
Profanity Doesn't Work - noelsequeira
http://www.hanselman.com/blog/ProfanityDoesntWork.aspx
======
nhashem
You're sitting in a meeting to talk about strategy next quarter. Ideas are
flying. People are talking over each other. Every so often someone scrawls
something on a whiteboard. Then they start talking about dates and "quick
wins." Estimates get thrown out, which inspires another furious rush of
discussion.

You keep trying to interject. You lost two engineers a month ago. Another one
has put in his notice. You hired a bright kid a week ago, but he's going to
need time to ramp up. You keep trying to say that hiring needs to be the focus
of any new strategy, because nothing's getting done if you don't have the
engineers to do it. You keep trying to raise this point and get the group to
talk about how you can redouble your recruiting efforts, but everybody wants
to talk about "establishing social media channels" and "improving our
performance marketing network."

So finally, you sigh, and raising your voices a couple notches, you say:

"There is no way we're doing to do ANY OF THIS SHIT with our current staff."

The room quiets down. All heads turn to you.

Then the CEO says, "All right, let's talk about recruiting."

------
kstenerud
What always amuses me is the tendency of some people to "censor" out profanity
(f __* vs fuck and s __* vs shit), as if by not actually typing the word, the
writer could write about profanity and yet not be "sullied" by it, or
something to that effect.

Seriously, loosen up. This almost puritanical aversion to profanity is
unhealthy.

~~~
Dove
Actually, there is an effect on the reader. Being indirect softens the blow
for folks who are offended by it, much like a euphemism does.

~~~
sams99
People are always offended for "other" people, I would be curious to hear the
thoughts of a person who is truly offended by the word fuck. Does it have some
magic powers that cause it to fire off a pain circuit in mutant brains?

~~~
Dove
I find profanity offensive in general.

It's not words themselves that matter. It's what people mean by them. Saying
"please", vacuous as it might be, communicates consideration. Profanity
communicates the opposite.

Of course, it isn't that simple; language is language and context is
everything. Sometimes someone swearing at you means, "Some people would be
offended by this, but I know you can take it." The inconsiderate language is a
compliment. Sometimes it means, "We don't have time for social niceties; this
is important." It's like pounding your fist on a table or slamming a door. But
by itself, the meaning is closer to, "I don't care about you, because I just
don't."

Profanity can certainly be used _well_ , but without a redeeming purpose the
vibe is somewhere between stupidity and rudeness. I find that offensive. Not
as in, "I'm wounded", but as in, "that's unpleasant."

Some of it's cultural, too. One family may be big on courtesy -- always
saying, "please pass the butter" at dinner. Just reaching across the table at
that house would give a lot of offense because it violates how they show
consideration to each other. In another house, everyone may just reach for
everything all the time, and it doesn't mean anything.

Profanity is a lot like that. In some crowds, _any_ uncensored profanity is
highly offensive, a nine out of ten. In others, vocabulary alone can't push
the needle past two, and you need to start in with creative graphic
descriptions if you really mean to offend.

People have a couple of different reactions to that.

Some people, particularly the folks with a high pain threshold, just assume
their culture is better. They swear a lot and the subtext is, "I don't care if
you're offended because I think your culture sucks anyway." Hardly polite.

Other folks try to speak the language of the crowd they're in. If you say "X
is sh*t" to a mixed group, some will hear "X is stinky socks" while others
will hear "X is bestiality and I hate you." If you're pretty sure where on the
spectrum your crowd falls, you can go ahead and use the expression. If it's
mixed, though, you had best go ahead and use whichever of the two phrases it
is you actually mean.

~~~
michaelcampbell
> Profanity communicates the opposite.

To you. By adopting this mindset, you give the word much more power than the
speaker is (most likely) intending.

By all means it's your right to be offended and maintain your personal
standards for such things, but don't mistake you being offended with someone
else trying to offend.

------
Tsagadai
I disagree with the article. Swearing is highly effective but only if rarely
used. The article's author hints at innuendo, euphemisms, dysphemisms and
doublespeak as alternatives to swearing. I am a firm believer and follower of
concise eloquence so avoiding calling a spade a spade is akin to heresy. Come
out and say it, don't avoid words when they perfectly describe something.

Think of swearing as an alternative to hitting someone. Sometimes you really
want to hit someone and there may be a good reason for it but violence is
never appropriate. Swearing in such a contexts is how humans don't
continuously tear each other apart. They should be a tool of last resort to
express our most powerful emotions.

