

This is just a genre confusion. Different kinds of writing naturally have different lengths.

One simple and interesting study could be to go back through this thread and count how many posts are: dismissive, sneering, avoidant, bullying, mocking or pejorative- without a rational supporting argument. And then correlate them to the poster being pro-P&V or anti-P&V. We might see if other speech vices correlate with justifying profanity and vulgarity or whether they do not. I have a hunch.

 

[nagibson1]

This is pretty unimpressive grammar for a guy who wants me to read 13 pages of single spaced rambling about how words hurt him.

posts are not essays. Different grammar expectations. Calling it rambling without reading it is just a sneer. I can't answer mockery with an argument.
I do love you tag line though!

 

[307]

There are different kinds of writing. Technical writing should be short. sure. And most books that are 340 pages could be 80-120. But the more counter cultural an argument is, or the more misunderstood premises, or the more ignorance of the relevant data, or the more bigotry against it- the more argumentation may be needed to clear the ground. Most legal arguments can be made in three paragraphs and yet the included data has to make briefs hundreds of pages.

This is just a genre confusion. Different kinds of writing naturally have different lengths.

One simple and interesting study could be to go back through this thread and count how many posts are: dismissive, sneering, avoidant, bullying, mocking or pejorative- without a rational supporting argument. And then correlate them to the poster being pro-P&V or anti-P&V. We might see if other speech vices correlate with justifying profanity and vulgarity or whether they do not. I have a hunch.

That, or you really enjoy hearing yourself talk. I have a hunch too.

 

[woods89]

Ryan and Jake are grown men, have built a successful business with a lot of facets, and can make their own call as to how they want to express themselves. I have a lot of respect for the products they are working on, and will not boycott them because I express myself differently.

But the profanity 100% makes me pass over a lot of their content. It doesn't fit my value system. Like others have posted, I still listen when the content is highly relevant to my uses, but only then. Now those who feel like me may be a large group or small, and it will be up to Ryan and Jake whether they want to appeal to us or not.

I really like it when a point can be made on the strength of the idea presented, without a lot of chaos around it. As mentioned before, the Exo guys are probably one of the best in this space at doing this.

 

[idelkslayer]

If disliking profanity and asking you to tone it down offends you...(insert every insult that has been thrown the other direction in this thread).

When I hear tough guy profanity types say "Don't force your religion/morality on me, it's just words, suck it and toughen up". I often want to reply "Don't force your terrible speech patterns on me, words carry meaning and reveal character, be better." So maybe we are not all that different.

 

[5811]

I am not anti-swearing. I think the right amount can help convey a message or a tone.

I think too much can sound inauthentic. It reminds me of being a kid and hanging out with friends unsupervised and really just getting into swearing when it felt rebellious. You were trying to show that you were part of the group or you were a hot shot.

I'm sure pushing the profanity envelope on something like a podcast is a bit of a thrill and maybe a bit of branding. I don't mind the swearing when they are on-topic. It's the profanity ridden Macdonalds discussions that make me rethink my choice.

 

[svivian]

You were trying to show that you were part of the group or you were a badass. Hot shot

FIFY

 

[KurtR]

They probably listened to too much of that damn rap music as children.

View attachment 926938

That would be me. Rolling around bumping the chronic brings back fond memories.

 

[WyldGoose]

posts are not essays. Different grammar expectations.

Same with podcasts.
Some speak with unoffensive “proper” English that might really get your personal juices going, while others will be vulgar with Borat level humor and flamin’ hot fart jokes.