Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Is the sarcasm emoticon needed for obvious sarcasm?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 06:59 PM
Original message
Is the sarcasm emoticon needed for obvious sarcasm?
Do we have that many here on DU who can't see obvious sarcasm? Do we have to post a sarcasm emoticon to just to help them see it?

Boy---they must have fits with the Stephen Colbert show.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:02 PM
Response to Original message
1. Yes, there is no vocal inflection in ascii.
Now, you tell me, was I being sarcastic there or not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
trumad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:04 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. It's not obvious---
but if it's obvious as the nose on your face, what then?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rzemanfl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
2. I use it because some people don't seem to understand my
Edited on Thu Aug-31-06 07:05 PM by rzemanfl
sense of humor and take me seriously. See, e.g., the Shirley Booth thread of a while back...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
3. I've found that disclaimers work best
oh... :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
4. Yes
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
6. I am frequently amazed at the utter lack of any sense of irony
that even DUers have.

Voltaire didn't need a :satire: emoticon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pharaoh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. yes! some people don't get it
don't know if your a freep or a moron,............so yes please use it!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indepat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #13
20. That obviously dripping-with-sarcasm needs no elucidation IMO
Edited on Thu Aug-31-06 07:26 PM by indepat
but what do I know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hvn_nbr_2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
7. People have gone off on posts from The Onion.
Yeah, I think you probably need to use that emoticon.

When reality has become crazier than anyone could have imagined satire being only a few years ago, well, some people just won't get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
8. I say no, but since I never know I try to remember it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
9. i LOVE not putting the emoticon on obvious sarcasm knowing full well....
... that jillions here won't get it.

I should make a movie! I'll call it: "Idiots revealed"!

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. I like that in a person
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #9
25. or you could call it
"Sarcasm on a Message Board"

too obvious? :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlooInBloo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:49 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. lol! I doubt if more than 1/3 would get that even!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
10. Yes, it is.
If the sarcasm tag isn't there. It's not really sarcasm. People who don't use it aren't really being sarcastic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Junkdrawer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:06 PM
Response to Original message
11. Your flamebait backfired?????
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
14. I've been yelled at for not using it.
If you don't use the sarcasm emo, be prepared to have a 'that was sarcasm' sarcastic reply ready.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mcscajun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
15. Yes, because sarcasm is conveyed by sound, not by text alone.
If 'net communications weren't fundamentally flawed in conveying emotional subtext, we'd never have needed any smileys at all, would we?

Many a flame war has been averted by judicious and correct use of smileys to convey meaning that words alone cannot.

Nothing is perfect, though. :)

This was a sarcasm-free post. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxsolomon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:16 PM
Response to Original message
16. having not used when it should have been obvious
and being jumped on over it by literal minded DUers, yes. yes it is.

and i'm TOTALLY ok with it. :sarcasm:!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wtmusic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:17 PM
Response to Original message
17. What's obvious to one DUer
is lost on another. But because using :sarcasm: destroys any entertainment value in a well-written sarcastic post, IMO it's better to let some people flip out thinking you're serious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AlwaysQuestion Donating Member (412 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 09:21 PM
Response to Reply #17
37. I agree.
While not all of us are good at writing sarcasm with much success, I applaud any among us who are willing to give it a go. If we succeed, great; if not, so what? A forum reader can always request clarification. We have some talented folks on DU who thankfully refuse to be redundant by employing the sarcasm emoticon. Sarcasm is an art form which calls for much practice. What better place than on a forum to practice writing skills and receive feedback.

As for smilies, I believe they should be used sparingly. A thumb's up is fine. It serves to substitute for an entire phrase; e.g., "I'm with you!" I'm also in favour of any emoticon which conveys laughter, tears, winking--any action--and those which substitute for words.

But using emoticons to substitute for written clarity is a form of mea culpa, as in, "Hey, I may not have made my meaning clear, so I'm adding an emoticon to help you get my drift."

And now, gawd help me if I've ever used them here "incorrectly."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turbineguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:19 PM
Response to Original message
18. No
Edited on Thu Aug-31-06 07:20 PM by Turbineguy
wink wink nudge nudge

On Edit: :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blue cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:25 PM
Response to Original message
19. Absolutely yes
Many read this blog who aren't regulars. There was a case when something on a blog that was sarcasm but was being discussed in another country as fact. Sorry, I can't remember the details but it was on dailykos.com.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Der Blaue Engel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:26 PM
Response to Original message
21. I find a nice
:eyes: works pretty well. It also conveys my sense of superiority. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skids Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
22. Yes.
A) Just because you think your sarcasm is obvious, doesn't mean it really is obvious. Keep in mind that there are idiots who actually hold really strange and perverse beliefs, so it isn't a stretch for many people who have to deal with such morons to take you at face value. Remember, these days it "is getting harder and harder to distinguish truth from satire."

