
Swearing - fbuilesv
http://zachholman.com/posts/swearing/
======
nirvdrum
What I'd like to see is an ounce of professionalism in most technical
presentations. I'm not easily offended by swearing, but I am offended by
content. For example, a couple years back at jQueryConf in Boston I just
walked out of a talk. In the first 10 min. the presenter had said "fuck" about
17 times and managed to make an MS joke. That's not Microsoft mind you, that's
multiple sclerosis. In most contexts I wouldn't have cared, but I paid $300 to
attend that conference and it was pretty evident that this guy wasn't going to
provide any actual content in his talk.

Most tech talks I've seen in the past 5 years have been terrible. I see the
presenters tweeting that they still need to do their slides while flying to
the conference. Obviously they haven't rehearsed that all and it shows in
their presentation. They read from the slides. The code examples don't work.
They throw up pictures of lolcats and other memes to get a cheap laugh. And
occasionally they'll swear to seem edgy. Most of this is mistaken as
connecting with the audience. It's sorta like when you watch a horror movie
that just throws in a loud noise all of a sudden to startle you. The result is
that you appear scared but you can still walk away and think it was a bad
movie.

The best talks I've seen have been practiced to the point that they seem
natural. The presenter knows his content thoroughly. The slides are
informative and all support the content of the talk. The talk isn't a thinly
veiled vendor pitch for the presenter's consultancy or company. The talk isn't
also just a summary of introductory information. There's real substance.
Whether swearing is used or not seems to have little impact on that, but in my
experience the best presenters manage to deliver a compelling talk by throwing
out cheap rhetoric.

~~~
mdonahoe
"That's not Microsoft mind you, that's multiple sclerosis."

This sentence is you making an MS joke.

~~~
nirvdrum
Not really. That's me pointing out how frequently Microsoft jokes make their
way into tech presentations. It's another way I've found presenters avoid
sharing actual content.

------
davesims
Swearing doesn't bug me, it's neither here nor there as far as I'm concerned.
But the idea that it's being used to carefully craft a 'persona' in order to
'build a brand' is annoying and frankly immature. I have very little patience
with the idea that our personalities can and should be carefully crafted for
public consumption, to 'build a following.' There's a world of difference
between, for instance, _why's comic persona constructed from wit and
creativity, and a 'branded' persona constructed out of simplistic marketing
principles.

It definitely reinforces the idea that, in this case, the swearing is a device
used to draw attention to the speaker rather than the speaker's point. And
that was the thrust of the original criticism.

I usually don't even notice or care if someone curses in a presentation, but
my douche-radar starts going off if I get the sense that it's being done for
self-aggrandizement. I don't get the feeling that Zach is a douche-y kind of
guy. But one of his 'personas' might be leaning that direction.

Is this where the technology community is going? Do we really need 'personas'
in addition to technical accomplishments and good communication skills? Are
technologists going to start looking more and more like wide receivers?

~~~
jzb
I don't really want to work with anyone who has "crafted" a "persona." I want
to work with interesting people - and sometimes those people are characters.
That's who they are - no work involved.

Some of them swear, a lot. If it's natural, I don't really see an issue - and
if it's situationally appropriate. A technical talk to a group of developers
may not be marred by an f-bomb. A presentation to a customer almost always
will be.

------
danso
"I wouldn’t have nearly as many of them if I played it safe. I enjoy keeping
an edge, and they respect that. "

This is my problem with the "Swearing is a good tool" argument. Too often, and
I'm not saying it's necessarily the case with Zach, people equate cussing with
being edgy or controversial. But cussing is a shortcut; it takes the easy way
to "edginess" because it takes advantage of how we've been raised to not swear
in mixed company.

So, to some people, this otherwise bland statement qualifies as edgy:
"Javascript is fucking awesome and fuck you if you don't think so."

I think a good rule of thumb is, if your point is uninteresting without the
use of a cuss word, then don't use it. Or come up with a better point.

If your phrasing is reliant on the cuss word, as in, "[insert company name]
can go fuck themselves", then keep it. But only if your evidence and support
is just as strong as that statement.

~~~
Lewisham
Exactly. The adage of offending people with style when you can offend them
with substance springs to mind. Swearing isn't edgy. Content is edgy.

~~~
shadowfiend
Eschewing style in favor of substance is just as foolish as its inverse. Style
and substance combine to make a better end product. That's true in software,
it's true in hardware, it's true in writing, and it's true in presentations.

That's my problem with people hating on the use of cuss words. They are a
stylistic flourish, and they can be used well, or poorly, but they do not
deserve disproportionate attention. Someone who uses cuss words all the time
in a presentation is just the presentation version of the guy who wears a
bright green suit to every social event. They are failing to use style
effectively.

------
edw519
Zach's writings, presentations, and videos are excellent. His passion and
especially his creativity give him a distinctive voice among all the noise.

That's why I cringe with every f-word. Zach may think that helps give him his
edge, but IMHO, it just distracts. He already has his edge.

Zach, you've reached the big time now, so I challenge you to abandon the
crutches. We'll all be better off. Try it; you'll see.

~~~
buff-a
_That's why I cringe with every f-word_

You have a physical reaction when you hear a sound? Have you considered
therapy? Or meditation? You have an unnecessary, irrational response that is
affecting _your_ appreciation of the world.

If this were a drooping eyelid, or an eye deficiency such as short-
sightedness, you would take steps to correct it. If this were super-
sensitivity to sunlight would you wear sunglasses, or demand that the sun not
rise? You perceive _your_ reaction to be _Zach's_ fault, you blame Zach and
state that _Zach_ should change his behavior.

This is absurd.

~~~
Sandman
Edw519 merely stated his opinion that the use of swear words adds nothing to
Zach's speeches, and you, instead of writing a post explaining why there's
nothing wrong with the occasional use of swear words in presentations, decide
to write a sarcastic comment advising edw519 to consider theapy. Why? Do you
really think this type of comment adds something valuable to the discussion?

~~~
buff-a
If edw519 had said "swear words adds nothing" and left it that then he'd have
made my fucking point for me. It was the part where he said that it made him
cringe that I was responding to. Clue: that's the bit I quoted. Did me quoting
that part not help you?

 _Why? Do you really think this type of comment adds something valuable to the
discussion?_

Valuable??? LOL. We're having 150+ comments on _swearing_. I'm sorry. What
exactly are you expecting to get out of this whole thing? That we'll all go
wash our mouths out with soap?

~~~
kahawe
You really do not know what a figure of speech is and take "makes me cringe"
all literal just for the hell of it hm?

------
Swizec
To paraphrase XKCD: When did we forget our dreams that we would rather worry
about fitting into some hypothetical mold somewhere than do whatever feels
right? Fuck. That. Shit.

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

To be honest, I don't understand the whole debate that's been raging for the
past week. So Zach used a naughty word. So fucking what? Are we as a community
really that petty?

~~~
helloworld1
hi, swizec, I "cumming" love your comment. What a "dick" argument you're
having here. So awesome. Please don't ride on high horse and interpret my
message wrongly. Like "very" or "awesome", I'm just "raping" to stress my
point. So "cumming" cool, uh? We're so "cumming" alike in our expressions. I
raping love you, bro.

~~~
gks
Whoosh. That's the sound of the point flying over your head.

The article, and the OP, aren't saying throw in all the swear words you can
find into what you say. Yours were just deragatory and purposefully put there
as some out of context hyperbole.

Nice try but you didn't provide a very good argument.

The point here is that people have opinions on this. Which is great. OPINIONS
are great people. The simple fact that you're discussing this is because you
have an opinion on it.

When someone goes out of their way to provide emotion in a speech that should
reflect that the person cares a lot about what they're talking about. He uses
swearing because he has an opinion and strong opinions that he feels
necessitate using strong words.

That's the same emotion and strong opinions that people like you have towards
this particular topic of swearing in a talk.

It isn't any different. He chooses to communicate how he does because it shows
emotion. Why does everything tech related have to be so dry? Many people love
their Apple products (just an example) because they relate to it in a way.
They have strong opinions and strong emotions about them.

This is no different.

~~~
helloworld1
The point I'm trying to make is that not many people interpret F bombs the way
you do. Some people get excited. Some people don't care. Some people have some
images flash through their head. Some people get offended. Some people get
uncomfortable.The world is big. There are many different people with different
cultural, religious values and social norms. Something you think is no big
deal can be an offense or distraction for others. Show some respect for
diversity.

~~~
alextgordon
You can't go through life worrying about what might offend people. Because the
scope of what people are offended by is _enormous_. Some people are offended
by sex before marriage. Or atheists. Or religious people. Or gay people. Or
vegetarians.

Sure, if you're holidaying in Saudi Arabia, you shouldn't walk around
badmouthing Mohammed. But for the most part you can be certain that a small
percentage of your actions will offend a small percentage of the people you
meet. Such is life.

Fun fact: here in the UK, the word "git" is mildly offensive (I mentioned
GitHub amongst family and got a bit of an incredulous look). The _company the
guy works at_ is an offensive word.

~~~
rahoulb
Fun tangent: Linus knows about the word `git` -
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Git_(software)#Name>

------
ender7
I don't really care about profanity in speeches; I think the stronger argument
was made by Rob Conery:

 _I'm not opposed to swearing in presentations, or anywhere for that matter. I
don't cringe when I read F-bombs nor do I care if you have the word "Fuck"
embroidered on your Calvins. Swearing says more about your abilities as a
speaker then it does your content... that's the problem._

<http://wekeroad.com/2011/11/08/some-people-not-have-way>

Profanity can be a great way to drive your point home. It can also be a
crutch, one that lets you avoid having to actually come up with something
interesting to say.

~~~
fbuilesv
Swearing, as shown by many presenters, can also have a positive effect on your
talks. Zach mentions most of the reasons why in his article. Attacking a
person instead of the content of his talk for using a _word_ is ridiculous.
Would someone say that Zach's talk was bad and that was using the word "fuck"
to help himself?

I agree with you in the statement: _Profanity can be a great way to drive your
point home_. If that is true then Conery's argument, in the derogatory form he
uses, makes no sense.

PS: Referring to "fuck/fucking" by using "the F-bomb" makes the person look
just... bad.

~~~
dorian-graph
Can we judge someone by their choice of words? Or rather, by what they allow
out of their mouth?

When people become completely adjusted to swearing and it no longer helps
'drive a point home' (For some people), what will these people rely on then?

------
travisfischer
I strongly disagree with the notion that swearing is a very strong tool for
communication. In the conversations I'm a part of the in the real world I hear
profanity used as a completely meaningless filler word.

In my opinion, in today's popular culture profanity doesn't hold much weight
at all as an effective tool for communication. While profanity is often used
by people who are communicating something passionate and emotional, it is used
just as often in a completely flippant and emotionally detached manner.

For people who are offended by profanity it may evoke a negative emotional
response but I find for people who are comfortable with profanity, it carries
very little weight or meaning except for the fact that the speaker couldn't be
bothered to come up with a more meaningful word to use.

I will acknowledge that because most of society is so lazy in their use of
language, there is a strong relationship between a person who is communicating
passionately and the frequency of profanity usage. This is why movie writers
so often lace passages of emotionally intense dialog with profanity because it
reflects what we hear in the real world. I however find that relationship to
be one directional. The use of a profanity doesn't imply any kind of emotion
in of itself because of how prevalent flippant usage of profanity is.

I'm aware that is a personal perspective and I may not be in the majority with
these views.

~~~
barrkel
Swearing isn't a strong tool for communication, and the TFA is not arguing in
favour of that proposition. You're arguing against somewhat of a straw man
there.

Zach's point is different. It's about making a connection, establishing
commonality and empathy at a human level. Carefully chosen profanity can be a
branding tool; it can establish commonality with a certain group of people,
and depending on when it's used, empathy too. Just about all of us swear when
we accidentally hurt ourselves, for example; if we were acting that out and
didn't swear (no matter how mildly), we'd seem more fake somehow, like we were
pretending to be invincible or something.

And Zach has his "brand", it comes fairly easily to him, more easily than
other approaches. If it turns off people who don't have that in common, that's
OK.

And that connection is what in turn makes richer communication possible than
dry exposition.

~~~
travisfischer
My reaction was to the very first line of the piece.

"Swearing is a strong tool. It can be a particularly strong tool during
presentations."

I get that Zach believes he is building a connection and empathy by using
profanity. My argument is the same there as well. I personally believe that
profanity doesn't work well as a tool for creating personal connections and
empathy either.

There is a group of people that thinks: "Oh man! he used the f-word in his
public talk. He's so passionate and edgy. I feel connected to his disregard
for old-fashioned professionalism."

I would suspect the group of people that think along those lines is rather
small. I would also suspect that even for those people that feel a connection,
the net result of the use of that profanity in their overall take-away from
the talk is a tiny positive.

~~~
barrkel
I think it's more subtle - and more simple - than that. When someone uses an
inoffensive professional tone, they sound fake.

Like the way a salesperson or a teacher is fake, when you meet them in those
roles, rather than in a social setting of equals.

This barrier of "professionalism" is exactly what the careful use of profanity
is trying to puncture. It's not the only way to puncture it; and not everyone
is comfortable with puncturing it, or having it punctured. But it may be worth
it for the people who prefer the closer connection.

Professionalism, almost by definition, implies distance. Your emphasis on it
actually convinces me that profanity is even more useful in presentations than
I thought it was; I very seldom use profanity except in the company of people
I know very well, but having had this exchange with you (combined with TFA) I
may use it when I next give a talk.

------
patio11
There are all sorts of ways to be passionate and authentic without swearing,
just like there are all sorts of ways to be funny without relying on the
pavlovian response of a shared Monty Python reference. There's still time to
get in on the hipster-cred level of not-swearing before everyone else is not-
doing it!

------
zeteo
I know our age is a bit poor in rhetoric, so go listen to a speech by:
Churchill, FDR, JFK, MLK etc. It's really sad to hear some people need to
resort to _swearing_ in order to emotionally connect with their audience... If
your speech/presentation would be utterly boring unless punctuated with strong
words, then it was probably badly structured to begin with.

~~~
bgarbiak
Agree with your point, although I wouldn't say our age is that poor in
rhetoric. Obama had some really great speeches in his campaign and Jobs'
product presentations were top notch too.

~~~
mattdeboard
Churchill & FDR rallying their countrymen in a time of global crisis; JFK
leading Americans through one of the most tense periods of the nuclear age;
MLK bringing discipline, wisdom and guidance to a country deep in the throes
of social upheaval; Obama addressing a country embroiled in two wars and
entering a deep economic crisis to offer hope; Steve Jobs announcing the iPad.

One of these things is not like the other.

~~~
philwelch
There's absolutely a divide between Winston Churchill and Steve Jobs. And if
you're talking at a technical conference about how awesome Github is, you're
definitely on one side of that divide, and it isn't Winston Churchill.

That's not a bad thing. Steve Jobs still changed history by taking the stage
and talking millions of people into buying touchscreen phones, but it's best
not to get an overinflated self-image about what we do.

------
angdis
Usually not a good idea to swear, especially when presenting to a wide
audience. Not everyone is cool with profanity and you risk being silently
judged and dismissed by those individuals as a result. Moreover, you never
know where your presentation will be circulated. Not everyone understands or
is fluent with extremely casual American speaking styles and idioms. Swearing
just does not translate well.

~~~
josephg
Zach dealt with this, specifically, in his blog post:

 _I don’t view it this way. I’m less concerned about my overall reach than I
am with connecting with my audience. Put another way: I’m content with losing
a handful of people if that means I connect much stronger with everyone else._

~~~
nirvdrum
Sure, but how do you know if you've connected much stronger with everyone
else? I've never left a talk thinking "I really wish that guy swore more." And
I personally swear all time. But I abstain from it during presentations
because at best it's a cheap technique to get something of a rise from the
audience, IME.

~~~
vacri
Not in presentations, but in support it can definitely help to swear. I found
that if you swear to one 'notch' less than your clients, it helps put them at
ease - they're no longer worrying that you might be looking down your nose at
the way they're speaking. It means the clients are more likely to pass useful
content along because they're not dividing their attention watching their p's
and q's.

------
nathanb
Holman is making a mistake by conflating use of profanity and strength of
emotional connection.

He is implying that given his stated goal of a passionate reader base,
profanity is a necessary evil. I dispute the necessary part.

~~~
tbeseda
Ultimately it comes down to the relativity of profanity as evil or not.

------
seanalltogether
"Together, it’s a crafted persona. That persona includes edge, informality,
and passion for what I do. Sometimes I’ll swear to invoke that persona."

I understand there's a certain showmanship that goes with technical
presentations, but this quote kinda sounds like something a reality show star
would say.

------
buff-a
"If an alien was looking down on us and inspecting our language, they would
see that the worst thing we do on this planet is we torture, we kill, we
abuse, we harm people… we’re cruel. And those are the things for which we
should be ashamed.

"Amongst the best things we do is we breed children and we raise them, we make
love to each other, we adore each other, we’re affectionate and fond of each
other. Those are the good things we do.

"And they would say ‘How odd, that the language for the awful things is used
casually all the time.’ ‘Oh the traffic was agony. It was hell, it was cruel.
Oh, it was torture waiting in line!’ They’d say ‘You use words like torture!
That’s the worst word!’

"And yet if we use the f-word, which is the word for generating our species,
for showing physical affection one to another, then we’re taken off air and
accused of being wicked and irresponsible and a bad influence to children.
Now, we’re part of this culture so we often don’t question it, but if you
think of someone from outside it, it is very strange.

\-- Stephen Fry

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSQmk6gGTcE>

------
msg
_I have had it with these mother----ing snakes on this mother----ing plane!_

Samuel L Jackson swore so much he crossed the line from emotion to a parody of
himself doing it. Also, he got to read "Go the ---- to Sleep".

You're debasing the most expensive currency in your wallet. Every word is
costly, that's why Strunk and White tell you to get rid of them.

I swear once per quarter or so at work. I reserve it for the worst decisions,
organizational maneuvers, designs, and code. And when I do, people notice.

If you use these words regularly you've got to find some way to really swear
again, when it's called for. You could raise your voice or start mixing in
some inappropriate animals.

~~~
v21
As someone who swears a lot - it's pretty easy to find a way to swear again,
when you really want to make your point known. Becoming deathly serious and
quiet, and then deliberately not swearing works well.

------
bphogan
Anyone else bothered by the idea of a "well-crafted persona"?

I'm fine with being prepared for your talk, and knowing your topic. But
spending 2-3 weeks on a slide deck and crafting a "persona" for your public
presence sounds a lot like something an entertainer does.

To me, this seems like something you do when you're more interested in your
self-image than you are about your topic. And that bugs me a little, because
if you just come to your audience well-prepared, knowledgable, and _genuine_ ,
I don't think you'd have to rely on an edgy "persona" at all.

But if people like it and learn from your talks, I guess it's all good. Just
doesn't sit right with me.

~~~
v21
I think it was uncommonly honest for him to discuss it in those terms.
Possibly not wise, but I hate to condemn a person for not concealing their
motives.

And -- there's no exclusion between topic and persona. But you can have many
topics, but you rarely get multiple public personas. For many people, and I'd
bet Zach is one of them, their reputation is their biggest asset. Being
careful about it seems entirely sensible to me.

------
glenjamin
I'm rather bemused by this whole thing, I'd be intrigued to know the
demographics of the people who take such, issue with use of swear words.

Perhaps it's an American thing, but in Britain I'm not aware of anyone I know
who'd react in hysterics at the thought of a strong word appearing in
something as public as a slide deck!

Swearing _at_ someone can be extremely rude, but using such words passively to
add emphasis seems perfectly normal to me.

The following video sums it up nicely IMO
[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_osQvkeNRM&feature=youtu...](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_osQvkeNRM&feature=youtube_gdata_player)

~~~
Lewisham
As a Brit (although I live in America), I don't understand your comment at
all. British society, as a whole, is absolutely infatuated with your persona
(I am guessing as an extension of class). I would never, ever, _ever_ swear in
a presentation in the UK. I might do it in the US. Remember: it's not the
_word_ that's the problem it's that it makes it sound like you don't
understand the social conventions of the position you're in.

If you're delivering a professional presentation to people you know, swear
away. If you're doing it at a conference with people you don't, you appear
clueless. It's the vocabulary version of turning up to a business of suits in
t-shirt and shorts (or vice versa). If you're particularly powerful, you can
get away with it, like Zuck does. If you're not, you can't.

Honestly, I'm surprised holman stuck strongly to this. It's childish, and,
more importantly, it's fake. Swearing in the slides is fake. As the original
blog post that pointed this out mentioned: "fucking" almost always has no
semantic payload at all. None. It's an exclamation mark. If you want to build
up some sort of chummy relationship by using swear words, put it in your
spoken text. Putting it in the slides? Tacky. Clueless.

~~~
buff-a
I'm British too. Went to Queens' college too, like Mr Fry. Don't have a
problem with it and can't think of any of my friends or peers that would.

Yes, there's a whole ream of uptight wankers who make it their business to be
proper. There are even TV comedies about such awful people. [1] Don't think
you speak for all of us.

 _it makes it sound like you don't understand the social conventions of the
position you're in_

LOL. Yes, we're all for knowing our place in the world here at HN!

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keeping_Up_Appearances>

------
megamark16
Zack's talk at Ruby Midwest last weekend was, in my opinion, one of the best
talks of the whole conference. Saying "meetings suck" just doesn't cut it,
because usually "meetings fucking suck...hard" Maybe I'm a simpleton, but
Zack's talk hit home for me, and I really appreciated the effort and passion
he put into it.

------
TheCapn
I've always felt that the way you write should be the same way you'd talk to
the person if you were face to face. I'll be blunt and drop f bombs when I'm
talking with people informally so if we're having a round-table discussion
regarding a blog I wont be afraid to call it "fucking brilliant" or "a piece
of shit" because if we were face to face over a beer, that's how I'd put it.

A friend of mine took a "Business Communication" class recently and started
getting on my ass about my communication at the office saying it wasn't
professional enough, I don't feel that I should be toning down my language or
using "less emotion" because its how I communicate; I'm not a god damn robot!
Looking at my emails over the last few months I find I'm getting more positive
and personal responses from my "informal" emails than I am from the formal
ones.

People like talking to people, don't change that.

~~~
luriel
Also swearing is often a sign that you _care_ , and people (at least smart
people) like talking to people who care.

------
lusis
We had a discussion about the original blog post over on IRC.

I'm not going to tone down my talks (unless it's inappropriate for the
audience) but I normally won't include it in a slide. There's a difference for
me verbally and putting it down "on paper".

I want people to pass around my slide decks. A slide deck full of vulgarity is
probably not going to get passed around. However I probably cussed like a
sailor during the same presentation.

~~~
gchucky
Can you link to the original blog post? I (and some other people, I'd wager)
are out of the loop on this one.

~~~
fbuilesv
Zach Holman (the author of this post) uploaded his slides for a talk he gave
at a Ruby conference a couple of weeks ago. Some people, including Scott
Hanselman, complained about talks including profanities (especifically the
word "fucking" in a slide).

The blog post by Hanselman is here:
<http://www.hanselman.com/blog/ProfanityDoesntWork.aspx>

Zach Holman slides are here: <http://zachholman.com/talk/a-documentation-talk>

------
nupark2
I agree that swearing is an incredibly strong tool in human communication.
However, I _do not_ agree that it belongs anywhere near technical discussions
in the field of software engineering.

The best technical content is _dispassionate_. Appeals to emotion obscure the
underlying rational argument (assuming there is one).

That doesn't mean that talks shouldn't be exciting or interesting -- but those
emotions shouldn't serve as the primary argument for whatever position is
being presented. Yet, this is exactly what happens when you leverage a huge
emotional trigger like swearing.

~~~
ctdonath
Bingo.

On the spectrum of human experience, does verbiage suitable for "someone's
gonna die" scenarios belong down around "I hate #defines" (and oh yes I do)?
If the most extreme verbiage gains acceptable use around the latter, what then
can be used for the former to indicate the vast gulf between those scenarios?

If you're using obscenities to "communicate passion" for, say, how cool
C++11's lambda syntax is, you're going to have a hard time expressing suitable
emotions when, say, a nurse informs you your spouse's heart is being stopped
on the operating table and they'll get back to you in a couple hours - and
then don't for more than 5 without good reason.

Maybe that's the thing: those advocating swearing in technical presentations
haven't learned what _real_ intense emotion is. As such, they can't comprehend
why some people consider application of such verbiage inappropriate.

------
websymphony
I don't really understand why the whole issue is being blown so much out of
proportions. A good developer has used "objectionable" words in his
presentation to drive his point home. But really, who are we to decide if
those words were indeed "objectionable"? He is the one who knows his audience
best, and I think that is where we should leave it. If you found slides
distasteful, just don't read them. It is that simple. You don't like the
developer's style of communication? Dont follow his blog. Again really simple.
But don't go around telling people how they should or should not write their
presentations, let them be a judge of that.

------
moses1400
Swearing is used for cheap pops. And it seems like many times swearing is used
in place of quality content. A real shame. How come this author didn't throw
up a potty mouth in his post?

------
itguy1
You have to resort to the "I don't know a better adjective or adverb" so I
will throw a moronic word into the fray! Emotion comes from believing in the
product you are talking about. Relying on an asinine word that has no real
purpose in the sentence is stupid. Think about it! You say what the #$%^.
Really it means "What the sexual intercourse was that! Or that's some good
defecation!

In my opinion the way that you talk and your method of speech tells me a lot
about the person. If someone wants to sell me on an idea and they begin
swearing that person will never sell ma anything. The individual will not work
for me! And the company that the idiot is representing will not get my
business!

By calling a person a writer, you have now put a label on that person that
they are a professional, that they know what they are doing, what they are
talking about. A writer targets a specific audience. By the language a writer
uses, he will gain the adoration of some, and will drive others away. I guess
it all depends on who you want following you. I personally would rather not
listen to swearing. In fact, I will walk out of a talk or presentation if the
person swears to "enhance" his vocabulary by swearing.

Kinda like steroids--make you look good, makes you feel strong--but it isn't
real. And the majority of people would rather not here a pro on steroids.

------
simon
I grew up in a Navy town, so I had an extensive education in all manner of
swear words. I doubt there are many that I have not heard. You young edgy guys
have nothing on the British Royal Navy ... not even close. I've heard people
swear up a storm when they weren't even angry, they do it that naturally.

This means that I don't cringe when I hear swear words, but they don't impress
me either. My parents taught me that swear words are for people who have a
poor vocabulary. And that advice has stood me in good stead. And doubly so now
that I pastor and have to preach and teach twice a week. I am now quite versed
in connecting to my audience. I have even been known to inspire an emotion or
two. I don't have a fancy AV setup, so I do it all without the aid of slides
or videos. If you have good content and you know what you're talking about,
your presentation will be memorable. If you care about your presentation, your
audience will care and connect with you as you convey that passion.

Of course, I'm just a mid-forties fuddy-duddy who isn't edgy and doesn't have
a crafted persona, so what do I know ... other than I suspect that I've made
more presentations than many of today's speakers, and likely to more people
and likely evoked more emotions and connected more and all with zero swear
words.

------
kingkilr
I curse more than a sailor, really. It's not that (I almost cursed in this
sentence) hard to not curse in a presentation. It's not that hard to not make
your slides one step short of a porno. It is difficult to write and deliver a
presentation.

I don't know if I'm a good speaker or not, I'm really not a good judge of
myself. But I do know, if I'm a crappy speaker, it wasn't because people were
distracted by things that had nothing to do with my technical content.

~~~
izak30
You are a good speaker.

------
mikerice
The way I look at it is that if he's not swearing _AT_ you, then you shouldn't
be offended. He doesn't go up there and say "dear audience, fuck you".

~~~
ctdonath
No, he's just asking you to stand with him as he offends others.

~~~
adbge
You can choose what things you find offensive.

If you choose to be offended when someone uses profanity, that's your problem,
not mine. It's not my responsibility to protect the world from potentially
offensive things.

~~~
ctdonath
Read what I wrote. I didn't say you would find it offensive, I said he was
asking you in joining his side as he offended others.

A typical audience is, by continued presence and attentiveness, inclined to
support what the speaker says. The speaker is not saying "fuck you" to the
audience, he's saying it to a third person/thing and at minimum implicitly
suggesting the audience support the notion. He's not trying to offend you,
he's trying to get you to offend someone/thing else. You don't have to protect
the world from the offense, but you don't have to sit there tacitly supporting
it either.

~~~
burgerbrain
What the hell does this even mean? He's 'asking' you to support the offending
of a mythical "third person"? I have no idea what you are attempting to
communicate.

~~~
ctdonath
I'm asking you to think about obscenity and offenses thereof in a completely
different way than you're used to.

This means that the use of obscenity is directed at someone or something,
intending offense thereto. Yes, he's asking you to support the offending of a
third person (or thing), mythical or not. He is acting as an offender (whether
there is a being to experience being offended or not), and he's asking you to
take the role of offender as well.

Do understand: there are times when initiating offense is appropriate. There
are times when asking others to join you in initiating offense is appropriate.

Some people in the audience may not want to share in offending the subject of
the offense the speaker is initiating. Thus, by using obscenity, the speaker
may alienate some of the audience. Now, question is, was that necessary?

~~~
burgerbrain
_"This means that the use of obscenity is directed at someone or something,
intending offense thereto."_

Without significant substantiating evidence, I am forced to object to this
premise.

You are going to need to back that up before the rest of your argument can be
coherent.

~~~
ctdonath
"Fuck you" is offensive to the subject. Changing the subject retains the
offense.

~~~
burgerbrain
The word is _way_ more versatile than that... That's _hardly_ substantiating
evidence for your claim.

But lets start simple. What about: _"I've got to go take a piss."_ (Urinate),
_"He looks rather pissed"_ (angry), and _"Let's get pissed"_ (drunk).

------
OoTheNigerian
Whenever I hear people talk of the "f-bomb" I remember this quote from my
friend.

"Euphemisms of bad words are still bad words. Words are not created filthy. We
give them meaning. So whenever you say "effing" or "fricking"... you're
missing the fucking point." - Jay Levanne

------
itsnotvalid
There have been many referencing to using those words.

E.g. <http://zachholman.com/posts/shit-work/>

And yesterday a rant on usage of swearing words in talks is given in many
places including [1] & [2] on hacker news.

[1] <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3212694>

[2] <https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3194287>

------
MrMan
I love swearing. The better the programmer, the more I enjoy it. No humor
attempted in this serious post of support for Zach, whoever he is.

------
bgentry
IMO the swearing is much less distracting than his many failed attempts at
humor. See <http://zachholman.com/screencast/play/>

Humor is great in a presentation when it's used appropriately (and when the
jokes are actually funny). But in that video, it comes off as very contrived,
like he's trying too hard to be funny.

------
krmmalik
OK - I just want to know what blogging engine this guy is using? The html on
that blog is very clean indeed.

~~~
adbge
It's generated using Jekyll (the technology behind GitHub pages).

The source is available here: <https://github.com/holman/holman.github.com>

------
tux1968
Social norms fluctuate. Things that our forefathers took offence at seem
inconsequential to us now, and vice versa.

Perhaps someday as a group we will get beyond taking offence over how someone
unmaliciously manipulates their vocal chords and instead concentrate our
outrage at more pressing problems.

------
mirkules
Swearing is a last resort. It can be very powerful, but it can also signify
loss of emotional control or lack of imagination. Hearing swears from a person
who never does (e.g. my mother) would be shocking and cutting. Hearing swears
from a sailor falls into the former category.

~~~
angdis
Indeed, that's why it is best to hold the swearing unless you _really_ need to
use it. It can be powerful rhetoric in the right context. But used too often,
it loses its sting and merely lowers expectations for whatever comes out of
the speaker's mouth.

------
yesimahuman
While I didn't really connect with his use of swear words on some of his
slides (Like "Fuck ruby is so fast I love it so much"), I think the fact that
everyone is talking about him and his presentations that he has succeeded in
some weird way I doubt he expected.

------
kylefox
I can appreciate a carefully-placed curse word.

But swears are like bolded words. Restrained use emphasizes a point, while
overuse drowns the message.

Dropping "fuck" every few sentences isn't offensive, it's boring. It indicates
your underlying message isn't powerful enough on it's own.

------
sliverstorm
Swearing has been demonstrated to help distract yourself from a trauma- but
only when it's unusual for the individual.

So, I tend to reserve my colorful language for those times when I've drawn
blood and/or tears from myself.

------
barryfandango
"Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that if
the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will
still say, ‘This was their finest fucking hour.’"

------
cafard
Almost any form of rhetoric can be used well or badly. For a writer's take on
the subject, have a look at Robert Graves's essay "Lars Porsena, Or the Future
of Swearing".

------
stevewilhelm
In my experience, swearing is effective if done sparingly.

I have noticed a trend; swearing has become linguistic filler for hipsters.

------
NanoWar
Wow, that blog post was boring...

------
klagan
I'm with Zach on this one...

------
dos1
Zach: You get lots of people reacting to your talks because you're
inflammatory. Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck get lots of reaction because
they're inflammatory too. I'm not offended in any way by profanity in a
presentation. But I know for a fact that your essay "Don't give you users shit
work" did not benefit a single bit from the expletive in the title. In fact,
my immediate reaction was "what 19 year old wrote this?"

You may cultivate an "edgy" persona, but it's not endearing. It may be a wise
idea to take Scott Hanselman's criticism and learn from it. He's one of the
best tech presenters in the world.

~~~
gks
This is exactly what he has proven in the article.

He would rather be that much more powerful in communicating his ideas to a
smaller group of people and alienating people like you. By you, I mean someone
who thinks "what 19 year old wrote this?" or similar.

He outlined this in the article. He gains a deeper engagement with some people
at the expense of losing others.

He isn't concerned about losing you, dear reader.

~~~
ctdonath
Is he, really, a much more powerful communicator thanks to his use of
obscenities? Would he, really, connect less with the same smaller group if he
didn't? Is the price of the loss, really, lower than the value of the gain?

(ETA: Interesting, HN won't let me reply to a downvoted reply to my post.)
Verbose defenders & detractors of the practice aside, methinks many who murmur
support do so from social pressures, and in fact dislike the practice but
won't or can't articulate their opposition.

~~~
josephg
_Is the price of the loss, really, lower than the value of the gain?_

That is a really interesting question.

I agreed completely with Zach's post, and I've agreed with all of @gks's
comments in this thread. Zach's use of swearing increases my emotional
connection to what he's saying. If Zach didn't swear, he would connect less
with _me_.

But the plural of anecdote is not data. What proportion of people are like
you, and find swearing in a talk trite and cheap? What proportion of people
are comfortable with Zach's slides?

We should do science.

------
georgieporgie
Take this with a grain of salt, since I'm talking about, as discussed, his
public _persona_ , but I watched his video the other day and the first phrase
that came to mind to describe him was, "smug little prick". Now, that's not
the sort of language I would normally use around here, but we were already on
the subject of presentation, expressiveness versus politeness, etc.

------
jsavimbi
> Swearing is a strong tool.

Mr. Holman has a lot of growing up to do. Don't swear in a professional
conversation, specially in front of an audience. It's unbecoming of yourself
and an insult to the listener who took the time out of their day to listen.

~~~
burgerbrain
Why would it be an insult to your audience?

Edit: To respond to both of you and not be repetitive, I would like to refer
both of you to the comment that I have made here:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3217649>

~~~
jsavimbi
It's an insult to pepper your audience with profanity when they took the time
out of their day to pay attention to what you had to share. It shows that you
did not take the time to properly prepare and present your arguments. It shows
that you are immature. It shows that you have a complete and total disregard
for even the most basic of social forums. And it shows that Mr. Holman is so
self-absorbed that when confronted with what in polite society is considered
ill-mannered and poorly timed swearing in a presentation, he doubled down and
bereft of supervision decided to lecture the audience even further as to why
he was entitled to swear at them.

In a time of crisis, some swearing is appropriate to convey urgency to the
listener. At a nerd meetup? Hardly.

~~~
burgerbrain
(The first part of your comment I have responded to above)

I think that a lot what you are describing is heavily dependent upon the
culture of the participants. Certainly in my culture _"total disregard for
even the most basic of social forums."_ would be a gross exaggeration and the
rest of your comment would likely be perceived as _far_ more insulting than
the casual non-aggressive use of 'profanity'.

------
jQueryIsAwesome
All the articles on the subject (including this one) should be one of those
honey pots they were talking the other day
(<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3166209>)