Expletives are the most powerful words in every language, but they only retain
their power when used infrequently and in contexts that demand them.

~~~
vacri
_The article's author hints at innuendo, euphemisms, dysphemisms and
doublespeak as alternatives to swearing._

I love wordplay and regularly engage in it with my friends. But to write an
article using wordplay as the basic tool for explaining anything other than
wordplay is worse than being offensive. You run the risk of alienating a lot
of English-as-second-language folks for a start, as they lack a lot of the
fluency required. But even further, I've learned heavily and repeatedly that
there are considerable differences between what many American English and
British English speakers can take from talking in metaphor. British English
speakers (and the British themselves, in particular) live and breathe
metaphor.

I find that most people who can't understand speaking in metaphor are either
English-second-language; American English speakers; or Brit English speakers
who have dropped out of education early and have very little socialisation.

It's not to say there aren't American English folks who don't understand
metaphor well, it's just that it's so common for them to misunderstand it. If
you hear an individual saying "But that's not literally what I said" to defend
what they have actually have said between-the-lines, it's unlikely that
they're a British English speaker.

~~~
Tsagadai
Second-language English speakers should always be seen as your target audience
for any professional communication. Most English speakers alive today do not
speak English as their first language. Also, many who speak English as a first
language are not experts in English either. Metaphor, idiom and wordplay are
great, interesting and they have their uses, mainly in social contexts and for
identifying yourself as a member of a group. But they do little but confuse
and isolate readers or listeners who aren't part of your cultural or
linguistic group. Most of what I write professionally is devoid of complex
words and almost every literary technique in order to be as accessible as
possible (Hacker News doesn't count, I'm being myself in this forum).

As for American English not having metaphors, do you not notice all of the
sporting metaphors frequently used by almost every stereotypical American
manager? Out of the the ball park, centre field, hit a home run, loaded bases,
the bullpen, etc. I'm Australian so I spent a month watching American sports
to grasp what some managers were on about in conference calls.

~~~
vacri
By 'speaking in metaphor' I mean that the speakers wind in and out of allegory
and double-meaning, not that they are using one-shot cliche metaphors, and
that what is said between-the-lines is readily acknowledged as being part of
the message, just as much as what is literally stated.

------
danilocampos
"The difference between the almost right word & the right word is really a
large matter--it's the difference between the lightning bug and the
lightning." - Mark Twain

There are occasions where only the word _fuck_ will do.

They're less common than what the habitually profane might guess (and I
regrettably count myself among that group).

Still – there is a talent to swearing. Part of it is delivery. Part of it is
timing. But the most crucial part is knowing when – and when not – to use a
particular tool for a particular instance. The people who write the Onion's
headlines have this air-tight.

~~~
scheff
In support of what you're saying - <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_g-
EOWoads>

~~~
socksy
In the vein of intelligent use of swearing with a scottish accent:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9arSotadmY>

------
mafro
I think he's correct in his assumption that it's only really in America that
people are offended by swear words on a slide. I'm in Europe and no one I know
would blink twice to see that - although I'd defo leave it out in a sales
pitch!

I personally thought the unnecessary swearing was quite amusing. It's nice to
see someone not taking themselves too seriously (for a change). Also reminded
me of Ted Dzuiba - anyone know what happened to him? His articles on
theregister were highly amusing.. Almost as funny as the comments where people
just bemoaning the swearing. That was hilarious.

Also reminded me of this, which was on HN a while back:
[http://andrewvos.com/2011/02/21/amount-of-profanity-in-
git-c...](http://andrewvos.com/2011/02/21/amount-of-profanity-in-git-commit-
messages-per-programming-language/)

~~~
getsat
Ted is still trolling away and being hilarious on his site,
<http://teddziuba.com>

------
dorian-graph
It is a poor man who relies upon swearing to have an impact upon his readers
or listeners. I view it similar to "Violence is the last refuge of the
incompetent."

Swearing may get the attention of people though it seems like a quick fix that
won't last. You know what else gets people's attention? Slapping them. :P What
is more lasting is effective teaching skills and telling stories well and to
do these well it requires practice and study. Instead of swearing try asking a
good question that will get them thinking and again, good questions usually
take preparation and it's not 'bad' to _prepare_ questions as some people seem
to think all good questions must be thought up on the spot.

