Well, that depends. 
Iād concur that the feedback is helpful. Iād be interested to hear if other listeners also think this is a problem; and if so, whether itās perceived that a specific presenter is often speaking over other presenters or whether itās an issue of all of us speaking over all of us. From there Iām confident itās an issue we can address.
ājeremy
3 Likes
Hi.
The first time here, in the forum. Listener for a past couple of months. Iād like to add up one quick thing to the āmoneyā bit of the discussion about vaccines. When @bryanlunduke states that itās not fair that in diseases outbreaks vaccines are being defended from her immunity vector while pharmaceutical companies make the money, he misses one element of the whole vaccine discussion. Selling vaccines is against the interests of pharma producers. Itās much easier, and more profitable for those producers to wait for people to get the flu/measles/etc and sell them paracetamol and vitamins for a week than to have them vaccinated. I will try to restrain any judgement, itās just an important part of the discussion and should be pointed out. The argument about āgreedy Big Pharmaā in this situation does not make any sense whatsoever.
Iām also sorry if my english is hard to read. Not my first language. Will try to do my best.
1 Like
Scrolled through the above posts about this and found this not yet posted. Best explanation of herd immunity, IMHO:
@bryanlunduke Please try thinking about vaccines (the standard childhood ones at least, not every possible one) not as a matter of personal, but of public hygiene. Like sewers & garbage collection. Should people be allowed to opt-out of connecting their house to the sewage pipes & having a trash can? And instead dump the waste onto the streets? There are unfortunately homeless people (in this example equivalent to people who canāt be vaccinated), who nobody should have the right to risk sullying them.
Also, about the Fluorine in drinking water: See how Calgary fares after removing it a few years ago. Thatās a research project theyāll probably wish they hadnāt started. āPoisonā is really not an valid argument here, because everything is a poison in the wrong dose.
1 Like
That would be a more apt comparison if having garbage collection also directly impacted your personal health ā in both a positive and negative way. The two really couldnāt be more different. One is adding something to your body, the other is relocating an already discarded item from one location to another.
Now this becomes a much more useful comparison (as we are talking about adding something to your body to achieve a goal). However, Iām of the opinion (and my opinion is swayable) that flouride provides does more harm than good. Does it aid in dental health for people who would, otherwise, have poor dental hygiene? Yes. Demonstrably so. But it also has (again, demonstrable) negative impacts on health. Which means that people should weigh the pros and cons for their specific case.
In my case: Where I (currently) live, there is no flouride in the drinking water. We pull water from a lake and put it through a filtration system. But we also make sure to have good dental hygiene for the family ā which includes tooth paste without flouride in it. As yet, no cavities for the daughter. She may at some point (lord knows I did as a childā¦ by the truck-loadā¦ and that was in an area with high amounts of flouride in the drinking water and good dental hygiene habits). And we may, depending on the specifics at the time, opt to add flouride. But, at present, it seems like a bad idea for my family. So no flouride.
Right? I mean, come on guys, that dude is just out of control.
For what itās worth. I do feel that Bryan often actively tries to silence the rest in the discussion. The episode in which he didnāt was the one recorded on SCALE. Maybe you should always record in front of a live audience?
1 Like
Silence the discussion or talk when another host is talking? (Thereās a pretty huge difference.)
I think thereās a pretty fair criticism that I interrupt a lot and end up talking over other hosts. I try to be mindful of itā¦ but itās not something that comes terribly easy for me in a podcast setting (in person or in a live show itās different). Iād like to blame it on doing a podcast, for over half a decade, with someone who was so uninteresting ā and had so little to say on the topic of the podcast ā that I had to constantly talk just to keep the audience from falling asleep. Doing a show with co-hosts that have something interesting and worthwhile to say isā¦ new to me. 
I meant āthe restā (of the hosts), understanding it as talking over them or not letting them finish a sentence, which makes them essentially silent. I didnāt mean to suggest censorsip attempts on your end. Sorry, my english is completely self-taught and I might be unclear sometimes. Will do my best to be understandable (is that even a word?).
The interruptions is what I had in mind. However, please consider the fact that itās only my general impression and not something that requires any kind of attention. Youāre all still doing a great job and listening to BV is great experience.
1 Like
Understandabubble?
1 Like
I have nothing to add to this discussion. However, as a religiously pro vaxer, It was nice to have my position rocked a bit by a cogent alternate position. It hasnāt changed my position, but it has made me reconsider it. Always a good idea. More of this!
