I think you have to know your audience. Hyperbolic threats of violence from someone I know isn’t violent make me laugh, they are not mean, they are funny.
This just tells me the guy is actually violent though. If he’s literally getting banned for his stuff then he can say it’s for comedy/meant to be funny, but he’s missing the mark.
Complaining about being censored in this case isn’t really valid as he’s going over the line.
You should actually watch some of his videos then. He’s doesn’t complain about being censored and he fully supports the advertising agency’s rulings. In the violent ones that were “banned” (just cut out of their respective videos), he fully agrees he was pushing the envelope which was entirely his intention.
Chill man. This person’s obviously blind to nuance and they’re only going to get worse if we provoke them.
We can’t afford to let these people just stew in their own misery. People have power, and if we can’t bring this person into the fold for all we know they could be the next hitler or something.
You’re taking a couple comments at face value, when the actual creator goes into detail about each one of his ads and the thought process about them. He’s legitimately a great guy and creator who does his best to be respectful with what he does. He’s very upfront that his content isn’t made for kids, including the best content warnings I’ve seen a content creator do on their media.
Perhaps, but nothing I’ve seen mentioned sparks my interest. I’m not a fan of “shock comedy,” and while foul language doesn’t offend me, it also doesn’t interest me.
The shock comedy is mainly his Surfshark ads, and even then the shock ones are few and far between. They’re mainly just comedy sketches. If you’ve ever seen any of the asdfmovie sketches, that’s him. One of his best videos is his in-depth review of Thomas the Tank Engine.
Couple other favorites from his main channel (Where the higher production skits are) are Let Me In and The Hole.
Because you’re making stupid judgments about him based on perceived certainty that your level of knowledge doesn’t warrant, and if you can see with your own eyes that you’re wrong on the calls you’ve made so far it might make you less likely to fall on the wrong side of something when it truly matters, like if you’re on jury duty and have another person’s fate in your hands.
So I should watch him because I don’t know what his content is like? There’s a lot of content I’m unfamiliar with, so much that I can’t possibly watch it all.
So far, nobody has given a compelling reason why I should watch it, and “it’s not as offensive as people claim” isn’t a very strong sales pitch. It’s not a reason to watch it, it’s just a reason to not avoid it, which isn’t the same thing.
So I’ll ask again, why should I watch him? What unique value does he offer over other content?
That’s his main channel with the higher production skits. There’s also his side channel at https://youtube.com/@TomSkaAndFriends which has a lot of great content as well. If you don’t find him funny, that’s a valid opinion since we have different views on what’s comedic. But assuming he’s turned into some “erratic psycho” is just rude.
Ultimately it may be completely out of context, but based purely on the small sample he appears a bit extreme. It’s the problem with small snippets like this, and why you need to be careful with what you post.
Yeah thats definitely true. Humans evolved bashing the brains of animals and other humans in. All of civilization is violent people pretending not to be violent.
Including you. You’re violent as fuck in the right situations. And the only thing keeping you from being violent is that fact the people who’ve already had their monsters unleashed, pretending like they’re not monsters.
Not all pretending is clandestine work. Pretending can also be found in theater, and in the concept of work.
It is not a condemnation to say a person is violent and pretending not to be. That’s just what it means to be a civilized adult human.
This is a weird take. Not everyone is violent and pretending not to be. I think that’s a gross misrepresentation of humans and not even the right way to justify this.
This is a very important key point. I’m a 41 year old conservative who grew up in the rural midwest in the 1980s. I was a teenager during the 90s.
When I cut my teeth on philosophical arguments, learned how to talk deep into the night about disagreements of the complex problems facing humanity, it was in the context of hanging out with my tightest friends from high school and college.
We could say pretty much anything, and because we had each other’s backs in the world, it was easy to fit in lots of potentially-ambiguous messages with confidence they’d be received well.
But online we’re interacting with people outside our social groups, from different cultures. As much as I personally hate it, it may be necessary to sanitize our words here moreso than elsewhere in order to avoid misinterpretation.
It’s just a totally different social context. And for people of my age — again I’m 41, born in 1982, graduated HS in 2000 — it’s a hard transition to comprehend because we did our social formation before online discussion with strangers became a norm.
We had online discussions before, but they were more niche and embedded in more stable communities. I remember being part of a forum around 2005 and I knew the people I was talking to. Not from real life, but from our many, many discussions. Instead of hundreds of millions, that forum had like a thousand members.
So I do think it’s healthy for people in real life to be unafraid to use extremely violent, absurd, insulting language, because that helps people bond. But online it may just not be necessary.
It’s less even about knowing the person directly, as it is about having the same microculture. Like back in the 90s I could assume any teen dressed like me would have roughly the same values and mannerisms as me. Now that’s not the case, because the internet has blurred the associations between different elements of culture.
I think you have to know your audience. Hyperbolic threats of violence from someone I know isn’t violent make me laugh, they are not mean, they are funny.
Also this guy is kinda known for fairly violent comedy videos, so “I’ll skin you alive” is pretty tame for him.
For example he’s created an ad that ended up being banned by the UK advertising watchdog, twice:
Source: indy100
This just tells me the guy is actually violent though. If he’s literally getting banned for his stuff then he can say it’s for comedy/meant to be funny, but he’s missing the mark.
Complaining about being censored in this case isn’t really valid as he’s going over the line.