The author mentions that it's more likely that Americans (Or rather, native
English speakers) find the words more 'offensive' than other countries and
I've noticed this too in a few Asian countries. For example, when I was in the
Philippines and we'd be talking to kids/teenagers and some would outright
swear (Sometimes at you) though were ignorant of it's true meaning/effect and
simply had heard it on movies/TV shows and the internet.

~~~
semanticist
Don't assume that everywhere that speaks English has the same monoculture. A
very strong aversion to swearing is, as far as I can tell, specifically
American.

I'm Scottish and I swear more or less continuously, using words that are
considered to be the 'most offensive'. This isn't 'trying hard', it's simply a
cultural artefact, a side-effect of growing up working class in a particular
place in the world.

This kind of reaction to swearing is really just parochial nonsense.

(On the other hand, if you do have a character trait that some people consider
a flaw, you might as well go out of your way to own it, and so:
<http://theswearingrubyist.com/> )

~~~
dorian-graph
In case people are assuming I'm American, I'll clarify. I'm not American, at
all. My father is from Glasgow and I was born in Australia (Australians are
known for their liberal swearing, it's the culture, apparently)—what other
culture aside from Scots and Australians swear more and are less likely to be
offended by it? ;)

With flaws/weaknesses I agree that they should be 'embraced' so that they can
be improved upon and if needed, removed, and not to use flaws/weaknesses as
excuses which may be for poor behaviour/actions/whatever.

It seems a common idea so far here and in most places is that 'not swearing'
is inherently a religious side-effect. I have friends who are not religious
and maintain their concepts of good, clean speech, of valuing what they say.

~~~
vacri
_It seems a common idea so far here and in most places is that 'not swearing'
is inherently a religious side-effect. I have friends who are not religious
and maintain their concepts of good, clean speech, of valuing what they say._

Two of the most proficient users of profanity I know are a pair of linguists,
mother and daughter. They are both heavily passionate about the English
language and will engage on the topic for hours at length if you let them.
Both think that books are sacred and have groaning bookshelves. The mother was
an editor for a very long time and has articles in peer-reviewed journals on
the topic, the daughter is a speech pathologist. They are very proficient in
English, and know the science and arts behind it, far more than the vast
majority. They are proficient in getting communication across in a variety of
ways, and both of them regularly use profanity in casual speech.

It's a total and utter misconception that 'people who really care about
language don't swear'. Anyone spending time with passionate linguists, speech
pathologists, and English Lit enthusiasts will know that use of profanity is
not uncommon amongst that demographic.

~~~
dorian-graph
> It's a total and utter misconception that 'people who really care about
> language don't swear'. Anyone spending time with passionate linguists,
> speech pathologists, and English Lit enthusiasts will know that use of
> profanity is not uncommon amongst that demographic.

That isn't quite what I was implying. There is a difference between being
aware of how beautiful languages are and being able to mechanically use them
well and those who value what they say and the effect of them.

An example is, I have a friend in the Philippines who when speaking while she
does not have an exhaustive vocabulary (I'm not talking about English but her
native tongue), as she is from the lower class and most simply use the
conversational version of their dialect, obviously valued what she said and
would do her to best to simply speak well, convey her ideas, have tact, etc.

Then there are those I know who do care for what they say though swear as well
so we return, apparently, simply to one's opinion of profanity. Out of that
comes understanding and respect. People who have been in support of this
person's blog post have been told to loosen up, implied that they're
puritants, mocked, etc. I've seen the same happen in other respects like at
university I overheard a group of people commenting about another student
because she chose to dress well and not reveal half her body and they said she
was a religious nut and other derogatory things. Funny thing is, she's not
religious.

Here and elsewhere people have said, basically, "I'm going to swear and I
don't care if you're offended" and while I find the concept of being offended
usually ridiculous it shows a lack of understanding.

------
GiraffeNecktie
The word "shit" is not profane, just coarse. And vulgarity has it's honored
place in the lexicon. In fact, I'd say that "shit work" is an excellent term
to use when describing unpleasant, meaningless activity.

------
malbs
I'm not sure what industry Scott actually works in? I can look at our code-
base here at work, and there are plenty of swear words through out. The
classic foobar as an extension on fubar, as in fucked up beyond all
recognition.

Then there was that article a few years ago (which I can't even remember the
actual argument, but I think it was about censorship) that the linux kernel
source code would be black listed because it had 7000+ counts of the word fuck
in it.