5 Likes
The absence of garbage collection and sewers would very definitely impede ones personal health. At the very latest once the flies, roaches and rats would run around your kitchen and bathroom. But I suggested to try and think about it as a matter not of personal, but of public, hygiene 
In our modern western societies, few severe infectious diseases left uneradicated. Hence, the personal benefits of vaccinations are only secondary to the benefits of maintaining herd immunity. Their side effects (which are inherently, primarily personal) are thus perceived to be relatively large compared to the danger of the diseases they protect against. I predict that this perception will shift in favour of vaccines, once herd immunity drops low enough for the vaccination risk paling again in comparison to the then prevalent infections. The problem will solve itself. Itās justā¦ Not exactly 1st-rate clever to let it arise at all.
In that context, relying on the good medical care that we luckily have is like putting good locks on all doors within your flat/house, but leaving the external ones open. āOh yeah, the robbers wonāt get much once theyāre inā¦ā
2 Likes
I too found the vaccination debate to be somewhere between a segment that was troubling at worst or just not useful at best. But I, learning from previous segments I had similar feelings to, skipped it, and will continue to enjoy the show which for the most part has many excellent parts.
Someone here was accused of not being open to discussion or other view points. Iād like to say that maybe itās not as black and white but a spectrum. Some controversial things, like say the death penalty, to me, are still undecided. I lean away from it, but admit there may be cases itās applicable. Debate on that topic I am quite open to and would listen to both sides. Same on many other things, like best Linux distro etc.
Vaccinations how ever, to me, are a more decided issue, like the āround world theoryā. So to me, having someone on the show putting forward a flat world theory, and having a āniceā and āpoliteā discussion about it would be unproductive at best and, personally, probably not worth my time.
Which is fine. Somethings like evolution I take as granted and some things like best shower radio are still very undecided to me. The worldās full of stuff that maybe I donāt want to spend my time on, like cave men living with dinosaur āhistoricalā museums and celebrity news (sites and shows). Thatās me. Obviously a) not everyone shares my opinion on a) the answer and b) how decided or confident they are in it per a given topic.
So I skipped the segment pretty quickly. However or the most part I find the show interesting and fun.
The other point someone raised with was a bit about authority. Part of the reason you as presenters gravitate towards Linux and tech issues is because you are all somewhat experts on parts of it, especially Linux things. Itās been your careers, youāve been near the cutting edge. You have opinions formed by lots of deep and broad experience. There are more adjectives I might like to use like ālegitimateā, but maybe ānon-personalā, ābroadā and āprofessionalā are actually closer to the mark.
We as a society as an audience seem to have brain wired fallacy to like to listen to people who are celebrities for one reason (say acting) state opinions on things they are not experts on (like world politics). To me, having people who are very good at acting but might be shockingly deficient in world political knowledge try to debate that is unproductive, not informative and possibly dangerous. To me, Paris Hiltonās views on the middle east crisis donāt hold weight.
In this same vein, when you foray into other topics of interest but maybe not personal experience I as a listener find it less useful for the reasons outlined above. I get why youād want to, I too like to discuss things maybe Iām not an expert on, and sometimes the result is still fun. But as a means of learning more about it, with my potentially limited time, it may not be the best, and Iād often like to go to other āexpertsā (for what ever that might means) in those fields for advice.
So combining the two problems above this might help explain why I and some other listeners found problem with the segment. But I just chose to bypass it and move on. Bryan is still a fun interesting guy to listen to and has a lot of cool neat interesting Linux and making stuff experience I like to hear about and from. As a source for my medical decisions, I will probably not be soliciting him for advice 
So on the whole I find the show fun, enjoyable and informative. On occasion not so much, but thatās easily solved without a big binary abandon the entire show or not decision .
3 Likes
Seriously? Your English is completely self-taught? I am damned impressed ā you are easier to understand than some writers I know. Color me impressed.
No, no, no. You make a totally valid point. I absolutely have a tendency to interrupt. Not all the time and, certainly, not to be a jerk to my co-hostsā¦ but it happens and it something worth noting so that I can be aware of it. Those sorts of things help to make the show that much better.
