
Think twice about that F-bomb in your next talk - ghurlman
http://wekeroad.com/2011/11/08/some-people-not-have-way
======
ellyagg
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.

~~~
xanados
One nuance to this is that not all profanity is created equally. Essentially
none of the people here that would drop the F-bomb in a presentation would
utter the word "cunt" in any __remotely __professional environment. It
connotes disrespect much more strongly and status perhaps very little,
probably negatively.

~~~
astrec
I've found anecdotally that acceptance of that word in a professional
environment is limited to the two tails of the income distribution.

------
stevelosh
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>

~~~
jamesbritt
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
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...)

~~~
joe24pack
How about the use of "impactful" ? (I swear by The Fates, the FSM's Noodly
Appendage, and the Holy Handgrenade of Antioch that actual English speaking
human beings used that word)

On the few occasions that I hear someone using the word "impactful", I'm
tempted to ask "Do you mean 'effective'?"

------
ChuckMcM
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
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
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 :-)

~~~
jimkogs
Presenting _is_ choosing to change one's vocabulary and speech habits, in
order to bond with the audience. It's a matter of how good one is that
determines whether a "fuck" is a fuck-up or a fuck-yes.

[eww, that parallelism felt forced, but I can't resist.]

------
mechanical_fish
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.

~~~
tptacek
Presumably you've seen:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dF1NUposXVQ>

(Louis CK, NSFW, totally worth it though)

~~~
mechanical_fish
I should take down my whole complaint and replace it with this link.

(Tragically, one can no longer assume that I've seen anything, so thanks for
the link. Whatever happened to the version of me that actually watched TV?)

------
m0nastic
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.

------
pbiggar
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.

~~~
dorian-graph
Why is it that if someone dislikes swearing in some regard they're considered
to be on a high horse? It seems like having some view points simply isn't
allowed . . which I usually find amusing as those who are against people with
view points like this are usually in support of some modern, disruptive cause.
;)

It kind of reminds me of in high school where the kids who studying were told
effectively to get off their high horses and the others would proudly proclaim
they will not do their homework as they please.

~~~
vacri
Disliking another's way of speaking, regardless of profanity, is generally
considered a high horse. Someone who doesn't like the way slumdwellers speak
for example. Or someone who doesn't like the way folks trained with clear
diction speak.

If you dislike the way a person communicates - not the content, but the method
- then you're of the opinion there's a better way they should be talking.
Hence: high horse.

~~~
billybob
I think those are different. I say "y'all" because I grew up in the southern
US, and we recognize the need for a proper second-person plural here. Not
everybody likes that word, but I'm not saying it in order to annoy them.

On the other hand, the very thing that DEFINES a swear word is that everyone
knows that it's offensive. To choose a word BECAUSE it's offensive, then
demand that people not be offended by it, is silly.

------
reverend_gonzo
"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
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.

------
simonsarris
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/>

~~~
epo
Which Gordon Ramsey? The chef? He swears incessantly.

~~~
robconery
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 f __ _ing a_ *hole". You can't help
but laugh at that visual.

~~~
roc
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
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.

------
TheKevDog
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
<http://xkcd.com/137/>

~~~
rglullis
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
> 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.

------
bdr
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.

------
schacon
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?

------
dorian-graph
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.”

------
artursapek
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> 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/> 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.

------
brudgers
"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."

------
buff-a
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.

------
masterzora
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
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"

------
fleitz
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.

------
mikeryan
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".

------
powertower
Fuck you! ... Pay me.

<http://weblog.muledesign.com/2011/04/creative_mornings.php>

It's the one time I've seen it work well.

------
samstave
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!

------
synnik
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
> 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.

------
gerggerg
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?

------
psyklic
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
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
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!

------
j_baker
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.

------
JabavuAdams
> 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"

------
keithpeter
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...

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

------
overgard
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.

------
Avshalom
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.

------
seanalltogether
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.

------
buff-a
_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.

------
codeslush
"...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)

------
run4yourlives
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.

------
chousuke
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.

------
valyala
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-
bo...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/30/schwarzenegger-f-bomb-
in_n_340579.html) .

------
Mz
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.

------
bengl3rt
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>

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

------
lincolnwebs
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.

------
bherms
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.

------
runjake
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.

------
ryan-allen
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!

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

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

------
locusm
Never trust a man that doesn't swear.

Dad 1987

------
dubajj
kids these days with their swearing and rock and roll...get off my lawn _old
man voice_

------
rayditutto
consider the troll nature of Rob's composition

~~~
robconery
What would that be exactly? Could I apply the same thing to this comment?

~~~
rayditutto
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 :-)

------
drivebyacct2
... What? If I use "fuck", I have a strong personality and want to sell you on
my superiority? What an absurd premise.

------
rajpaul
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.

------
indrax
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.

~~~
kbutler
s/f.ck/smurf/g

It illustrates the level of writing skill/vocabulary/maturity quite well.

~~~
andrewflnr
"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.

------
maratd
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.

