10 ms·

Think twice about that F-bomb in your next talk

178 points by ghurlman 15y ago

simonsarris 15y ago
I agree wholeheartedly. As any good writing or speaking course will mention, swears are a literary crutch. English especially is a wonderful langauge for wordplay. Like most langauges we have entire genres of humor based on how and which words are used. Most of the swearing I see on the internet is simply a lazy stab at adding adjectives or getting a reaction. I feel the same way about the (over)use as John Hodgeman does about the word "meh."[1] I think you gain an even greater disdain for swearing with the more critical literature you read. Reading Ebert's movie reviews or perhaps Gordon Ramsey's words, you realize they have a kind of eloquence that you don't often see in everyday speech. It is because they work at it, and refined writing is beautiful, but also because they take the time to avoid lazy crutches like swearing. [1]: http://waxy.org/2009/02/john_hodgman_on_meh/ http://waxy.org/2009/02/john_hodgman_on_meh/
- epo 15y ago
  Which Gordon Ramsey? The chef? He swears incessantly.
  - robconery 15y ago
    I think he's referring to "eloquent swearing" - meaning that Ramsey doesn't just drop an F-bomb, he does it with style :). I've heard some great ones from him - once he described a burnt omelet (I think that's what it was) as "something that dropped out of my dog's fing a*hole". You can't help but laugh at that visual.
    - roc 15y ago
      The exact argument against the use of profanity is that the omelet would be better described as "something that dropped out of my dog's dirty backside" or something similar. That is, there is no "eloquent swearing" exception. At all. Full Stop. Holding that profanity can be used to positive effect in conveying passion and attitude is the precise argument against the "profanity is a crutch" crowd.
      - robconery 15y ago
        Completely agree here. Ramsey is about shock value - something that's incredibly cliche. You have to be damn good to be able to pull it off. 99% of the wannabe-dhh's out there aren't.
  - simonsarris 15y ago
    It was a poor choice, I really should have come up with a better second example - I've never seen any of his shows, only read his books. I was trying to think of a respected critic with mass-appeal. Christopher Hitchens would be a better example.
- ZeroGravitas 15y ago
  Gordon Ramsey? The angry chef that has been timed as swearing on average every 20 seconds in some of his shows?
- baddox 15y ago
  I've never quite understood this argument. Basically, and correct me if I'm wrong, you're saying that using a larger vocabulary is a good thing (and I agree), and yet you're suggesting banning words will somehow help you achieve a "larger" vocabulary.
  - JamesBlair 15y ago
    If one word substitutes for many, the net result of banning that word would be to raise the vocabulary. Not saying anything about the validity of the argument, just that objection to it.
    - sixbrx 15y ago
      Yeah I think this gets at a core problem of some curse words - the problem with words like "fuck" is that in the mind of the speaker, when agitated or lazy or both, the word often seems like a useful substitute almost anyplace in a sentence, and the word-search algorithm ends happily at that node very easily out of habit. To the listener, it's just noise and usually makes the speaker seem like an idiot.
      - eropple 15y ago
        This is certainly true. Fuck is not a bad word, and is a word I use with abandon. But it can't be the go-to largely because of its versatility. Overuse makes it less flavorful. (I have had the privilege of working with some artists whose medium was profanity, and have been accused of it on occasion.)
- overgard 15y ago
  The thing is, sometimes, instead of impressing people with their wit, some people just want to get to the point quickly. SAT words are great to know, and they have their place, but to use them in all contexts isn't always appropriate and is occasionally pretentious.
indrax 15y ago
Before anyone points out that fuck is the most versatile word, I'd like to point out that 'blog' can serve all the same functions.
- pavel_lishin 15y ago
  "Shut the blog up" doesn't quite have the same ring to it.
  - jolie 15y ago
    As someone who spends her entire day writing and reading blog posts and has developed a love/hate relationship with blogging, I think "shut the blog up" is pretty satisfying and appropriate for Internet usage.
    - jrockway 15y ago
      "Go blog yourself" works too. And, blogging one's self might be even more self-indulgent than the alternative.
- kbutler 15y ago
  s/f.ck/smurf/g It illustrates the level of writing skill/vocabulary/maturity quite well.
  - andrewflnr 15y ago
    "Documentation is smurfing important." Interesting. You might want to modify your regex so it won't tell people to smurf their hard drive. They might take that wrongly.
  - burgerbrain 15y ago
    I think Adolf Fick would likely object to this.
- GlennS 15y ago
  'Fuck the fucking fucker's fucked'? Shove that up your blog.
stevelosh 15y ago
I'm with Stephen Fry on this one: "There used to be mad, silly, prissy people who used to say swearing was a sign of a poor vocabulary. Such utter nonsense." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_osQvkeNRM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_osQvkeNRM
- daleharvey 15y ago
  Agreed, his alternative phrasing may be more fitting though "The sort of twee person who thinks swearing is in any way a sign of a lack of education or verbal interest is just fucking lunatic"
  - stevelosh 15y ago
    Yeah, there are so many fantastic lines in that video. The part where he calls out the "swearing is unnecessary" argument is probably my favorite.
- dorian-graph 15y ago
  Perhaps not a poor vocabulary but at least a poor effort. I don't believe the poster was making the point that people who swear have a poor vocabulary anyway and in one of his examples he simply used the word 'gorgeous' instead of swearing. Gorgeous is hardly an advanced word.
- jamesbritt 15y ago
  Sure, but it could be a sign of poor taste. Not for the supposed vulgarity, but for the lack of use of more interesting words. It's like the rampant over-use of the word "awesome". Fine word, nothing wrong with using it, but using it as the adjective for everything indicates a lack of critical thinking skills.
  - vacri 15y ago
    If I have to deal with people using marketroid-style 'impact' when the correct word is 'affect', then others should just suck it up and not worry about 'fuck' being used as 'lack of verbiage'. 'Impact' in presentations needs to die (well, perhaps it can stay in physics or medicine presentations...)
maratd 15y ago
I don't understand why so many fucks have to fucking bitch so much about other people's fucking lexicon. Fuckers who get offended by fucking words are really sad. Well, mostly fucking immature. However, it is fucking sad when some fuckers can't bring proper attention to the fucking subject matter in a cogent fucking manner. Life is all about fucking balance.
keithpeter 15y ago
Hello All If you want students in compulsory education (up to 16 in the UK) and in 'post compulsory College' (up to 18 here in the UK) to read any of your stuff at college, then you need to watch the language. Walled garden type systems block profanities. Fsck could be used and would add a certain cachet...
TheKevDog 15y ago
It's exactly like stand-up comedy: some swear brilliantly, some do okay at it, and amateurs think that is what's funny. And to paraphrase Isaac Asimov: Profanity is the first refuge of the insufficiently eloquent.
mcantor 15y ago
http://xkcd.com/137/ http://xkcd.com/137/
- rglullis 15y ago
  See, the thing about this comic is using profanity as a way to demonstrate non-conformance. But this does not seem to be the case here. Nobody here thinks that Zach is going to lose his job due to language. What I see is the opposite, actually. I started watching Zach's video on the Play app, in which he drops a "play some fucking music" in there. I couldn't help but think "Aww, he thinks it's cute to talk like a brogrammer". Put that together with the slide in his talk, and I can't stop having the impression that his use of language is more of an attempt to "sound cool" to his peers than to he actually "being himself". It's the same as teenagers smoking due to peer-pressure.
  - aphpex 15y ago
    > See, the thing about this comic is using profanity as a way to demonstrate non-conformance. FYI, It's this type of trite language that sets off my pretentious cunt alarm. I stopped reading after this sentence.
- thret 15y ago
  http://xkcd.com/75/ http://xkcd.com/75/
m0nastic 15y ago
I really find that it's all dependent on the context. The use of profanity in a presentation (or the use of humorous images) can set the tone of the talk, and in a larger context, sets the tone for the event. People have stated that profanity isn't appropriate in a "professional" context, and I think I agree with that. I don't use profanity around my clients, I wouldn't put it in a report, and if I wouldn't use it in a talk internally at my company. I work at a "professional" company. As an artifact of the industry I work in, however, I see a fair number of talks that aren't supposed to be part of a "professional" context. They're supposed to be part of a social context. In infosec, there's a continuum of "professionalism" in events which ranges from a bunch of folks in a bar giving talks while drinking to a conference like RSA. For what it's worth, I get way more out of events like the former (although certainly not because of people swearing). I think if you're giving a presentation at an event, you need to know what the context of the event is, and your presentation should match it.
mikeryan 15y ago
If, as the author clearly states, its okay to use the word "fuck" in presentations then what's his problem with using it for dramatic effect in the lead? Where's a better opportunity? The word "Fuck" is a dramatic word - it inherently conveys passion, I'd argue that Zach's use was the most appropriate use of the term (if you're going to use it at all). I'd find this post more compelling if he just said "using profanity is the easy way out" instead of consistently trying to say "some profanity is okay, just not this usage".
