104 ms·
Am I the only one that thinks using profanity is a lousy way to explain things?
by gukov 2y ago
Am I the only one that thinks using profanity is a lousy way to explain things?
- navjack27 2y agoAbsolutely disagree! Conveying frustration of the highest caliber sometimes requires profanity and if you can't deal with that then grow up.
- latexr 2y ago> Conveying frustration (…) sometimes requires profanity Agreed, but that’s unrelated to what your parent comment says: > using profanity is a lousy way to explain things Explaining something and conveying frustration are not the same thing. So you’re not really disagreeing, you talked about something orthogonal. For all we know, the parent commenter agrees with you. It’s not contradictory to think profanity is a good medium to convey frustration but a bad one to explain a concept. > and if you can't deal with that then grow up That was uncalled for. Please be mindful of the guidelines. HN aims for civil discourse, not needlessly judging others. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- mablopoule 2y agoSame. I felt that the article generally got his point across, and kept a good balance between "straight to the point" and flavor text. And while I don't want profanity present in all the articles I want to read, I find this kind of tone way more appealing than the dry, PR-approved blog posts where the only kind of levity found are "2010 internet humor" cat pictures, and "Corporate Memphis" illustrations.
- bombcar 2y agoProfanity can be like a spice, used wisely and sparingly. Or it can be overused or in the wrong context. It's rare you get something that can't be expressed in some other way, however - but it does exist, especially in the world of jokes.