Swearing almost goes with the territory of being a programmer.. Oh wait, we're
not supposed to call our selves programmers any more. Colour me confused! Ok,
so I add value to my organisation, I remove obstacles, and if I happen to
swear while doing it, oh well!

~~~
Aqua_Geek
> Swearing almost goes with the territory of being a programmer.

I respectfully disagree.

As a counterexample to your codebase, you'd be hard-pressed to find a single
swear word in the 50k lines of one of my projects - even in the commit
messages.

~~~
malbs
Sure, some of the guys on our team wouldn't commit so much as damn or hell,
but they are in the minority

We have something akin to a swear jar going on at work, where instead of a
coin donation, you must slap yourself in the face for swearing, it's a bad day
if it's not even gone 9am and you're slapping yourself

And after Embarcadero finally released a 64-bit Delphi compiler complete with
memory leaks and 8000% slower compile times, there was a lot face slapping
going on =\

------
mambodog
As a non-American, seeing people get upset about a bit of colourful language
is quite amusing.

~~~
vacri
Same here. That americans even have the term "F-bomb" as if it's something
explosive is very amusing. The main article goes on at length for such a mild
word as 'shit'. He's complaining about the mildest of swear words being used
not in a professional publication nor a boardroom sales pitch, but on a
personal blog site, and then as a slide for a talk. Talks are usually about a
meeting of peers, communicating on a peer level is usually expected.

From personal experience with long history of doing phone support, swearing
_helps_. My rule of thumb is swear to one 'level' less than the user. If
they're saying 'fuck', you can say 'shit', if they're saying 'shit', you don't
swear. I've found that if you're _not_ swearing and they are a lot, it puts
them offside and they feel uncomfortable. One more unnecessary thing to
manage.

But the author's sensitivities are ratchetted way too high. Do I want to
'help' my industry 'outlaw' swearing? Fuck no. I'm more interested in the
_content_ of what someone says than the way in which they say it. I'd rather
listen to a profanity-laden speech about a tech topic than a slick-as-snot
marketroid drone on about nothing important. It's 2011 - we should be offended
by _context_ , not by mere _words_.

------
onan_barbarian
The poster is right. Next up, I'm expecting another whiny thread about why all
these t-shirt wearing "fuck that shit" guys aren't paid or treated like
doctors, lawyers or architects.

These are _public_ presentations. Act professional. There are almost no other
professions where it would be considered de rigueur to pepper your
_professional_ presentations with profanity, or, for that matter, porn.

You want to swear in your office, or in your source base (not in the public-
facing API stuff), go ahead. But if you want to swear in your public persona
as a professional, don't expect to be treated like that much of a
professional.

------
jt2190
I agree with Jerry Seinfeld that swearing (when writing or speaking) is not so
much offensive but just a lazy way to grab people's attention. A good speaker
can hold attention without resorting to swearing.

That said, I actually think that the phrase "shit work" perfectly expresses
the point, and I'm not sure I would have called it anything else if I were the
author.

------
jeffreymcmanus
This is a little prissy. I'm far more offended by a poorly-edited tl;dr blog
post than the occasional f-bomb. Both can show disrespect for the reader;
there's an art to it.

------
thisduck
What makes swearing any more offensive than say, not wearing a tie at some
conference? Is there anything inherent in the tie and words or is there a
cultural attachment to these things that raises emotions?

So then, do we always cater to the current cultural trends, or do we pave our
own ways in some way? Some times we're not always looking to please, attempts
to be polite can lead to concealment of details that matter. So sometimes it's
worth not being polite, and politeness, too, is in the eye of the beholder.

Offensive is largely still a subjective matter, you have to decide how much
you value this subjectivity.

Some people get offended and start throwing shit at the wall, and some people
don't give a fuck.

~~~
bborud
I find ties offensive.

------
mey
Know your target audience. Sometimes it's appropriate to take an tone with the
audience to get a point across or make that impact. A blog has a pretty wide
audience.

My opposition nature now wants to start a conference with swearing as a
central theme.

------
bborud
The amount of swearing that is tolerated is a function of geography. To the
rest of the world, Americans are a bit prissy.

I'm from Norway. To me a typical American's reaction to swearing is more
offensive than the swearing itself. It offends me because because there being
"forbidden words" is indeed a terribly childish notion.

In fact, if you are from Norway, it takes a bit of time getting used to the
childish reaction most Americans will have even to relatively mild expletives.

(And I am not even from the north of Norway where swearing is more or less a
byproduct of how the respiratory system works).

It is just language. Grow up.

------
anthuswilliams
Profanity has a purpose. It expresses strong dissatisfaction, quite eloquently
in my opinion. The article was called "Don't Give Your Users Shit Work", and
maybe ZH could have gotten the point across by saying "Don't Burden Your Users
With Unnecessary Tedium". But seriously, "shit work" more accurately conveys
the soul-crushing awfulness of it all. Listening to this author's ideas on
what constitutes appropriate (who asked him anyway?) is unnecessarily
handicapping one's ability to communicate.

------
molbioguy
Society works on a handshake; there is no ultimate moral arbiter. So when the
vast majority agree that certain words are no longer offensive, then it's OK
to use them without concern. However, as long as that isn't the case (and it
certainly is not the case in general in most societies at this time) you have
to consider more than just your own personal views on profanity. If you are
offending a portion of your audience, then it's fair to say that you're being
disrespectful to hat portion of the audience. Most people I know use profanity
(sparingly) with their peers (age-wise), very rarely with their parents, and
almost never with their grandparents or young children. I think that reflects
a knowledge of their audience and a respect for varying levels of tolerance to
profanity. I find it troubling when I encounter people that lack that level of
respect for others, and shameful when I'm guilty of it myself. Broadcasting
something on a very public medium like the internet means you can't possibly
predict your audience and therefore can't really determine whether profanity
will be offensive or not. So why not refrain.

~~~
vacri
Broadcasting something on a very public medium like the internet means you
can't possibly predict your audience and therefore can't really determine
whether religion will be offensive or not. So why not refrain.

Broadcasting something on a very public medium like the internet means you
can't possibly predict your audience and therefore can't really determine
whether politics will be offensive or not. So why not refrain.

Broadcasting something on a very public medium like the internet means you
can't possibly predict your audience and therefore can't really determine
whether NASCAR will be offensive or not. So why not refrain.

------
silentscope
Though I don't get behind him 100 percent, the man does have a bit of a point
--especially for younger founders in a startup's initial phases. If you want
the job and the respect that comes with it, act the part. Obviously the rub
here lies in the speaker's ability to deliver the desired effect. But
sometimes dropping an f-bomb, especially in a presentation, makes it seem like
you're just trying too hard.

------
jdietrich
In my experience, attitudes to swearing are a remarkably effective heuristic.
If someone takes offence at my use of language, they're almost certainly going
to take offence at the thoughts and feelings I use that language to
communicate.

People fuck and shit and piss. Those words represent the most essential parts
of our nature, the most basic acts of a living animal. Use them wisely, use
them to enrich communication, but don't deny them, don't try and remove them
from the language. Profanity does work, precisely because it offends you,
precisely because it's a shock to the system. The world is too vital and
visceral for us to constrain the words we use to describe it.

The world might be full of witty, creative people who hate swearing, but I
certainly haven't met any. In my experience, people who dislike swearing are
prissy, small-minded bigots. They're the sort of people that call modern art
ugly, the sort of people who seek to constrain the private lives of adults
"for the sake of the children". Frankly, they can fuck off - I've no time for
any of them.

------
DenisM
Profanity is like yelling, where one is (in)appropriate so is the other.

Hence I never read articles that start with profanity - people who start
shouting before they can explain themselves are rarely worth listening.

------
jarin
I did 5 years in the Navy, so I have to try really hard NOT to swear
occasionally. I generally don't have a problem around children or my great
grandma, but when I'm giving a talk it's pretty hard not to.

I don't put swear words in my slides, though.

~~~
vacri
I used to work in a hospital with children forming half our patient load. One
of my fellow technicians was annoyed because she was saying 'sugar' instead of
'shit' at home now, and it didn't have the same cathartic feel to it.

We used to play around with finding good 'child-safe' profanity. My favourite
was 'sweet chilli chicken', which has a nice cadence to it. "Sweet chilli
chicken, what do you think you're doing!?". It's a little long, but it worked
for a short while...

------
cleverjake
This is totally a matter of culture.

My father worked for a (US) national company that actually required etiquette
training for their representatives from the northeast, because they were so
much more prone to swearing in casual conversation, that it would cause others
to be drawn aback and brought out of the conversation. Not to mention when you
get to international differences. My australian exchange student in high
school would drop 'fuck' as though it was his middle name.