seanalltogether 15y ago
I don't like swearing in presentations when the presenter is attempting to appear cooler then the audience they are addressing. These presentations tend to also be full of goofy pictures and lots of hyperbole and really turn me off. On the other hand, when I'm sitting through a very technical talk and the engineer giving the presentation warns the audience about "wading through a lot of shit to get this feature working" I tend to take them seriously on that point.
pbiggar 15y ago
I think the word "F-bomb" says a lot. To many, including I guess the OP, "fuck" is a "bomb", a word that rouses them from their slumber and causes them to say "OMG, did he just say 'fuck'". And while you still have this attitude, it's always going to be effective. This "swearing isn't cool" attitude annoys me. It isn't cool, I agree. It's just neutral; for emphasis, like "very" or "awesome". Get off your high horse. I'll say fuck if I please.
- monochromatic 15y ago
  Your comparison to the word "very" is unintentionally apt. There's no reason to use the word "very." It's a weak word, and it signals that you just couldn't come up with anything more interesting to say. So too with swearing just to get an audience's attention.
  - pbiggar 15y ago
    There's two orthogonal issues with "fuck". One is that it offends people. One is that it's kinda weak. But the "weak" argument doesn't matter. I use weak words all the time. 95% of my words are weak. So why does it matter that I have another one? I would say that it only matters if you buy into the first issue, that "fuck" is offensive. If you consider that fuck is just another word, then it doesn't matter that you're using yet another weak word.
    - msellout 15y ago
      Au contraire, the issue is exactly that the use of profanity is "weak" word choice. The article challenges those of us trying to create strong presentations to choose stronger words.
- wink 15y ago
  Even if I leave out my personal opinion on the matter, this post didn't leave me scratching my head in a "wtf, is this real?" manner, but I find it insightful.
- dorian-graph 15y ago
Avshalom 15y ago
It's a title slide, there isn't really space for actual clever word play. You can use some other single word for emphasis, you can make "important" even bigger, or I guess use some exclamation points, but those are kind of invisible. Or you can do with out any emphasis and just go with a affectless title slide. Whatever you go with, using 'fucking' only looks like a grammatical trick (or more of a trick than using 'extremely' say) if you do still cringe at the word or are still a little opposed to it.
reverend_gonzo 15y ago
"Fuck" is a crutch. Personally, I use it fairly often since I talk like a sailor, but I wouldn't use it in a professional presentation because there's better ways to communicate ideas, to evoke emotion, and to engage the audience. You might not know what those ideas are, but to be a better speaker, you need to find out. A couple years ago, I was studying sketch comedy writing at Second City (essentially the center of comedy, and where SNL, Daily Show, etc recruit from). As part of our last class, we had to put on a sketch show, and our teacher/director told us that we were allowed to use "fuck" once in our show, and this was a sketch comedy show ... the reason being, we had to find the one place where it be most effective and use it there. Every other place where we wanted to use, we had to find a better way to communicate our ideas. And you know, we were better for it. Using it in the title defeats the entire purpose of the word since everybody is already paying attention to you. "Fuck" is a draw word ... You need to find a better way to make them laugh and interested.
- chc 15y ago
  By "crutch," I assume you mean that it can be worked around, but it's easier for most people to use it. The words "I", "that" and "the" are also crutches in this sense. Arbitrary limitations can help you develop your creativity, but you shouldn't then conclude that the things arbitrarily disallowed are somehow bad in and of themselves.
fleitz 15y ago
Swearing is the spice of language, some people like more spice, some people like less, some like their food bland. But there is a point at which the food just tastes salty, and most importantly you need a blend of spice to make things really shine, you can't just use salt and MSG. Swearing is an art, not a science.
ChuckMcM 15y ago
Interesting to see the responses here. I felt the point was spot on, which is that if you are going to use profanity in your presentation it is useful to 'think twice' which I read as, "Sit back and think about what you are trying to achieve by doing that." The OP gave some examples of reasons people might come up with; waking up the audience, setting the tone, Etc. In general there is a lot of difference between folks who do spend a bit of time thinking about their presentation and those who basically spin one off on the fly. So if you're using profanity, and you think about why you chose to use profanity, and you agree with that choice then by all means go with it. However if you find that you're trying to bracket some key message that you really want your audience to go home with, then perhaps swearing isn't necessary. It can also be a lot less effective than you think. Saying "Social media is so over" can be more effective at getting attention than "What the fuck is Social Media?" if the audience is invested in social media and have been defending it, as a concept/meme/market, with skeptical acquaintences.
- jimkogs 15y ago
  I think one of the reasons that the author misses is that, as used by Zach Holman, 'fuck' levels the field between presenter and audience. "I'm not so important that I can't swear." It can be arrogant or overly formal to embrace how "gorgeous" your slides are, to emphasize how "gifted" you are at presenting. Instead, it emphasizes the fuckhead in all of us; the flaws, in order to say unequivocally "Yeah I'm an asshole sometimes, but here's what I think and I think it's worth hearing: I hope you do too."
  - ChuckMcM 15y ago
    Ok, I can see that, but I've seen folks who have tried and failed to make the audience think, that they themselves (the presenter) thought, of themselves (the presenter) as just another voice in the crowd. In general if one is presenting and choosing to change one's vocabulary and speech habits in order to be less off putting to the audience, one risks coming off as insincere and condescending. Just like prose in the third person singular sounds presumptuous :-)
    - 15y ago
JabavuAdams 15y ago
> I'm not offended at the presence of the F-bomb, I'm offended that someone with his talent takes the easy way out. This is silly. It's like arguing "I have no problem with X, but ..." followed by things that you would never say if you in fact had no problem with X. If the author had never been acculturated/trained to think that swearing was wrong, he wouldn't have written this post. I.e. where are the blog posts on how you should think twice about using the word "goldfish" in a presentation? There aren't any because people really, truly, have no problem with the word "goldfish", unlike the word "fuck". EDIT> If you want to argue against swearing in presentations, then do so. Don't pretend that you have no problem with swearing -- it just makes you look dishonest. EDIT2> "acculturated" doesn't mean what I thought it meant. Substitute "trained"
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
run4yourlives 15y ago
Like most of life: Time and Place. My advice: Do what you want, but recognize you're subject to the rules of the above, and interpretation can vary.
dorian-graph 15y ago
Agree wholeheartedly with this post Conery. In the English language we have so many beautiful words we can use and most people seem to have limited vocabulary. Why should we be content with lower, near meaningless words when we can learn news words and use those effectively? .. and what if people don't understand them? Use words appropriately with who you're talking to and consider what Handel said after the first performance of Messiah: “My lord, I should be sorry if I only entertained them; I wish to make them better.”
bdr 15y ago
The difference many people are missing is between moral offense and aesthetic offense. The author is claiming the latter; it's a critique of bad style. You can disbelieve the claim or disagree with it, but it's not prima facie nonsense.
ellyagg 15y ago
Whether you like to admit it or not, swearing is and will be taken as a sign of disrespect or superiority. You (99% percent of us) would not drop the F-bomb in the presence of a new boss, for example, unless you had very good reason to think it was ok. It's similar to the fact that the boss teases subordinates, but the reverse is much rarer. Swearing is absolutely a status strategy, even when speaking to groups. For all the people who claim that swearing is essentially as innocuous as any other speech, and only prissy people think anything of it at all, it would be interesting to see their behavior around their professional or social superiors. There'll always be the people who pipe up to claim they treat everyone the same, and don't know what status is, but on the whole, I'm pretty sure the social implications and power dynamics of swearing show very strong patterns. Swear all you like (I do), but please don't pretend that profane language doesn't have different effects from normal language.
- alexholehouse 15y ago
  I would agree with you if we're considering English. I'm not sure the same conclusions can be drawn for other languages (German springs to mind).
  - ugh 15y ago
    Why? I’m German and that seems bizarre to me. Swearing is definitely not used independently of context in German.
    - alexholehouse 15y ago
      I was in Germany a few years ago, and I remember a historian we were working with swearing a lot (in English) just to make points or convey extremities. When I queried him about it he said swearing didn't have particularly negative connotations when used in "normal conversation" in German. I took this at face value at the time, so I apologize if I've misspoken on the matter.