You should actually watch some of his videos then. He’s doesn’t complain about being censored and he fully supports the advertising agency’s rulings. In the violent ones that were “banned” (just cut out of their respective videos), he fully agrees he was pushing the envelope which was entirely his intention.
He says it even better in his video “Dear Surfshark, Please Forgive Me” https://youtu.be/mono4nHA1QI?si=R40wu5LlEHoZ-cwT
Why should I watch him? He sounds entirely unpleasant, and I’d much rather watch someone who isn’t pushing the envelope.
The personality of a housecat
Chill man. This person’s obviously blind to nuance and they’re only going to get worse if we provoke them.
We can’t afford to let these people just stew in their own misery. People have power, and if we can’t bring this person into the fold for all we know they could be the next hitler or something.
You’re taking a couple comments at face value, when the actual creator goes into detail about each one of his ads and the thought process about them. He’s legitimately a great guy and creator who does his best to be respectful with what he does. He’s very upfront that his content isn’t made for kids, including the best content warnings I’ve seen a content creator do on their media.
Perhaps, but nothing I’ve seen mentioned sparks my interest. I’m not a fan of “shock comedy,” and while foul language doesn’t offend me, it also doesn’t interest me.
That said, I’m glad he’s respectful.
The shock comedy is mainly his Surfshark ads, and even then the shock ones are few and far between. They’re mainly just comedy sketches. If you’ve ever seen any of the asdfmovie sketches, that’s him. One of his best videos is his in-depth review of Thomas the Tank Engine.
Couple other favorites from his main channel (Where the higher production skits are) are Let Me In and The Hole.
I haven’t heard of any of those, so I’ll give the Thomas the Tank Engine recommendation a shot.
“Shock comedy” doesn’t appeal to me in itself, but swearing and offensive speech don’t really bother me, provided it fits in context.
How boring.
Because you’re making stupid judgments about him based on perceived certainty that your level of knowledge doesn’t warrant, and if you can see with your own eyes that you’re wrong on the calls you’ve made so far it might make you less likely to fall on the wrong side of something when it truly matters, like if you’re on jury duty and have another person’s fate in your hands.
So I should watch him because I don’t know what his content is like? There’s a lot of content I’m unfamiliar with, so much that I can’t possibly watch it all.
So far, nobody has given a compelling reason why I should watch it, and “it’s not as offensive as people claim” isn’t a very strong sales pitch. It’s not a reason to watch it, it’s just a reason to not avoid it, which isn’t the same thing.
So I’ll ask again, why should I watch him? What unique value does he offer over other content?
Why speculate when you can go and see for yourself what his content is like?
https://youtube.com/@TomSka
Well it’s not violent from what I can see, but it’s also not funny.
He hasn’t posted in a while though, so I think I’d have to check out what he’s like on twitter to see if he’s turned into some erratic psycho.
That’s his main channel with the higher production skits. There’s also his side channel at https://youtube.com/@TomSkaAndFriends which has a lot of great content as well. If you don’t find him funny, that’s a valid opinion since we have different views on what’s comedic. But assuming he’s turned into some “erratic psycho” is just rude.
I’m just going off what he himself has posted.
Ultimately it may be completely out of context, but based purely on the small sample he appears a bit extreme. It’s the problem with small snippets like this, and why you need to be careful with what you post.
I think this quickly goes into bad territory.
It’s very easy to be racist/sexist and then just say “It was a joke bro! Calm down!” as an example.
If you’re making violent “jokes” but saying it’s not real… Well sorry to say but you’re actually just violent and pretending otherwise.
Yeah thats definitely true. Humans evolved bashing the brains of animals and other humans in. All of civilization is violent people pretending not to be violent.
Including you. You’re violent as fuck in the right situations. And the only thing keeping you from being violent is that fact the people who’ve already had their monsters unleashed, pretending like they’re not monsters.
Not all pretending is clandestine work. Pretending can also be found in theater, and in the concept of work.
It is not a condemnation to say a person is violent and pretending not to be. That’s just what it means to be a civilized adult human.
This is a weird take. Not everyone is violent and pretending not to be. I think that’s a gross misrepresentation of humans and not even the right way to justify this.
This is a very important key point. I’m a 41 year old conservative who grew up in the rural midwest in the 1980s. I was a teenager during the 90s.
When I cut my teeth on philosophical arguments, learned how to talk deep into the night about disagreements of the complex problems facing humanity, it was in the context of hanging out with my tightest friends from high school and college.
We could say pretty much anything, and because we had each other’s backs in the world, it was easy to fit in lots of potentially-ambiguous messages with confidence they’d be received well.
But online we’re interacting with people outside our social groups, from different cultures. As much as I personally hate it, it may be necessary to sanitize our words here moreso than elsewhere in order to avoid misinterpretation.
It’s just a totally different social context. And for people of my age — again I’m 41, born in 1982, graduated HS in 2000 — it’s a hard transition to comprehend because we did our social formation before online discussion with strangers became a norm.
We had online discussions before, but they were more niche and embedded in more stable communities. I remember being part of a forum around 2005 and I knew the people I was talking to. Not from real life, but from our many, many discussions. Instead of hundreds of millions, that forum had like a thousand members.
So I do think it’s healthy for people in real life to be unafraid to use extremely violent, absurd, insulting language, because that helps people bond. But online it may just not be necessary.
It’s less even about knowing the person directly, as it is about having the same microculture. Like back in the 90s I could assume any teen dressed like me would have roughly the same values and mannerisms as me. Now that’s not the case, because the internet has blurred the associations between different elements of culture.