But regardless, I thought one of the biggest points of hacker news was the
ability to grok out meaning of news and opinions, and not debate the
effectiveness of its communication.

~~~
tensor
_But regardless, I thought one of the biggest points of hacker news was the
ability to grok out meaning of news and opinions, and not debate the
effectiveness of its communication._

I think it's quite the opposite. The community has grown around an
appreciation for effectively communicating and discussing ideas. This is why
comments with little information and inflammatory comments are typically down
voted.

In terms of business and startups, there are numerous articles posted here
that discuss nothing _but_ communication. How do you communicate with users?
How do you work well in teams? How can you get your message across clearly and
effectively to prospective customers?

Communication is just as vital as technical skill.

~~~
cleverjake
Of course, and I agree, however that is focusing on this particular part of
the conversation strikes me as extremely superfluous. "shit work" is a
colloquialism. A crass one? perhaps. But to say that it is harming the
community - when it is communication within the community, just seems like FUD
to me. And then to go on and claim the rest of his articles are offensive as
well, simply for using one of a select few words that /this/ author finds
offensive just seems like muckraking.

If anyone can show me a single instance where a casual public curse has hurt
anyone in our community, I will gladly eat my hat.

~~~
jt2190
A small company I worked for once upon a time almost lost a major client due
to a curse. Thankfully the CEO was able to beg for mercy. (People loosing
their jobs counts as "hurt" to me, BTW.)

------
jamespcole
Words become less powerful over time, it was't that long ago "hell" and "damn"
were considered to be highly offensive, inevitably the swear words of our time
will become the the emphasis words of the future.

I've always held the opinion that being offended by swearing is a sign of
weakness. If a single syllable can make you angry or uncomfortable(when used
in a context not specifically designed to insult you) then the problem is
yours alone. Given that a negative feeling towards swearing is a purely
conditioned response your energies would be better spent on learning to not be
offended than attempt to censor everyone else.

I also find offence at swearing to be somewhat culturally specific. It seems
to be much more of a concern in America than it is in other english speaking
countries as it appears to be a much more conservative society generally.

Concern over swearing is a rather old fashioned ideal. In these modern times
where we are no longer obligated to follow the crazy arbitrary rules of
conduct required religion and tradition and are only required to conduct
ourselves within the rule of law there is no need to bother with outdated
social conventions. Every person has to make their own decisions about their
personal conduct so it should not be assumed that everyone shares your own
"calibration" of acceptable speech so only the intent of the speaker should be
of concern not the particular words used.

So get over it, in 30 years "fuck" and "shit" will be the "hell" and "damn" of
their time so why worry about it? Language changes over time, it always has
and will so look forward not back.

~~~
vacri
On the culturally-specific front - 'bloody' in Australia is no longer a
'swear' term, it's just a way to make something 'more Australiany'.

We had a tourism campaign in the UK recently that went very poorly - the
slogan was 'where the bloody hell are ya', which in Australia is a friendly
catchphrase for "having a fun time, why aren't you here". Apparently the Brits
don't generally have the same casual attitude to the word 'bloody'...

------
kingsidharth
WTF? Really? Are we going to comment on "is swearing right or wrong", now?
It's a personal choice and that's Holman's way of doing things. That's part of
his persona.

I, personally, would never read holman if it wasn't for swearing. People
swear, they build professions over it. If you don't like it, don't do it. Get
over it.

PS: More examples of people who sear when working - <http://ittybiz.com> ,
Garry Vaynerchuck, me.

------
blake8086
I'm reminded of <http://lesswrong.com/lw/13s/the_nature_of_offense/>

"Specifically, to give offense is to imply that a person or group has or
should have low status. Taking offense then becomes easy to explain: it’s to
defend someone’s status from such an implication, out of a sense of either
fairness or self-interest."

------
commieneko
There are very few rules for effective comunication. There are often
guidelines that are useful for the inexperienced or timid. A good speaker who
knows his/her business can get away with nearly anything they can get away
with...

------
baddox
The linked article "The Nine Parts of Speech and the F-word" is silly.
Replacing "John went to the bakery" with "That f __* went to the bakery" does
not a pronoun make, any more than "That person went to the bakery" makes
"person" a pronoun. The reflexive pronoun examples are similarly weak. The
third line under "Adverbs" has at least one error that makes it nonsensical. I
stopped reading at that point, but I'm sure there is plenty more garbage in
that article.

------
gyardley
The author's previous post is titled "It's the transparency, stupid." How is
that any better?

At least 'shit' here is an adjective, instead of a direct insult.

------
j_baker
I don't necessarily disagree with the author's logic, but it would seem that
the real world does: [http://www.spring.org.uk/2010/10/the-persuasive-power-
of-swe...](http://www.spring.org.uk/2010/10/the-persuasive-power-of-
swearing.php)

...at least that is assuming that "shit" has the same effect as "damn".