      - ugh 15y ago
powertower 15y ago
Fuck you! ... Pay me. http://weblog.muledesign.com/2011/04/creative_mornings.php http://weblog.muledesign.com/2011/04/creative_mornings.php It's the one time I've seen it work well.
bengl3rt 15y ago
Come on, now. Would this "Artur on SSDs" video be nearly as memorable (and therefore efficacious) without all the swearing? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7PJ1oeEyGg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7PJ1oeEyGg
brudgers 15y ago
"Fuck" isn't cute or particularly clever, but like "bullshit" it does make for more effective communication in appropriate contexts. Many years ago, one of mentors offered "You can't fuck scared and you can't sell broke," as the first rule of sales...and I only needed to hear it once for it to stick. And at times the word "fuck" is a necessary component of the concept, e.g. nothing adequately describes fuck you money except "fuck you money."
runjake 15y ago
I'm not offended by vulgarity in presentations, it's just a personal turn-off. It puts little "this person has an attitude problem" ideas in my head.
mechanical_fish 15y ago
A. Why have we editorialized in the title? If the author thought "Fucking Your Way Out" was an appropriate title, it should be the title here on HN, should it not? (I don't think the title is appropriate or elegant, and maybe there's a meta-policy on HN to avoid putting "fuck" on the home page, which there are good reasons to avoid, having to do with brand and overzealous filtering software and whatnot. But I think it's kind of misleading, especially for an essay like this one, to advertise one title and put another one on the essay itself!) B. If there is one fucking thing that will cause me to reconsider my personal policy of avoiding the use of the word "fuck" online, especially in public writing, it's the phrase "F-bomb", which is just fucking awful. If you're trying to avoid the word for the sake of young children, or for the sake of avoiding the emotional impact of a real "fuck", you obviously need to say "effing" (in speech) or "fscking" (in print) or any of the hundred thousand other classic euphemisms, because "F-bomb" is not a substitute for "fuck". It just doesn't work, grammatically. If, on the other hand, you're discussing the word from a literary standpoint, let me introduce you to a little concept called scare quotes: You can say "fuck" and not mean it! The safety is on! I think my real problem with "F-bomb" may be that it's obviously a word for conducting a meta-discussion of the word "fuck" in front of young children. Perhaps my reaction would be much the same if you addressed me in baby talk and ended every sentence by patting me on the head. I'm not convinced that such a word needs to exist – If the audience doesn't understand "fuck" well enough to safely read it, why are you discussing the word? But when you absolutely need such a word, try the simple phrase "the F-word". You will sound like a schoolmarm, but then again it's not as if you were going to avoid that.
- mquander 15y ago
  The HN title is ten times more descriptive than "Fucking Your Way Out." Nobody would have any idea what the article was about if he used that title, whereas his replacement title is succinct and accurate. You can quibble about whether it should say "fuck" or "F-bomb", but it's up to the submitter's discretion to use a good title, and his chosen one is far better than leaving it as the default, so I'm not inclined to complain too loudly. I also note that much of your ire should probably be directed at the author, who uses "F-bomb" as a euphemism many times in the article itself, and even heroically sneaks in the phrase "dropping some F-pepper" once (this is actually true.)
rayditutto 15y ago
consider the troll nature of Rob's composition
- robconery 15y ago
  What would that be exactly? Could I apply the same thing to this comment?
  - rayditutto 15y ago
    Not all uses of the word troll are necessarily derogatory. In its high form, a troll (the article, not the person) should evoke and provoke discussion. The article is well written using the very vernacular of the subject piece. The article and its subject article form a nice meta-circular structure. Something, i'm sure can be appreciated on HN :-)
fez 15y ago
For some reason I thought the "F-bomb" was going to be Facebook. Oh silly me.
ryan-allen 15y ago
The last person I saw swearing in a tech presentation also happens to own a one-off Pagani Zhonda. I'm sure he's doing something right!
j_baker 15y ago
I think it's a question of appropriateness. Cursing gets peoples' attention and stirs up powerful feelings and attitudes. Use a curse word at just the right time, and you turn a mediocre presentation into a good one. Or it can turn a good presentation into a fucking great presentation. On the other hand, if you use profanity too fucking gratuitously, it will turn your presentation into a fucking piece of shit. Motherfuckers who aren't offended by it will learn to fucking tune that shit out and will be mildly pissed at you. The fucking douchebags that are offended by it will be, well, fucking offended by that shit. In the case that the article mentions, my biggest reaction is a simple "Meh". I suppose a case could be made that it's a cheap shot aimed at getting peoples' attention, but ultimately, I don't feel like it was overdone. Nor do I feel it really helped a whole lot. I suppose if I were the presenter, I'd cut the "fuck" out for the simple reason that its use doesn't help my presentation out enough to justify having to hear people complain about it.
artursapek 15y ago
I can think of two well-known things I've seen in the blogosphere that use cursing heavily. The first is Mike Monteiro's "Fuck You, Pay Me." http://vimeo.com/22053820?utm_source=swissmiss http://vimeo.com/22053820?utm_source=swissmiss I think in this situation the usage is appropriate and he used repetition of this phrase effectively throughout his presentation. The second isn't a presentation, it's an advice-giving website "Good Fucking Design Advice." http://www.goodfuckingdesignadvice.com/ http://www.goodfuckingdesignadvice.com/ To me it comes off as tactless and pretentious. I get that it's playing to the "frustrated designer" but this type repetitive usage is the type that washes out the meaning of a curse. Personally I love cursing when it's appropriate. I go to a school where students and their teachers will often curse in front of eachother. It's never in aggression or anything, but the other day I came into class feeling ill and I was about to tell my teacher she asked, "feel like shit?" She knew a bug had been going around. In my opinion, curses are indicative of someone's character. That's basically it. Use it in your presentation if you want to come off as a light-hearted extrovert not to be taken too seriously.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
bherms 15y ago
Swearing should be a strength of your vocabulary and not a weakness. Occasionally it can be used to great effect, but hopefully is not relied on in general conversation.
viraptor 15y ago
Not sure about this one - I don't mind swearing if it's really rare and if someone wants to put something shocking on their slide because that's their style of bringing attention to some issues, then I'm completely fine with it. I know some people who happen to sometimes swear in emails, but knowing they'd do the same thing in person, it seems perfectly normal. What really annoys me is "f^^k", "s^^t" and other "words" like that. If you don't normally swear, don't write it. If showing "fuck" on your slide makes you cringe, just skip it. It's neither natural nor needed. It's not censored - everyone knows exactly what it was supposed to say, but they also know you didn't actually want to write it.
- ugh 15y ago
  See, that I don’t understand at all. To me “fk” and “fuck” are equivalent. If you want to use a word you should stand by it – it’s also typographically much nicer. “Fk” is a lazy cop-out. It doesn’t soften the blow, it only looks ugly.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
codeslush 15y ago
"...Swearing says more about your abilities as a speaker then it does your content... that's the problem." Good thing he is talking about speaking instead of writing. EDIT: That is in the opening paragraph, and this is in the closing paragraph: "...The minute you drop that F-bomb, that's when you lose me. If you don't care enough to flex the language at your disposal, why should I give a fuck about what you have to say?" Irony? :-) (replace say with write)
gerggerg 15y ago
Could someone explain to me how I could convey not only the content of my message but also the tone of my feelings more concisely than: What the fuck is all this fuss about?
samstave 15y ago
Frankly, this is one of the things that really turned me off to Adeo Ressi, in his talks, presentations and classes he constantly drops F-bombs -- I assume to make him seem more hip/cool/grounded/whatever -- but it comes across as arrogant. However when I expressed this previously people disagreed... whatever. I dont think it makes you look cool. I wish I could take a pill and have that word expunged from my own vocabulary though... I say it far too much in my private moments!
lincolnwebs 15y ago
The irony of writing long blog posts and HN comments about "unnecessary cursing" in a presentation (thereby linking to and discussing the presentation 10x more) is almost too much for me to bear.
buff-a 15y ago
Swearing says more about your abilities as a speaker then it does your content... that's the problem. Oh, god, can we please stop repeating this fucking shite. If you don't care enough to flex the language at your disposal, why should I give a fuck about what you have to say? If your ability to perform rational thought is so bad that it thinks that sentence us logically sound, then you probably aren't going to be able to comprehend or use what I have to say.
locusm 15y ago
Never trust a man that doesn't swear. Dad 1987
masterzora 15y ago
