PeeperStorm on 1/12/2009 at 02:53
Lepidus - What manner o' thing is your ZylonBane?
Antony - He is shap'd, sir, like himself, and he is as broad as he hath breadth; he is just as high as he is, and moves with his own organs. He lives by that which nourisheth him, and the elements once out of him, he transmigrates.
Lepidus - What color is he of?
Antony - Of his own color too.
Lepidus - 'Tis a strange fellow.
Antony - 'Tis so. And the tears of him are wet.
Kolya on 1/12/2009 at 08:04
Quote Posted by Subjective Effect
What do these posters have in common? Fairly well entrenched TTLG personae despite not posting as verbosely as you, me, RBJ, SD, Scots, GBM and many others.
The (
http://www.ttlg.com/forums/memberlist.php?order=DESC&sort=posts&pp=100) TTLG Memberlist ordered by postcount says these aren't good examples. (PigLick and Koki are among the first page pack and ZylonBane is leading.)
Not to imply that it was these posters intention, but if you want to establish your own brand of sarcasm you have to post a whole lot or you will be misunderstood most of the time. The fact that it's text-only will rather generate more misunderstandings than help you with establishing a pattern.
Additional cues like voice and facial expression would help that cause in a RL-setting and not hinder it as RBJ says. As if face and voice were just background noise...
There might well be mitigating factors for these missing communication channels to be found in the text or context. Since we're all internet posters we feel there are. But simply saying that the deficiency is actually an advantage doesn't make it roll.
One such factor you named yourself SubjectiveEffect and that's text-length, another one I can think of is timing, eg drive-by snarks or rapid fire posting.
june gloom on 1/12/2009 at 09:01
i gave your mom a driveby snark
SubJeff on 1/12/2009 at 09:26
Quote Posted by Kolya
As if face and voice were just background noise...
More like complicating factors. There are many more factors to consider than just the written word in RL. Its the reason we try to enrich our online text interactions with emoticons and memes, the reason we often misunderstand jokes and such online (especially in an entrenched community) and the reason that simple patterns are more easily picked up online.
As to number of posts; it really depends where you post. Eg, Bikerdude posts a whole lot in the tech help forum and as many of his posts are factual, dry stuff there isn't going to be a lot of opportunity to develop a sarcastic edge.
Kolya on 1/12/2009 at 10:45
But...complicating factors?
If I want to make a sarcastic remark in RL I have a whole array of markers at my disposal: I can make it sound extremely casual or serious, or I can overdo it by pronounciation, I can grin in several fashions, frown and whatnot. There aren't as many descriptions I could give you here as there are nuances in RL (part of the problem).
In any case those are not complicating the perception of sarcasm, the expressions can help it along. On the other hand someone has yet to give me a convincing example of how excluding these factors makes the perception of such patterns easier.
Memes, smileys and emoticons are collectively used media btw. I completely agree that they can help communicating a difference between literal and actual meaning. And yes, I will recognise the same meme if anyone repeats it online. Then again I recognise common phrases or movie quotes with people in RL too. Text-communication exaggerates stuff like that because it has to play catch-up with the meanings we'd like to convey.
EDIT: The problem I see is that text doesn't feel constrained when you use it. After all there seems to be an infinity of ways to express yourself in text, just as there's an infinity of ways to do so in RL. For any specific context and meaning to be conveyed I could potentially come up with a million and one ways to say what I want to. But in reality I just write "LOL" 'cause I'm lazy.
And that is a conscious expression, whereas in RL, if I actually said the same thing, my subconscious might very well colour my expression in ways I may not even recognise. Holy crap.
SubJeff on 1/12/2009 at 11:13
Quote Posted by Kolya
But...complicating factors?
In any case those are not complicating the perception of sarcasm, the expressions
can help it along. On the other hand someone has yet to give me a convincing example of how excluding these factors makes the perception of such patterns easier.
It can make it easier but equally it can make it harder. Someone who is very dry, for example, may be sarcastic in such a way as to make people unfamiliar with their particular brand of humour very uncomfortable. Online you're less likely to feel uncomfortable because you just take it literally and you're not on the spot re: interpretation. It works both ways. The difference in a forum (as opposed to in chat) is its not an ongoing conversation in the same way. People tend to be more to the point, they review their posts, they tweak before submitting and because this usually (if you're a reactionary twat) ends up in honing your expressions to the nub. And if you're sarcastic this will come through in purity.
Scots Taffer on 1/12/2009 at 13:50
Fascinating analysis you two, keep it up.
Scots Taffer on 1/12/2009 at 13:53
see what i did there
hopper on 1/12/2009 at 14:28
i agree, how DARE you engage in a discussion i'm not interested in :mad::mad:
Rug Burn Junky on 1/12/2009 at 14:42
Quote Posted by Kolya
Additional cues like voice and facial expression would help that cause in a RL-setting and not hinder it as RBJ says.
Yeah, uhh, about that: never did say that myself.
Doing a great job there, champ. Keep it up! We're all rooting for you!