------
buff-a
Personally, I don't use "fuck" on my company website, but I use it merrily on
facebook and my personal blog. Looks like Zach used "shit" (OMG) on his
personal blog, and Scott gets his knickers in a twist.

Can't help but notice that Scott works for Microsoft and Zach works for
GitHub.

I don't think its a coincidence.

~~~
shanselman
It's a coincidence. Not everything in my life has to do with my employer.
FWIW, note that I work from home on open source and many of our projects are
on GitHub. Zach and I are cool. No one's in a twist, we just differ on how to
reach an audience.

~~~
buff-a
Its not that you differ on how to reach your audience. Its that you felt you
had to call someone out on their personal blog post for using the word "shit".
And while not everything in your life has to do with your employer, certainly
your personal attitudes determine what kind of company you work for. Zach
works for a start-up, shaking up the world of software development. You work
for Microsoft, the living example of status-quo, monopolizing, our-way-or-the-
highway. So, thanks for spending your time telling us we shouldn't use the
word "shit", and that we should use "the Microsoft stack".

Update: it just dawned on me that perhaps you thought i was suggesting that
you were "attacking" Zach in some Microsoft vs GitHub proxy. No that's not
what I meant at all. I'm saying its funny that the roles in this comedy,
"grumpy old man" vs "uncouth upstart", neatly match the roles of your
employers.

~~~
shanselman
Thanks for the update. Point taken, and touché. That is funny/ironic. Would be
equally as much were I to work at Apple, Amazon or Google, I suppose.

I spoke to Zach beforehand and wasn't intending to call him out (which I
thought I made clear in the post, but it sounds like I did poorly) but rather
than use his post as an example of changing mores in this space and a
opporunity to provoke discussion.

Aside: I won't try to defend Microsoft as it's 80,000 people and many, many
groups, some less evil than others. That said, our group is the slightly less
evil, open source, free as in beer part of Microsoft. We'll be speaking at
<http://krtconf.com> next week on an open source realtime library we're having
lots of fun with.

------
tgrass
Though it can be effective, vulgarity on the web seems most often a product of
laziness.

Which is not always a problem. Much content we read here is for information;
many comments and blogs are little more than small talk.

We refer back to classic posts like P. Graham's because they were crafted with
deliberation.

------
techshit
Profanity is popular in the tech community because it conveys that we don't
give a fuck about offending people as we challenge existing norms. People are
going to object to that; if they're not offended, we're not doing a good
enough job.

~~~
tensor
My dislike of swearing in the tech community has little to do with challenging
norms or offending people. Although it's certainly crass, if you want to have
such a personality you are welcome to.

The problem with it is that it dilutes meaning and hinders communication.
Let's take the article being discussed. What exactly is _shit work_? Is it
unnecessary work? Is it unpleasant work? Perhaps it's work for which you are
poorly compensated? Who knows! Sure, you can read the article to find out.

It turns out in this case it meant _unnecessary work_. The author decided it
might have more impact to call it shit work, however. Why? Not because he
doesn't care about offending people. Rather the opposite. He knows the word
carries extra baggage with it. He knows it invokes ideas of "dirty" "bad"
"offensive" among others. So he uses it for impact. He's not alone in doing
this.