I think HN's title here is more accurate than the actual article. Do not expunge "fuck", or any other word, from your vocabulary just because it can be misused. I can misuse many words just as easily as peppering "fuck" everywhere but he doesn't seem to be arguing to get rid of anything but swears. If you're preparing a talk like that, you should be thinking twice about everything you prepare, though, not just "F-bombs". Did you put that "fuck" there to sound edgy? Unless you're presenting to a group of 12-year-olds nobody's going to think you're edgy. On the other hand, I love to use "fuck" to establish tone. A few judicious and well-placed "fuck"s and you can easily establish that you're just like everyone else in the room and you're essentially just chatting rather than talking down at them or anything like that. Sure, if you banned yourself from using this word you could establish the same tone via a variety of methods but, sometimes, you just need to fucking cut through the bullshit and stop pussy-footing around.
- vacri 15y ago
  There's also the aspect that, used well, using 'fuck' in a presentation helps to imply "I'm not selling you something here, making it sweeter than it actually is. I'm telling it like it is"
Mz 15y ago
I have a tendency to swear like a sailor. I try to keep it "pg 13-ish" when posting online. It's against the rules to use profanity at work, so I work really hard at behaving there. But I still tend to swear too much around co-workers when not actually at work. SIGH. It annoys me. I think it makes a very bad impression.
psyklic 15y ago
The real question here isn't whether the F-bomb is appropriate. Rather, it's how to balance entertainment and content in a technical presentation. Zach's talk is memorable. People will remember him and talk to him afterward for sure. People will also think he's a strong presenter -- half of his jokes fell flat, but his confidence was impressive. I do improv for fun at a "family" theatre in Hollywood. In my experience, skilled comedians use the "F-bomb" to convey character and to show they're "one of the guys," not as a shock word. In this talk, rather than using shock words, Zach is filtering his content through a character -- an informal "brogrammer" who loves alcohol and swears on occasion. This is his ploy to entertain the audience while talking about a superficially-boring subject -- documentation. Does it work? Well, perhaps Zach doesn't come off as an all-knowing expert. But, he does deliver a few messages in an entertaining fashion. After all, would you rather have everyone agree you gave a "good" talk (and then forget about it, since there were so many "good" ones), or be a bit controversial and have a few people really take notice and love your point of view?
- CPlatypus 15y ago
  Yep, sure, lots of people will remember Zach and talk about him. It's too bad that they won't remember what he was talking about. When the presentation drowns out the content - assuming there was any content to begin with - that's a problem.
  - psyklic 15y ago
    True, a lot of people get wrapped up in the presentation and are sparse on content, as I believe happened here. However, the goal of these is often not to go in depth but to give your audience main points to remember. So, there is plenty of room to give an entertaining and contentful talk. I am disappointed when people try to play it safe by avoiding humor or by hiding their personality. Making yourself relatable and engaging is important too!
synnik 15y ago
This is one of those issues in which I clearly see generational differences. I am pushing 40, and my opinions are at odds with most of the commenters. In your personal language, your choice to curse or not is none of my business. But in the business world, it is unprofessional. I won't think you are a bad person for cursing. But it will lose my respect. I will most likely stop taking you seriously. And the likelihood of my choosing to do business with you in the future is minimal.
developish 15y ago
> I'm not offended at the presence of the F-bomb, I'm offended that someone with his talent takes the easy way out. I think the conversation would be more productive if we considered the language used when people respond to those who use profanity. Typically we're talking about being "offended" or "taken aback" (Scott Hanselman's post). From my trusty Apple dictionary I find that offense means "annoyance or resentment brought about by a perceived insult to or disregard for oneself or one's standards or principles". So essentially this is a whole argument about annoyance caused by a choice of language. When it's said "I'm offended that someone with his talent takes the easy way out." it's further revealed that the annoyance is not coming from any high moral ground but is purely stylistic. All the talk about "do(ing) better" or cursing being a "crutch" is a red herring. Further, this offense is caused by "disregard for oneself or one's standards or principles". It's rather arrogant to think that anyone should have any regard for your standards standards or principles at all. It's time to grow up and realize that getting upset by the particular style of another's words is a waste of your time and attention.
dubajj 15y ago
kids these days with their swearing and rock and roll...get off my lawn old man voice
overgard 15y ago
Two thoughts: "Fuck" seems like an excellent filter. It lets people who are more concerned with appearances and rules rather than content know that what I'm saying isn't something for them. That's ok, not everyone has to like what I say; the quicker they come to know that probably the better for both parties. The kind of person who could become offended by a simple word choice is just so different from me that I doubt we'd ever get along. My second thought is that it also just seems like a more powerful form of the word "very" or "really" to me; only more fun. Like those words, if you overuse them it will get annoying, but otherwise I just don't fucking care.
buff-a 15y ago
This person believes that you should follow his rules. This person believes that even if you clearly don't follow his rules, he will evaluate your content based on how much your behavior would indicate that you value you them if you did follow his rules. o_O This person values presentation over content. There are plenty of people on earth like this. Its good to know they exist. But lets not spend any more time discussing them.
drivebyacct2 15y ago
... What? If I use "fuck", I have a strong personality and want to sell you on my superiority? What an absurd premise.
dools 15y ago
If you're writing about people's skills as communicators, learn the difference between the words then and than.
rajpaul 15y ago
The article says that swearing is the easy way out, and that intelligent, talented people can do better. I'd go further and say that swearing nothing more than cheap fucking theatrics, and gimmicks.
chousuke 15y ago
I feel that most occurrences of the word 'fuck' are unimaginative and fail to utilise the full expressive potential of swearing. There are countless interesting words and phrases that convey the same emotion as the F-bomb, and I would rather see more of those. I will not say that it's always inappropriate to use 'fuck' but it's certainly overused.
ajanuary 15y ago
This puts into words why I found the use of "shit" in http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3209500 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3209500 jarring despite not really being offended.
valyala 15y ago
IMHO, it's more funny to hide F-bomb in your presentation, so only a few people will notice it :) See, for instance, Schwarzenegger's F-bomb hidden in Veto letter - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/30/schwarzenegger-f-bomb-in_n_340579.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/30/schwarzenegger-f-bo... .
schacon 15y ago
It would be difficult for me to disagree more strongly with this article. To say that Zach is somehow lazy because he used a swear word is missing the forest for the trees. I have probably attended more than 50 conferences in the last few years and of the hundreds of talks I've seen, Zach obsesses over his presentations more than nearly anyone I've ever known. The talk you pulled a single slide from, completely out of context, was simple, beautiful and useful - Readme Driven Development and TomDoc have been incredibly useful concepts driving productive development at GitHub and the talk was very effective in getting across what they are and why they are helpful. The vast majority of conference talks are pretty awful. Often they are a handful of slides with little design or thought put into them, consisting of a generic Keynote or Powerpoint theme with a dozen slides with 6 bullet points on each one with the speaker simply reading them off. Or impossible to read code or any of another hundred horrible presentation mistakes. Many of them are boring, hard to follow and unfocused. Zach, on the other hand, puts hours, often days, of work into each of his talks, focusing on making them simple, entertaining and useful to the audience. He uses jokes, like this, to keep the audience awake and paying attention - which given the way most conferences are set up, is necessary to keep people from checking their email during your talk. The amount of focus and attention that speakers like Zach pay to delivering their message is so much more respectful to the audience and the organizers than something mind-bogglingly unimportant like not swearing. Zach understands the majority of his audience, respects their time and tries to make his time in front of them worth it, and improves developers lives by effectively delivering information to them. This is more than I can say for more than half the speakers I've ever seen. To focus on Zach as a target because of using language that all of us use every fucking day is not only useless and mean, but harmful to the already difficult environment that is the technical conference world today. Instead of the handful of people that might have been made slightly uncomfortable with language they probably use all the time, how about a blog post on the thousands of developers who are now more effective because of the actual content of his talks?

