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

[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.

 

[dylanvb]

I do find it funny that the same generation that tells people to toughen up gets so offended by words…..

That being said I feel like the words in context matters more than the actual word said. You can attack someone with your words without even saying a cuss word and you can joke around with cuss words. Idk, context.

 

[SDHNTR]

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.

Exactly. While it does have some genuinely valuable content from time to time, the overall feel of the podcast is quite immature. And I’m not even 50 yet.

Plus, they totally lost me when they demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of controlled round feed actions and, imo, disrespect of heritage.

 

[Deadspace]

I’m weathered in right now waiting to fly into moose camp. This thread was/is a great time killer. Thanks fellas.

 

[johnnycake]

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.

Of course there are. But all writing can all be broken down and fit into two general classifications: good writing and bad writing.

I have a hunch as to how your 13 pages would be classified.

 

[Q_Sertorius]

Exactly. While it does have some genuinely valuable content from time to time, the overall feel of the podcast is quite immature. And I’m not even 50 yet.

Plus, they totally lost me when they demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of controlled round feed actions and, imo, disrespect of heritage.

Disrespect of heritage? Please explain.


____________________
“Keep on keepin’ on…”

 

[Ozarkansas]

Q: Why not use vulgarity?

A: because some potential listeners won’t like it and won’t become repeat listeners, particularly if they listen to podcasts when their children or spouses can hear.


Boom. A perfectly acceptable, brief argument against cursing on podcasts

 

[JGRaider]

Exactly. While it does have some genuinely valuable content from time to time, the overall feel of the podcast is quite immature. And I’m not even 50 yet.

Plus, they totally lost me when they demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of controlled round feed actions and, imo, disrespect of heritage.

Yep. I sure wouldn't want vulgartity and profanity to be anywhere near my "brand", that's for sure. It's one thing if you're 15 in a football locker room and are trying to be cool, it's another if you're 30 and "professional".

 

[JFK]

Main thing is to be able to turn it off. Around women and children I don’t cuss at all. Around buddies and at work we all talk like sailors. If a grown man says “frick” you can all but guarantee it’s not going to be the last weird thing you hear them say.

 

[nagibson1]

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.

I really agree here. This is not an all or nothing thing. I admire and respect Ryan and Jake for what they bring to hunting and shooting and this site. I would not encourage anyone to boycott them or their work- or even their podcast.
The only reason I said anything is because I think Jake made a sincere invitation. I wouldn't even presume to advise them about what to do on their podcast unless they directly asked me.

 

[LookinforDirt]

I do find it funny that the same generation that tells people to toughen up gets so offended by words…..

That being said I feel like the words in context matters more than the actual word said. You can attack someone with your words without even saying a cuss word and you can joke around with cuss words. Idk, context.

Just as easily it could be funny that someone associates excessive vulgarity with being tough.

 

[nagibson1]

Of course there are. But all writing can all be broken down and fit into two general classifications: good writing and bad writing.

I have a hunch as to how your 13 pages would be classified.

since this isn't an argument, but another mockery, I can't really answer it in kind without sneering.
Do you want me to feel humiliated because I offered to answer someone's question seriously and offered to incorporate improvements from willing contributors? A number of guys have read it and found it very helpful.
I'm not sure why guys want to attack the length of something without reading it only knowing the general subject it is about.
I have a hard time imagining a topic that could not warrant 15 pages of thoughtful argument.
Mike Moore's august 23rd review of the Kenai and Vario jackets is 11 pages when pasted into word. Granted, there were pictures.
His conclusion is: one is a lighter jacket than the other. Wear the warmer when it's colder. They're both good jackets.
It's a fine review. I did skim it a bit. Others prob read the whole thing.
Are you going to mock him for writing 11 pages on two jackets that are nearly identical? Or are you going to respect that the guy spent his time wearing them in different conditions outside on our behalf and offered us his thoughts?
I am a little confused about mocking 13 pages you haven't read on a site where we spend endless words comparing .005 of ballistic coefficients, 20grams per yard of insulation, 50 cubic measurements of down loft, 5 grains of bullet differences and 75 FPS between hunting loads.
You might say, "well, it can make a bid difference." if so, I'd agree, and I say that is true for moral philosophy too.
how many pages in MS word is this discussion thread? If you've gotten this far you've read at least twice the length of my essay.

 

[taskswap]

Irony: Folks noting the insanity of a 13-page diatribe on swearing while running up 7 pages (so far) of comments commenting about that very thing.

 

[wyogoat]

 

[nagibson1]

Q: Why not use vulgarity?

A: because some potential listeners won’t like it and won’t become repeat listeners, particularly if they listen to podcasts when their children or spouses can hear.


Boom. A perfectly acceptable, brief argument against cursing on podcasts

Yes. But I think in context Jake conceded that pragmatic argument, but was asking for a good moral argument that had obligatory force morally. That is, it would appeal to his conscience and reason, and he would feel inwardly compelled to pursue it because it is true. He was saying: "Hey, y'all that are so big on this- can you give me a good moral justification for it beyond that you don't like it or that it bothers you or that "it's wrong"?"
The reason you offer is a good practical reason for a business, but not a moral argument per se.
Good moral argumentation, esp in our day and age, requires a little more construction, especially when the relationship between the action and harms are remote/indirect, distributional, varied in susceptibility and not obviously materially causal.

 

[nagibson1]

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.

agree. I would not have done anything if Jake had not asked someone in the audience to answer the question. I do not even make a recommendation to Jake or Ryan. I only offered an argument for what he asked for: is there a good moral justification to not use vulgarity normally and reflexively?

 

[nagibson1]

Irony: Folks noting the insanity of a 13-page diatribe on swearing while running up 7 pages (so far) of comments commenting about that very thing.

and these pages are WAY longer than a page in MS word.

 

[Jimmy]

 

[grfox92]

Im from New York. I curse like a sailor and dont see anyway to change it this late in life. It is just how people talk back there.

I can obviously tone it down in professional or appropriate settings, but its a form of expression in my mind.

Sent from my SM-G990U using Tapatalk

 

[atmat]

Im from New York.

Ew.