I had the textbooks, a dictionary, and later on subtitled movies. And if your first language is polish, then english on a basic-to-intermediate level comes off as easy. (As in: http://img-9gag-ftw.9cache.com/photo/anXXB0V_700b.jpg)
3 Likes
I find myself suddenly gripped by a burning desire to have someone on the show who is an advocate that the world is flat.
I completely agree with part of this. Will Paris Hiltonās thoughts sway my opinion on Middle Eastern Politics? Highly unlikely. But I have no qualms with her expressing her opinions. And, hey, if Iām interested (either because of the topic or because of Hilton, herself)ā¦ I might listen. And, who knows. Maybe sheāll surprise me and her words will enlighten me in some way.
Totally, 100% a reasonable stance.
Bad Voltage is a show where 4 dudes talk about things theyāre interested in (or interested in talking about). A lot of those things end up being about Open Source and Linux ā an area the 4 of us arenāt completely retarded about. But, just like most people, our interests are pretty diverse (and, often, just plain weird). Jono is a musician with a focus on heavy metal. Jeremy is a foodie with a focus on some pretty scientific methods of cooking. Stuart is a Ginger. Weāre just all over the map.
And the show is likely to continue to reflect that diversity. I think thatās a good thing. Luckily Stuart makes a point of adding the time stamps for each segment in the show notes to help people skip the segments that they simply arenāt interested in.
I am quoting this because:
A) You complimented me. I like that.
B) Nobody, anywhere, should use me as a primary source of medical information. Or secondary. Or third-ary (whatās the word for that?). This cannot be stressed enough.
One thing I like about these guys who are having a discussion about various topics, is that it is informal, and with no illusions that, on many topics, they are trying to pull themselves off as āexpertsā (unless itās about Jimmy Dean!), but rather, more like some friends sitting around with refreshments talking the topic over. One benefit, I find, that by listening to these discussions, it might bring up an issue I was unaware of, or, at least, a viewpoint of an issue I had not considered. This, in turn, might influence me to research said topic, if I would be inclined to do so.
I guess it goes with the notion that I encourage all to do, which I constantly do, that is, I challenge my views, assumptions, and beliefs. I try not to always assume that the matter is settled.
1 Like
Tertiary.
Almost perfectly @sil Would you please try it out to put those before the segment title? Some podcatchers (AntennaPod among them) can hyperlink those to the audio segment. That doesnāt work with the time-stamp in parenthesis. For example like this:
00:02:02 Elementary OS
- The new release Freya makes us think...
00:25:40 Stuart reviews OpenElec and the Raspberry Pi 2
- ...
Thank you!
Thatās the word! Thanks.
Can you believe I write words for a living? Crazy world.
Interesting point, but I think even for relatively popular decisions (like most people seem to be supportive of vaccinations), I think it is always fun and interesting to understand the views of someone who shares a different perspective.
As an example, I find it fascinating to read or listen to folks who talk about their love of religion, of certain hobbies and interests, or different political persuasions. I think even if we have made our minds up about something, it is always healthy and worthwhile to listen to other perspectives with open ears - throughout my own life I have had some resolute opinions that were changed when someone helped me to think of something in a different way.
ā¦and here is an example of how tricky this is. For some, evolution is a slam-dunk clear thing: it happened or it didnāt. For some folks evolution is clearer cut than vaccinations . It varies, and this is why I think having diversity of topics for people to consider is good for the show.
Well, yes and no. I would argue that for many of our topics we are about as equally experienced as we were with vaccinations.
As an example, for my son, Jack, my wife and I researched vaccinations, which ones he needed, what the side effects were, how effective they were, and we made a decision. This isnāt dramatically different to researching about OpenSuSE or Google Loon or Bitcoin that we have covered previously on the show.
Yes, some of us have more expertise on the show in certain topics, but letās all remember one thing: Bad Voltage is not supports to be a show where we hand down expertise on topics. It is supposed to be four friends hanging out, shooting the shit about different topics, some of which we have more experience in than others, and exploring what common ground and differences we see.
As someone earlier in this topic said, this is more about well produced pub discussion than anything else. This is why my general view is āwhat is fit for the pub is fit for Bad Voltageā.
Exactly. There will always be some topics of less interest to some and more interest to others (ourselves included!). We try to strike a balance, and this why you havenāt seen the big social issue discussions that often: we think they are fun from time to time, when it feels right.
As you do, @dan, we encourage everyone to listen to the whole show, but if they are really not digging a segment, skip over it.