178 points by ghurlman 15y ago

I agree wholeheartedly. As any good writing or speaking course will mention, swears are a literary crutch. English especially is a wonderful langauge for wordplay. Like most langauges we have entire genres of humor based on how and which words are used. Most of the swearing I see on the internet is simply a lazy stab at adding adjectives or getting a reaction. I feel the same way about the (over)use as John Hodgeman does about the word "meh."[1] I think you gain an even greater disdain for swearing with the more critical literature you read. Reading Ebert's movie reviews or perhaps Gordon Ramsey's words, you realize they have a kind of eloquence that you don't often see in everyday speech. It is because they work at it, and refined writing is beautiful, but also because they take the time to avoid lazy crutches like swearing. [1]: http://waxy.org/2009/02/john_hodgman_on_meh/ http://waxy.org/2009/02/john_hodgman_on_meh/

epo 15y ago
Which Gordon Ramsey? The chef? He swears incessantly.
- robconery 15y ago
  I think he's referring to "eloquent swearing" - meaning that Ramsey doesn't just drop an F-bomb, he does it with style :). I've heard some great ones from him - once he described a burnt omelet (I think that's what it was) as "something that dropped out of my dog's fing a*hole". You can't help but laugh at that visual.
  - roc 15y ago
    The exact argument against the use of profanity is that the omelet would be better described as "something that dropped out of my dog's dirty backside" or something similar. That is, there is no "eloquent swearing" exception. At all. Full Stop. Holding that profanity can be used to positive effect in conveying passion and attitude is the precise argument against the "profanity is a crutch" crowd.
    - robconery 15y ago
      Completely agree here. Ramsey is about shock value - something that's incredibly cliche. You have to be damn good to be able to pull it off. 99% of the wannabe-dhh's out there aren't.
- simonsarris 15y ago
  It was a poor choice, I really should have come up with a better second example - I've never seen any of his shows, only read his books. I was trying to think of a respected critic with mass-appeal. Christopher Hitchens would be a better example.
ZeroGravitas 15y ago
Gordon Ramsey? The angry chef that has been timed as swearing on average every 20 seconds in some of his shows?
baddox 15y ago
I've never quite understood this argument. Basically, and correct me if I'm wrong, you're saying that using a larger vocabulary is a good thing (and I agree), and yet you're suggesting banning words will somehow help you achieve a "larger" vocabulary.
- JamesBlair 15y ago
  If one word substitutes for many, the net result of banning that word would be to raise the vocabulary. Not saying anything about the validity of the argument, just that objection to it.
  - sixbrx 15y ago
    Yeah I think this gets at a core problem of some curse words - the problem with words like "fuck" is that in the mind of the speaker, when agitated or lazy or both, the word often seems like a useful substitute almost anyplace in a sentence, and the word-search algorithm ends happily at that node very easily out of habit. To the listener, it's just noise and usually makes the speaker seem like an idiot.
    - eropple 15y ago
      This is certainly true. Fuck is not a bad word, and is a word I use with abandon. But it can't be the go-to largely because of its versatility. Overuse makes it less flavorful. (I have had the privilege of working with some artists whose medium was profanity, and have been accused of it on occasion.)
overgard 15y ago
The thing is, sometimes, instead of impressing people with their wit, some people just want to get to the point quickly. SAT words are great to know, and they have their place, but to use them in all contexts isn't always appropriate and is occasionally pretentious.

indrax 15y ago

Before anyone points out that fuck is the most versatile word, I'd like to point out that 'blog' can serve all the same functions.

pavel_lishin 15y ago
"Shut the blog up" doesn't quite have the same ring to it.
- jolie 15y ago
  As someone who spends her entire day writing and reading blog posts and has developed a love/hate relationship with blogging, I think "shut the blog up" is pretty satisfying and appropriate for Internet usage.
  - jrockway 15y ago
    "Go blog yourself" works too. And, blogging one's self might be even more self-indulgent than the alternative.
kbutler 15y ago
s/f.ck/smurf/g It illustrates the level of writing skill/vocabulary/maturity quite well.
- andrewflnr 15y ago
  "Documentation is smurfing important." Interesting. You might want to modify your regex so it won't tell people to smurf their hard drive. They might take that wrongly.
- burgerbrain 15y ago
  I think Adolf Fick would likely object to this.
GlennS 15y ago
'Fuck the fucking fucker's fucked'? Shove that up your blog.

stevelosh 15y ago

I'm with Stephen Fry on this one: "There used to be mad, silly, prissy people who used to say swearing was a sign of a poor vocabulary. Such utter nonsense." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_osQvkeNRM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_osQvkeNRM

daleharvey 15y ago
Agreed, his alternative phrasing may be more fitting though "The sort of twee person who thinks swearing is in any way a sign of a lack of education or verbal interest is just fucking lunatic"
- stevelosh 15y ago
  Yeah, there are so many fantastic lines in that video. The part where he calls out the "swearing is unnecessary" argument is probably my favorite.
dorian-graph 15y ago
Perhaps not a poor vocabulary but at least a poor effort. I don't believe the poster was making the point that people who swear have a poor vocabulary anyway and in one of his examples he simply used the word 'gorgeous' instead of swearing. Gorgeous is hardly an advanced word.
jamesbritt 15y ago
Sure, but it could be a sign of poor taste. Not for the supposed vulgarity, but for the lack of use of more interesting words. It's like the rampant over-use of the word "awesome". Fine word, nothing wrong with using it, but using it as the adjective for everything indicates a lack of critical thinking skills.
- vacri 15y ago
  If I have to deal with people using marketroid-style 'impact' when the correct word is 'affect', then others should just suck it up and not worry about 'fuck' being used as 'lack of verbiage'. 'Impact' in presentations needs to die (well, perhaps it can stay in physics or medicine presentations...)

maratd 15y ago

I don't understand why so many fucks have to fucking bitch so much about other people's fucking lexicon. Fuckers who get offended by fucking words are really sad. Well, mostly fucking immature. However, it is fucking sad when some fuckers can't bring proper attention to the fucking subject matter in a cogent fucking manner. Life is all about fucking balance.

keithpeter 15y ago

Hello All If you want students in compulsory education (up to 16 in the UK) and in 'post compulsory College' (up to 18 here in the UK) to read any of your stuff at college, then you need to watch the language. Walled garden type systems block profanities. Fsck could be used and would add a certain cachet...

TheKevDog 15y ago

It's exactly like stand-up comedy: some swear brilliantly, some do okay at it, and amateurs think that is what's funny. And to paraphrase Isaac Asimov: Profanity is the first refuge of the insufficiently eloquent.

mcantor 15y ago

http://xkcd.com/137/ http://xkcd.com/137/

rglullis 15y ago
See, the thing about this comic is using profanity as a way to demonstrate non-conformance. But this does not seem to be the case here. Nobody here thinks that Zach is going to lose his job due to language. What I see is the opposite, actually. I started watching Zach's video on the Play app, in which he drops a "play some fucking music" in there. I couldn't help but think "Aww, he thinks it's cute to talk like a brogrammer". Put that together with the slide in his talk, and I can't stop having the impression that his use of language is more of an attempt to "sound cool" to his peers than to he actually "being himself". It's the same as teenagers smoking due to peer-pressure.
- aphpex 15y ago
  > See, the thing about this comic is using profanity as a way to demonstrate non-conformance. FYI, It's this type of trite language that sets off my pretentious cunt alarm. I stopped reading after this sentence.
thret 15y ago
http://xkcd.com/75/ http://xkcd.com/75/

m0nastic 15y ago

I really find that it's all dependent on the context. The use of profanity in a presentation (or the use of humorous images) can set the tone of the talk, and in a larger context, sets the tone for the event. People have stated that profanity isn't appropriate in a "professional" context, and I think I agree with that. I don't use profanity around my clients, I wouldn't put it in a report, and if I wouldn't use it in a talk internally at my company. I work at a "professional" company. As an artifact of the industry I work in, however, I see a fair number of talks that aren't supposed to be part of a "professional" context. They're supposed to be part of a social context. In infosec, there's a continuum of "professionalism" in events which ranges from a bunch of folks in a bar giving talks while drinking to a conference like RSA. For what it's worth, I get way more out of events like the former (although certainly not because of people swearing). I think if you're giving a presentation at an event, you need to know what the context of the event is, and your presentation should match it.