B) If people don't get your sarcasm, maybe you just aren't a talented enough writer.

C) It would waste less time and makes room for more worthwhile threads if we could dispense with the occasional misunderstanding.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orangepeel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
23. of course not.
:sarcasm:

( :eyes: can work, too)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kurth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
24. Yeah. No. So, like, are we having fun yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poiuyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
27. You don't need it UNLESS you threaten to boycott Olbermann
OK, I was being captious
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
datasuspect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 08:23 PM
Response to Original message
28. man
i declared a moratorium on smilies back in 1996.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
idgiehkt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
29. since I was told I needed to use it the other night
I would say it's not obvious to everyone all the time...

I know I sometimes have trouble with interpretation... :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ktlyon Donating Member (733 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 08:24 PM
Response to Original message
30. I think it is best to be as clear as possible so smilies can help.
Being specific instead of using pronouns is also helpful. I seem to always be trying to clarify my thoughts. Just because I know what I'm referring to doesn't mean everyone is on my page.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 08:36 PM
Response to Original message
31. No
Since I don't care if people are pissed off or confused by my posts. Especially when I'm in THAT mood, it's great entertainment. I'm certain I've never used one.

And don't tell me that if the point of these endless yammering posts isn't amusing oneself at least some of the time-then what's the point of being on a message board anyway!??


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redstone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
32. Not in posts from me, it shouldn't be necessary.
Redstone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gormy Cuss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
33. Yes, because written sarcasm isn't understood by some
Edited on Thu Aug-31-06 08:40 PM by Gormy Cuss
without a big honking sarcasm emoticon.

On edit: I worked with someone who couldn't recognize spoken sarcasm unless there were others around who laughed at the remark... then he knew to ask.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liontamer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 08:43 PM
Response to Original message
34. yes it really is
when I don't add it, I get flamed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Left Is Write Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 09:07 PM
Response to Original message
35. You wouldn't think so, but some folks are quite sarcasm-challenged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HarukaTheTrophyWife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 09:09 PM
Response to Original message
36. In my experience, yes.
I've offended even people I like with sarcasm, because I didn't use the emoticon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
38. I don't like the bloody dripping sarcasm icon. My sarcasm is light & fun.
It's a bad fit. I like the eye-rolling smily. But blood-dripping sarcasm is the sort of thing I expect from freepers, Rush Limbaugh, and (sadly) a few of our own tin foilers around here. And yet some people com across as so dense around here.

Case in point: In GD someone was speculating that the only reason the JonBenet Ramsey story broke this month is because the White House and the monolithic media they utterly control were trying to cover up some bad news in Iraq.

I responded:
I have a problem w/people saying "If big news breaks, it's a distraction"

The idea that some pointless, manipulative, or sensational story always gets hyped whenever the Bushies want to hide their corrupt cavortings from public scrutiny is just silly. They're always, constantly, up to some criminal, unethical, or unconstitutional shenanigans. For this "when news breaks" theory to make any sense, there would have to be an occasional lull in the corrupt practices and criminal incompetance of the Bush administration. In almost six years I have not seen their idiocy nor their malevolence nor their utter contempt for the rule of law let up for an instant. There is never a time when they welcome scrutiny.

For this theory to hold, there would have to be an almost constant barrage of frivolous and hysterical, yet irrelevent news being broadcast into our homes.


I thought that was a pretty obviously dopey thing for a DUer to say. And yet someone responded...
And your point being...

"For this theory to hold, there would have to be an almost constant barrage of frivolous and hysterical, yet irrelevent news being broadcast into our homes"

Most of what is broadcast on MSM television is just that!!! Or was this an attempt at sarcasm??!!


My first thought was that using two question marks and two exclamation points with such a thickheaded question just had to be someone one-upping my ironic understatement with their own comic overstatement. But I realize now I was giving them much too much credit. This person really thought I was defending the quality and integrity of the major tv news media.

Amazing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bridgit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-31-06 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
39. oh yes, many here just simply don't get it....
:rofl: oh............................ :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Nov 23rd 2017, 06:13 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » The DU Lounge Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC