Is Chuck scaling down the tone of his video content for the best or worst?

[Yukaphile]

Recently I got into a debate over this, and no, it wasn't over whether he's updating less - it's how he was a lot more, um... please forgive me for this, if you're reading, Chuck, but... VERY toxic in his early videos, and is less so these days. It was very funny, sure, but it seemed less insightful too, and there was less room for reasoned discussion in a few cases I could mention. I'm not trying to attack him, mind - I'm just trying to gauge the feel of his audience. Do you feel that him toning down the vitriol in his later videos is for the best or the worst? For me, I think it can have many positives, yet I've also felt it had a few negatives like his almost total lack of a response to the blatant misogyny and near rape apologia in "The Enemy Within" - from the same guy who's called it out so viciously in the past.

But this is not about me. I wanna get a discussion going, and don't worry, I don't intend to participate past this initial description of what it's all about. So, what do you guys think?

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I've watched his stuff from years past and today and I've never found it have vitriol.

Will watch the enemy within review considering that you were gracious enough to provide an example for speculation.

[Yukaphile]

Well, contrast that, to, say, something like "Profit and Lace" and you'll notice a difference. And I was just trying to start a discussion, I wasn't even accusing the poor guy.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Well, contrast that, to, say, something like "Profit and Lace" and you'll notice a difference. And I was just trying to start a discussion, I wasn't even accusing the poor guy.

I wouldn't worry about what I said too much I just like to speculate on this kind of thing.

[Yukaphile]

Well, I guess it all depends on whether or not one agrees he's "toned down" his show from ten years ago, though I think there's definitely a difference if you check out the vids from those time compared to those from today. Again, my question is on if you guys believe that's a good or bad thing. This guy I was debating with (I forget who, sorry, don't blast me! ) considered it good.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

Yeah I'm not going over a 48 minute video to muse this.

[Robovski]

Profit and Lace has a lot to work with if you want to get worked up over it. Over the course of doing something like this for 10 years I would expect two main things: 1. That you get better at the tasks involved. 2. You develop a style and form that is your own.

10 years is a lot for anyone, and opinions change as well. Basically, it doesn't matter if things are different from how he did it 10 years ago - he's also a changed person from who he was 10 years ago.

[Wargriffin]

So he didn't rant about the sexual assault in the episode, because the episode itself did not condone or support the behavior itself.

What do you just want him to rant at everything you find offensive?


Profit and Lace got ranted at cause it was trying to be comedy using uncomfortable and unwise methods.

[PerrySimm]

But this is not about me.

You're right. It's not. If you want someone to blame for id-Kirk's behaviour this episode you have plenty of other options.

[Admiral X]

I liked his earlier stuff, but everyone and their uncle can get angry and rant at something. The way he does things now tends to set him apart from others better. I will say that I miss the old intro he did for his "Threshold" review, though. I liked his explanation for why he does the things he does, and I've brought up similar points myself when getting into the standard internet arguments.