mikeryan 15y ago

If, as the author clearly states, its okay to use the word "fuck" in presentations then what's his problem with using it for dramatic effect in the lead? Where's a better opportunity? The word "Fuck" is a dramatic word - it inherently conveys passion, I'd argue that Zach's use was the most appropriate use of the term (if you're going to use it at all). I'd find this post more compelling if he just said "using profanity is the easy way out" instead of consistently trying to say "some profanity is okay, just not this usage".

seanalltogether 15y ago

I don't like swearing in presentations when the presenter is attempting to appear cooler then the audience they are addressing. These presentations tend to also be full of goofy pictures and lots of hyperbole and really turn me off. On the other hand, when I'm sitting through a very technical talk and the engineer giving the presentation warns the audience about "wading through a lot of shit to get this feature working" I tend to take them seriously on that point.

pbiggar 15y ago

I think the word "F-bomb" says a lot. To many, including I guess the OP, "fuck" is a "bomb", a word that rouses them from their slumber and causes them to say "OMG, did he just say 'fuck'". And while you still have this attitude, it's always going to be effective. This "swearing isn't cool" attitude annoys me. It isn't cool, I agree. It's just neutral; for emphasis, like "very" or "awesome". Get off your high horse. I'll say fuck if I please.

monochromatic 15y ago
Your comparison to the word "very" is unintentionally apt. There's no reason to use the word "very." It's a weak word, and it signals that you just couldn't come up with anything more interesting to say. So too with swearing just to get an audience's attention.
- pbiggar 15y ago
  There's two orthogonal issues with "fuck". One is that it offends people. One is that it's kinda weak. But the "weak" argument doesn't matter. I use weak words all the time. 95% of my words are weak. So why does it matter that I have another one? I would say that it only matters if you buy into the first issue, that "fuck" is offensive. If you consider that fuck is just another word, then it doesn't matter that you're using yet another weak word.
  - msellout 15y ago
    Au contraire, the issue is exactly that the use of profanity is "weak" word choice. The article challenges those of us trying to create strong presentations to choose stronger words.
wink 15y ago
Even if I leave out my personal opinion on the matter, this post didn't leave me scratching my head in a "wtf, is this real?" manner, but I find it insightful.
dorian-graph 15y ago

Avshalom 15y ago

It's a title slide, there isn't really space for actual clever word play. You can use some other single word for emphasis, you can make "important" even bigger, or I guess use some exclamation points, but those are kind of invisible. Or you can do with out any emphasis and just go with a affectless title slide. Whatever you go with, using 'fucking' only looks like a grammatical trick (or more of a trick than using 'extremely' say) if you do still cringe at the word or are still a little opposed to it.

reverend_gonzo 15y ago

"Fuck" is a crutch. Personally, I use it fairly often since I talk like a sailor, but I wouldn't use it in a professional presentation because there's better ways to communicate ideas, to evoke emotion, and to engage the audience. You might not know what those ideas are, but to be a better speaker, you need to find out. A couple years ago, I was studying sketch comedy writing at Second City (essentially the center of comedy, and where SNL, Daily Show, etc recruit from). As part of our last class, we had to put on a sketch show, and our teacher/director told us that we were allowed to use "fuck" once in our show, and this was a sketch comedy show ... the reason being, we had to find the one place where it be most effective and use it there. Every other place where we wanted to use, we had to find a better way to communicate our ideas. And you know, we were better for it. Using it in the title defeats the entire purpose of the word since everybody is already paying attention to you. "Fuck" is a draw word ... You need to find a better way to make them laugh and interested.

chc 15y ago
By "crutch," I assume you mean that it can be worked around, but it's easier for most people to use it. The words "I", "that" and "the" are also crutches in this sense. Arbitrary limitations can help you develop your creativity, but you shouldn't then conclude that the things arbitrarily disallowed are somehow bad in and of themselves.

fleitz 15y ago

Swearing is the spice of language, some people like more spice, some people like less, some like their food bland. But there is a point at which the food just tastes salty, and most importantly you need a blend of spice to make things really shine, you can't just use salt and MSG. Swearing is an art, not a science.

ChuckMcM 15y ago

Interesting to see the responses here. I felt the point was spot on, which is that if you are going to use profanity in your presentation it is useful to 'think twice' which I read as, "Sit back and think about what you are trying to achieve by doing that." The OP gave some examples of reasons people might come up with; waking up the audience, setting the tone, Etc. In general there is a lot of difference between folks who do spend a bit of time thinking about their presentation and those who basically spin one off on the fly. So if you're using profanity, and you think about why you chose to use profanity, and you agree with that choice then by all means go with it. However if you find that you're trying to bracket some key message that you really want your audience to go home with, then perhaps swearing isn't necessary. It can also be a lot less effective than you think. Saying "Social media is so over" can be more effective at getting attention than "What the fuck is Social Media?" if the audience is invested in social media and have been defending it, as a concept/meme/market, with skeptical acquaintences.

jimkogs 15y ago
I think one of the reasons that the author misses is that, as used by Zach Holman, 'fuck' levels the field between presenter and audience. "I'm not so important that I can't swear." It can be arrogant or overly formal to embrace how "gorgeous" your slides are, to emphasize how "gifted" you are at presenting. Instead, it emphasizes the fuckhead in all of us; the flaws, in order to say unequivocally "Yeah I'm an asshole sometimes, but here's what I think and I think it's worth hearing: I hope you do too."
- ChuckMcM 15y ago
  Ok, I can see that, but I've seen folks who have tried and failed to make the audience think, that they themselves (the presenter) thought, of themselves (the presenter) as just another voice in the crowd. In general if one is presenting and choosing to change one's vocabulary and speech habits in order to be less off putting to the audience, one risks coming off as insincere and condescending. Just like prose in the third person singular sounds presumptuous :-)
  - 15y ago

JabavuAdams 15y ago

> I'm not offended at the presence of the F-bomb, I'm offended that someone with his talent takes the easy way out. This is silly. It's like arguing "I have no problem with X, but ..." followed by things that you would never say if you in fact had no problem with X. If the author had never been acculturated/trained to think that swearing was wrong, he wouldn't have written this post. I.e. where are the blog posts on how you should think twice about using the word "goldfish" in a presentation? There aren't any because people really, truly, have no problem with the word "goldfish", unlike the word "fuck". EDIT> If you want to argue against swearing in presentations, then do so. Don't pretend that you have no problem with swearing -- it just makes you look dishonest. EDIT2> "acculturated" doesn't mean what I thought it meant. Substitute "trained"

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]

run4yourlives 15y ago

Like most of life: Time and Place. My advice: Do what you want, but recognize you're subject to the rules of the above, and interpretation can vary.

dorian-graph 15y ago

Agree wholeheartedly with this post Conery. In the English language we have so many beautiful words we can use and most people seem to have limited vocabulary. Why should we be content with lower, near meaningless words when we can learn news words and use those effectively? .. and what if people don't understand them? Use words appropriately with who you're talking to and consider what Handel said after the first performance of Messiah: “My lord, I should be sorry if I only entertained them; I wish to make them better.”

bdr 15y ago

The difference many people are missing is between moral offense and aesthetic offense. The author is claiming the latter; it's a critique of bad style. You can disbelieve the claim or disagree with it, but it's not prima facie nonsense.

ellyagg 15y ago

Whether you like to admit it or not, swearing is and will be taken as a sign of disrespect or superiority. You (99% percent of us) would not drop the F-bomb in the presence of a new boss, for example, unless you had very good reason to think it was ok. It's similar to the fact that the boss teases subordinates, but the reverse is much rarer. Swearing is absolutely a status strategy, even when speaking to groups. For all the people who claim that swearing is essentially as innocuous as any other speech, and only prissy people think anything of it at all, it would be interesting to see their behavior around their professional or social superiors. There'll always be the people who pipe up to claim they treat everyone the same, and don't know what status is, but on the whole, I'm pretty sure the social implications and power dynamics of swearing show very strong patterns. Swear all you like (I do), but please don't pretend that profane language doesn't have different effects from normal language.

