I find 'win quick' gambits disgusting

This whole emphasis on beating lower rated players seems so bizarre to me. Where is the challenge there?  Is it because some IMs/GMs have low self-esteem because they've never quite made it at the top level so seek consolation in looking like a super-hero on Twitch? And why do people want to watch it? It's really like those old gladiator stories you hear about when people flocked to the circus to see professional fighters massacre practically defenceless victims. 

Gambits are a sound way to sacrifice a pawn and get compensation, and they are made to crush people, the reason they say such videos titles is because lower rated opponents arent good at defending

Gambits are good in my opinion for players in our rating range. It leads to very fun positions, improves tactical vision in practical play, teaches us how to use initiative. Gambits may not be played at highest levels, but they are legitimate here. As your opponent is probably going to blunder a piece in next few moves. They are very good for chess improvement goals too.

John Bartholomew an IM plays lower ranked players https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2huVf1l4UE&t=4s to educate viewers/players, not for the reasons you mentioned. I've found the videos on youtube very helpful..

At my level it's quite common, opponent blunders a piece tactically.

Your level is way higher than me.

My Contribution:

Gambits are interesting openings where White or Black sacrifices material early for initiative/attack, although there are exceptions where the compensation is positional in nature (Benko Gambit). At the GM level, they are not able to give White or Black an advantage, and many gambits are unsound/dont give enough compensation. Having an all gambit repertoire can be a stumbling block to improvement, since you will only learn how to use the initiative instead of positional concepts. However, if all you play is the Berlin and you never push a single pawn with malintent, your attacking skills will cease to exist.

At the beginner level, gambits are good for winning games and are quite fun. If you want to improve, you might want to try some more solid yet still dynamic openings (Kings Indian, London), but if you aren't trying to get better at the game (which is perfectly fine) then sticking with gambits is fine. 

As for what Nikki said that improvement is useless because not everybody will be a GM one day, that IS a straw man fallacy. Some people improve because they think playing at a higher level will be more fun (learning is fun). However, not everyone has the time or the will to improve, and there is nothing wrong with that.

Great point. 

My bad. I didn't checked your profile completely. Anyways at this level blunders are common what we need is strong tactical vision in order to spot them. 

*when you realize that somewhere a red herring was thrown since the original argument was what was wrong with videos that preach gambits in order to crush lower-rated players*

This thread can be summarized as a bunch of people roasting Richard with "git gud, LOL".

Personally, as a positional player, I avoid gambits as well, unless it's really overpowered. Although gambits are only a tiny fraction of my chess style, I don't have such strong feelings of them like some of you do. Gambits is an aspect of chess, much like endgame theory and positional play. Some gambits are really overpowered and almost do give you a guaranteed win. Personally, I don't think they're that bad. There's nothing wrong with a miniature, that's just life. Here's a personal favorite gambit that gives me a lot of success if my opponent accepts it. I hope that you will find gambits interesting and grow to not hate them as much.

Personally I don't see the problem with gambits. The gambiteer learns how to use the initiative and make use of active pieces, while the defender learns how to defend against unsound attacks, or maybe not allow an attack in the first place (Trade queens cough)

EXACTLY! @Richard_Hunter maybe the reason you don't like them is because you've lost games against them. However, if you try them out, perhaps you will grow fond of them!

Also I want to clairfy, I also don't LIKE the "bully little children with this mega cheesy gambit" videos, but that doesn't mean I can't learn something from them.

o.O

Not a gambit player but quite like the romantic style... and hate playing against a good gambiteer. If you decline... many don't have another plan.

Yes, it's a good alternative strategy to go for a quick mate