I do listen to it, and I disagree with the drastic and dramatic conclusions that people arrive at. Sure, people get offended, some easier than others, that is enough to dislike, even hate it, but its not hardly a good enough basis, anecdotal as it is, to arrive at conclusions such as "alienates half their listeners" or some sort of attempt at an authoritative "the podcast's quality is [objectively] bad because I feel so"... this is just wrong reasoning, not in my opinion, but according to reason, logic, science and so on.
It's fair enough to dislike it and voice criticism, but is it wrong to meet that with scepticism and criticism of ones own? If so, this becomes a very one-sided and narrow notion of who can and cannot voice their concerns and criticisms. If you put your opinions out there, I have as much right to question it and poke at the basis of it, to see if its "merely" feelings that's been hurt, or if there is something actually wrong with the podcast - that I for some reason haven't noticed myself (whether through my own stupidity or ignorance of internal American discourse).
As for the slice of the community that frequent these boards, it's hardly a useful statistical sampling method to arrive at any useful conclusion with.
I agree that it should be about a Star Wars RPG, and not so much about their Kickstarters and lots of side talk about sports and stuff... when it comes to the humour, yes it is simple, base and vulgar, but I just find it hard to understand that these things should be such an obstacle really. I mean sure, there are episodes that are worse than others. Of course, I'm not trying to convince anyone to start listening or change their ways because of this podcast. I mean, if its such a big issues don't listen, voice your concerns or criticism, as you've done, but doing that you are also opening yourself to questions, criticism and poking around as for why, and particularly criticism for sweeping conclusions based on flimsy evidence. The conclusion is the issue, not that you don't like it.