alexholehouse 15y ago
I would agree with you if we're considering English. I'm not sure the same conclusions can be drawn for other languages (German springs to mind).
- ugh 15y ago
  Why? I’m German and that seems bizarre to me. Swearing is definitely not used independently of context in German.
  - alexholehouse 15y ago
    I was in Germany a few years ago, and I remember a historian we were working with swearing a lot (in English) just to make points or convey extremities. When I queried him about it he said swearing didn't have particularly negative connotations when used in "normal conversation" in German. I took this at face value at the time, so I apologize if I've misspoken on the matter.
    - ugh 15y ago

powertower 15y ago

Fuck you! ... Pay me. http://weblog.muledesign.com/2011/04/creative_mornings.php http://weblog.muledesign.com/2011/04/creative_mornings.php It's the one time I've seen it work well.

bengl3rt 15y ago

Come on, now. Would this "Artur on SSDs" video be nearly as memorable (and therefore efficacious) without all the swearing? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7PJ1oeEyGg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7PJ1oeEyGg

brudgers 15y ago

"Fuck" isn't cute or particularly clever, but like "bullshit" it does make for more effective communication in appropriate contexts. Many years ago, one of mentors offered "You can't fuck scared and you can't sell broke," as the first rule of sales...and I only needed to hear it once for it to stick. And at times the word "fuck" is a necessary component of the concept, e.g. nothing adequately describes fuck you money except "fuck you money."

runjake 15y ago

I'm not offended by vulgarity in presentations, it's just a personal turn-off. It puts little "this person has an attitude problem" ideas in my head.

mechanical_fish 15y ago

A. Why have we editorialized in the title? If the author thought "Fucking Your Way Out" was an appropriate title, it should be the title here on HN, should it not? (I don't think the title is appropriate or elegant, and maybe there's a meta-policy on HN to avoid putting "fuck" on the home page, which there are good reasons to avoid, having to do with brand and overzealous filtering software and whatnot. But I think it's kind of misleading, especially for an essay like this one, to advertise one title and put another one on the essay itself!) B. If there is one fucking thing that will cause me to reconsider my personal policy of avoiding the use of the word "fuck" online, especially in public writing, it's the phrase "F-bomb", which is just fucking awful. If you're trying to avoid the word for the sake of young children, or for the sake of avoiding the emotional impact of a real "fuck", you obviously need to say "effing" (in speech) or "fscking" (in print) or any of the hundred thousand other classic euphemisms, because "F-bomb" is not a substitute for "fuck". It just doesn't work, grammatically. If, on the other hand, you're discussing the word from a literary standpoint, let me introduce you to a little concept called scare quotes: You can say "fuck" and not mean it! The safety is on! I think my real problem with "F-bomb" may be that it's obviously a word for conducting a meta-discussion of the word "fuck" in front of young children. Perhaps my reaction would be much the same if you addressed me in baby talk and ended every sentence by patting me on the head. I'm not convinced that such a word needs to exist – If the audience doesn't understand "fuck" well enough to safely read it, why are you discussing the word? But when you absolutely need such a word, try the simple phrase "the F-word". You will sound like a schoolmarm, but then again it's not as if you were going to avoid that.

mquander 15y ago
The HN title is ten times more descriptive than "Fucking Your Way Out." Nobody would have any idea what the article was about if he used that title, whereas his replacement title is succinct and accurate. You can quibble about whether it should say "fuck" or "F-bomb", but it's up to the submitter's discretion to use a good title, and his chosen one is far better than leaving it as the default, so I'm not inclined to complain too loudly. I also note that much of your ire should probably be directed at the author, who uses "F-bomb" as a euphemism many times in the article itself, and even heroically sneaks in the phrase "dropping some F-pepper" once (this is actually true.)

rayditutto 15y ago

consider the troll nature of Rob's composition

robconery 15y ago
What would that be exactly? Could I apply the same thing to this comment?
- rayditutto 15y ago
  Not all uses of the word troll are necessarily derogatory. In its high form, a troll (the article, not the person) should evoke and provoke discussion. The article is well written using the very vernacular of the subject piece. The article and its subject article form a nice meta-circular structure. Something, i'm sure can be appreciated on HN :-)

fez 15y ago

For some reason I thought the "F-bomb" was going to be Facebook. Oh silly me.

ryan-allen 15y ago

The last person I saw swearing in a tech presentation also happens to own a one-off Pagani Zhonda. I'm sure he's doing something right!

j_baker 15y ago

I think it's a question of appropriateness. Cursing gets peoples' attention and stirs up powerful feelings and attitudes. Use a curse word at just the right time, and you turn a mediocre presentation into a good one. Or it can turn a good presentation into a fucking great presentation. On the other hand, if you use profanity too fucking gratuitously, it will turn your presentation into a fucking piece of shit. Motherfuckers who aren't offended by it will learn to fucking tune that shit out and will be mildly pissed at you. The fucking douchebags that are offended by it will be, well, fucking offended by that shit. In the case that the article mentions, my biggest reaction is a simple "Meh". I suppose a case could be made that it's a cheap shot aimed at getting peoples' attention, but ultimately, I don't feel like it was overdone. Nor do I feel it really helped a whole lot. I suppose if I were the presenter, I'd cut the "fuck" out for the simple reason that its use doesn't help my presentation out enough to justify having to hear people complain about it.

artursapek 15y ago

I can think of two well-known things I've seen in the blogosphere that use cursing heavily. The first is Mike Monteiro's "Fuck You, Pay Me." http://vimeo.com/22053820?utm_source=swissmiss http://vimeo.com/22053820?utm_source=swissmiss I think in this situation the usage is appropriate and he used repetition of this phrase effectively throughout his presentation. The second isn't a presentation, it's an advice-giving website "Good Fucking Design Advice." http://www.goodfuckingdesignadvice.com/ http://www.goodfuckingdesignadvice.com/ To me it comes off as tactless and pretentious. I get that it's playing to the "frustrated designer" but this type repetitive usage is the type that washes out the meaning of a curse. Personally I love cursing when it's appropriate. I go to a school where students and their teachers will often curse in front of eachother. It's never in aggression or anything, but the other day I came into class feeling ill and I was about to tell my teacher she asked, "feel like shit?" She knew a bug had been going around. In my opinion, curses are indicative of someone's character. That's basically it. Use it in your presentation if you want to come off as a light-hearted extrovert not to be taken too seriously.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

bherms 15y ago

Swearing should be a strength of your vocabulary and not a weakness. Occasionally it can be used to great effect, but hopefully is not relied on in general conversation.

viraptor 15y ago

Not sure about this one - I don't mind swearing if it's really rare and if someone wants to put something shocking on their slide because that's their style of bringing attention to some issues, then I'm completely fine with it. I know some people who happen to sometimes swear in emails, but knowing they'd do the same thing in person, it seems perfectly normal. What really annoys me is "f^^k", "s^^t" and other "words" like that. If you don't normally swear, don't write it. If showing "fuck" on your slide makes you cringe, just skip it. It's neither natural nor needed. It's not censored - everyone knows exactly what it was supposed to say, but they also know you didn't actually want to write it.

ugh 15y ago
See, that I don’t understand at all. To me “fk” and “fuck” are equivalent. If you want to use a word you should stand by it – it’s also typographically much nicer. “Fk” is a lazy cop-out. It doesn’t soften the blow, it only looks ugly.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

codeslush 15y ago

"...Swearing says more about your abilities as a speaker then it does your content... that's the problem." Good thing he is talking about speaking instead of writing. EDIT: That is in the opening paragraph, and this is in the closing paragraph: "...The minute you drop that F-bomb, that's when you lose me. If you don't care enough to flex the language at your disposal, why should I give a fuck about what you have to say?" Irony? :-) (replace say with write)

gerggerg 15y ago

Could someone explain to me how I could convey not only the content of my message but also the tone of my feelings more concisely than: What the fuck is all this fuss about?

samstave 15y ago

Frankly, this is one of the things that really turned me off to Adeo Ressi, in his talks, presentations and classes he constantly drops F-bombs -- I assume to make him seem more hip/cool/grounded/whatever -- but it comes across as arrogant. However when I expressed this previously people disagreed... whatever. I dont think it makes you look cool. I wish I could take a pill and have that word expunged from my own vocabulary though... I say it far too much in my private moments!

lincolnwebs 15y ago

The irony of writing long blog posts and HN comments about "unnecessary cursing" in a presentation (thereby linking to and discussing the presentation 10x more) is almost too much for me to bear.