Which brings me to the second problem with it. Not only is it not a very clear
way of communicating, but when everybody does it, you end up with entire
communities continually making hyperbolic statements. Everyone wants to stand
out and be heard, so everybody is now yelling. A product is not just poorly
implemented, or rough around the edges, it's either _the best_ or it's
_complete shit_. This is not effective communication as far as I am concerned.

~~~
bborud
The points you raise on precision in communication are valid, but they are
somewhat orthogonal to the question of whether it is acceptable to use
colorful language or not. It smells a bit too much of the old accusation that
the use of expletives indicates a small vocabulary or that the speaker has
poor command of language.

I would also like to add that I think proper swearing is a bit of an art.
There has to be rythm and contrast to it. A well placed expletive in an
articulate context is a thing of beauty. Not everyone can pull that off.

Of course, for those incapable of elegance, there's always sheer volume. Which
is a demanding discipline in its own right. For the past 20 years or so there
has been a recording making the rounds in Norway of a bus driver taped while
trying to fix a washing machine. In Norway it is, in all seriousness,
considered somewhat of a national treasure. (Swearing is such a part of
Northern Norwegian culture that calling a police officer a horse penis is
legally acceptable north of the polar circle, but not to the south of it).

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

(The recording circulated on tapes in the pre-internet era so the sound
quality is pretty bad. But most people of the internet generation will know
what you are talking about if you mention "saltdal.wav").

------
yesimahuman
I work at a young startup. Swear words are so common that they are only
noticed when used maliciously.

I only seem to care when older people swear, which is odd. I never liked when
my dad swore, but with my peers it feels natural.

------
AznHisoka
I hope the guys who write the original article don't follow this guy's advice.
I love people who don't give a shit what other people think, and don't have to
watch what they say or do 24/7 in fear. That's freedom.

------
aredington
There are individuals who care more about fundamentally good ideas than about
leveraging them for profit. We aren't sufficiently offended by profanity to
consider it a net negative value in presentations.

------
codypo
At the very least, this post has given me the title of my forthcoming
autobiography: Words that Are Evocative of Sex and Feces.

------
michaelcampbell
I found this amusing given this article's title. And yes, perhaps I'm being
sophomoric here.

From the author's bio: "...I am a failed stand-up comic..." Perhaps these 2
things are related?

------
molecule
"Don't Give Your Readers Shit Words"

------
maeon3
The frequency of swearing increases as you descend the ranks of society down
to the lowest levels, down to the floor where you have drunken hobos sleeping
in their own filth on the side of the road. Where profanity is the most
common.

I support your right to use profanity, and I support my right to judge you
poorly for it.

PROFANITY IS KIND OF LIKE USING ALL CAPS TO GET PEOPLE TO READ THIS POST. ALL
CAPS IS A GREAT WAY TO GET YOUR POINT ACROSS RIGHT!

------
jes5199
Oh, shit.

------
bradleybuda
Fuck that.

~~~
epochwolf
Could you elaborate?

~~~
MostAwesomeDude
Sometimes shit sucks.

Or, to be more verbose, sometimes somebody creates, publishes, and endorses a
crafted good or work which is incredibly inferior not just to current state of
the art, but also prior art and future ideals, but without any indication that
the creator has encountered any reason to believe that their invention will
not stand the tests of time, merchantability, reliability, insight into the
human condition, etc.

In those cases, it's incredibly useful to identify and call out these things
as bad. If we can't use the full width and breadth of language, then it gets
harder to do so; invariably, all attempts at censorship start with the
negative parts of language in an attempt to whitewash thought and opinion. (As
recent examples, consider Facebook's omission of a "Dislike" button, or
American Idol's refusal to allow voters to indicate unfavorable opinions of
all contestants. The historical ideal is Newspeak.) When we can't say that
something is bad, then we lose some of our freedom, not to mention some of the
expressiveness required to attack everyday problems.

So, yeah, fuck that. Sometimes shit sucks.

------
JabavuAdams
Oh my fucking God on a dildo. Really?

If we banned swearing at work it _would_ be a lot quieter, I guess.

------
buff-a
_However, you take no chances of offending by not swearing, but you guarantee
to offend someone if you do._

Good. Fuck them. Believe me, we aren't going to get along. Best to know now.
Also, I believe in evolution, think the earth is more than 4000 years old and
I support gay marriage. That offends a ton of people and expressing that
opinion has the same effect on those "relationships" as saying "fuck".

You might think you're being polite. You're not. As Bill Hicks would say,
you're sucking on Satan's cock, ice ice baby.

And as a matter of economic reality, I've found that the better educated, and
economically advantaged a person is, the more likely they are to use words
that others have judged to be offensive. "Manners" are what the servants have.

Then there's an anecdotal inverse correlation between the likelihood that a
person uses the word "fuck" and the likelihood that they support dropping
cluster-bombs on civilian areas. That is people go all weak at the knees if I
say "fuck", but those same people are all for shredding small children: just
so long as they are "non-christians". (Yeah, I'm sure _you_ don't do that Mr
No-Potty-Words HN reader - its just a general observation).

Whatever.

~~~
feralchimp
If you're writing people off as "too far outside your value system to be worth
bothering with" because they happen to find swearing offensive, you're missing
out on knowing a lot of really awesome people for a pretty stupid reason. Then
again, your policy does save them hassle, so maybe it's for the best.
Penalties offset...repeat first down.

~~~
vacri
You have the cart before the horse. He's not preventing the relationship by
using profanity, it's those other people that are preventing the relationship
by refusing it due to profanity. It's very rare to have a user of profanity
refuse to talk to someone else simply because they're not swearing.