buff-a 15y ago

Swearing says more about your abilities as a speaker then it does your content... that's the problem. Oh, god, can we please stop repeating this fucking shite. If you don't care enough to flex the language at your disposal, why should I give a fuck about what you have to say? If your ability to perform rational thought is so bad that it thinks that sentence us logically sound, then you probably aren't going to be able to comprehend or use what I have to say.

locusm 15y ago

Never trust a man that doesn't swear. Dad 1987

masterzora 15y ago

I think HN's title here is more accurate than the actual article. Do not expunge "fuck", or any other word, from your vocabulary just because it can be misused. I can misuse many words just as easily as peppering "fuck" everywhere but he doesn't seem to be arguing to get rid of anything but swears. If you're preparing a talk like that, you should be thinking twice about everything you prepare, though, not just "F-bombs". Did you put that "fuck" there to sound edgy? Unless you're presenting to a group of 12-year-olds nobody's going to think you're edgy. On the other hand, I love to use "fuck" to establish tone. A few judicious and well-placed "fuck"s and you can easily establish that you're just like everyone else in the room and you're essentially just chatting rather than talking down at them or anything like that. Sure, if you banned yourself from using this word you could establish the same tone via a variety of methods but, sometimes, you just need to fucking cut through the bullshit and stop pussy-footing around.

vacri 15y ago
There's also the aspect that, used well, using 'fuck' in a presentation helps to imply "I'm not selling you something here, making it sweeter than it actually is. I'm telling it like it is"

Mz 15y ago

I have a tendency to swear like a sailor. I try to keep it "pg 13-ish" when posting online. It's against the rules to use profanity at work, so I work really hard at behaving there. But I still tend to swear too much around co-workers when not actually at work. SIGH. It annoys me. I think it makes a very bad impression.

psyklic 15y ago

The real question here isn't whether the F-bomb is appropriate. Rather, it's how to balance entertainment and content in a technical presentation. Zach's talk is memorable. People will remember him and talk to him afterward for sure. People will also think he's a strong presenter -- half of his jokes fell flat, but his confidence was impressive. I do improv for fun at a "family" theatre in Hollywood. In my experience, skilled comedians use the "F-bomb" to convey character and to show they're "one of the guys," not as a shock word. In this talk, rather than using shock words, Zach is filtering his content through a character -- an informal "brogrammer" who loves alcohol and swears on occasion. This is his ploy to entertain the audience while talking about a superficially-boring subject -- documentation. Does it work? Well, perhaps Zach doesn't come off as an all-knowing expert. But, he does deliver a few messages in an entertaining fashion. After all, would you rather have everyone agree you gave a "good" talk (and then forget about it, since there were so many "good" ones), or be a bit controversial and have a few people really take notice and love your point of view?

CPlatypus 15y ago
Yep, sure, lots of people will remember Zach and talk about him. It's too bad that they won't remember what he was talking about. When the presentation drowns out the content - assuming there was any content to begin with - that's a problem.
- psyklic 15y ago
  True, a lot of people get wrapped up in the presentation and are sparse on content, as I believe happened here. However, the goal of these is often not to go in depth but to give your audience main points to remember. So, there is plenty of room to give an entertaining and contentful talk. I am disappointed when people try to play it safe by avoiding humor or by hiding their personality. Making yourself relatable and engaging is important too!

synnik 15y ago

This is one of those issues in which I clearly see generational differences. I am pushing 40, and my opinions are at odds with most of the commenters. In your personal language, your choice to curse or not is none of my business. But in the business world, it is unprofessional. I won't think you are a bad person for cursing. But it will lose my respect. I will most likely stop taking you seriously. And the likelihood of my choosing to do business with you in the future is minimal.

developish 15y ago

> I'm not offended at the presence of the F-bomb, I'm offended that someone with his talent takes the easy way out. I think the conversation would be more productive if we considered the language used when people respond to those who use profanity. Typically we're talking about being "offended" or "taken aback" (Scott Hanselman's post). From my trusty Apple dictionary I find that offense means "annoyance or resentment brought about by a perceived insult to or disregard for oneself or one's standards or principles". So essentially this is a whole argument about annoyance caused by a choice of language. When it's said "I'm offended that someone with his talent takes the easy way out." it's further revealed that the annoyance is not coming from any high moral ground but is purely stylistic. All the talk about "do(ing) better" or cursing being a "crutch" is a red herring. Further, this offense is caused by "disregard for oneself or one's standards or principles". It's rather arrogant to think that anyone should have any regard for your standards standards or principles at all. It's time to grow up and realize that getting upset by the particular style of another's words is a waste of your time and attention.

dubajj 15y ago

kids these days with their swearing and rock and roll...get off my lawn old man voice

overgard 15y ago

Two thoughts: "Fuck" seems like an excellent filter. It lets people who are more concerned with appearances and rules rather than content know that what I'm saying isn't something for them. That's ok, not everyone has to like what I say; the quicker they come to know that probably the better for both parties. The kind of person who could become offended by a simple word choice is just so different from me that I doubt we'd ever get along. My second thought is that it also just seems like a more powerful form of the word "very" or "really" to me; only more fun. Like those words, if you overuse them it will get annoying, but otherwise I just don't fucking care.

buff-a 15y ago

This person believes that you should follow his rules. This person believes that even if you clearly don't follow his rules, he will evaluate your content based on how much your behavior would indicate that you value you them if you did follow his rules. o_O This person values presentation over content. There are plenty of people on earth like this. Its good to know they exist. But lets not spend any more time discussing them.

drivebyacct2 15y ago

... What? If I use "fuck", I have a strong personality and want to sell you on my superiority? What an absurd premise.

dools 15y ago

If you're writing about people's skills as communicators, learn the difference between the words then and than.

rajpaul 15y ago

The article says that swearing is the easy way out, and that intelligent, talented people can do better. I'd go further and say that swearing nothing more than cheap fucking theatrics, and gimmicks.

chousuke 15y ago

I feel that most occurrences of the word 'fuck' are unimaginative and fail to utilise the full expressive potential of swearing. There are countless interesting words and phrases that convey the same emotion as the F-bomb, and I would rather see more of those. I will not say that it's always inappropriate to use 'fuck' but it's certainly overused.

ajanuary 15y ago

This puts into words why I found the use of "shit" in http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3209500 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3209500 jarring despite not really being offended.

valyala 15y ago

IMHO, it's more funny to hide F-bomb in your presentation, so only a few people will notice it :) See, for instance, Schwarzenegger's F-bomb hidden in Veto letter - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/30/schwarzenegger-f-bomb-in_n_340579.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/30/schwarzenegger-f-bo... .

schacon 15y ago

It would be difficult for me to disagree more strongly with this article. To say that Zach is somehow lazy because he used a swear word is missing the forest for the trees. I have probably attended more than 50 conferences in the last few years and of the hundreds of talks I've seen, Zach obsesses over his presentations more than nearly anyone I've ever known. The talk you pulled a single slide from, completely out of context, was simple, beautiful and useful - Readme Driven Development and TomDoc have been incredibly useful concepts driving productive development at GitHub and the talk was very effective in getting across what they are and why they are helpful. The vast majority of conference talks are pretty awful. Often they are a handful of slides with little design or thought put into them, consisting of a generic Keynote or Powerpoint theme with a dozen slides with 6 bullet points on each one with the speaker simply reading them off. Or impossible to read code or any of another hundred horrible presentation mistakes. Many of them are boring, hard to follow and unfocused. Zach, on the other hand, puts hours, often days, of work into each of his talks, focusing on making them simple, entertaining and useful to the audience. He uses jokes, like this, to keep the audience awake and paying attention - which given the way most conferences are set up, is necessary to keep people from checking their email during your talk. The amount of focus and attention that speakers like Zach pay to delivering their message is so much more respectful to the audience and the organizers than something mind-bogglingly unimportant like not swearing. Zach understands the majority of his audience, respects their time and tries to make his time in front of them worth it, and improves developers lives by effectively delivering information to them. This is more than I can say for more than half the speakers I've ever seen. To focus on Zach as a target because of using language that all of us use every fucking day is not only useless and mean, but harmful to the already difficult environment that is the technical conference world today. Instead of the handful of people that might have been made slightly uncomfortable with language they probably use all the time, how about a blog post on the thousands of developers who are now more effective because of the actual content of his talks?