Rug Burn Junky on 1/12/2009 at 18:46
Tsk, tsk, that sounds like you're trying to insult me by calling me princess. Such a high-minded individual as yourself shouldn't need to resort to such gutter tactics.
But go ahead, quote my words as you like. That's not a problem. The problem is that you're misconstruing them.
Or does the fact that nobody else seems to be backing you up not give you that clue?
Aerothorn on 1/12/2009 at 18:49
For no discernible reason, I find it really depressing that Agent Monkeysee is in the top ten despite having not been her in 2.5 years and not having posted regularly since before then. WHY DID HE ABANDON US
P.S. A lot more useful would be "TTLG Memberlist ordered by number of pissing matches with RBJ."
P.P.S.
Kolya and RBJ
Run the gamut, sated view
Know them more, emotion bound
Martyred, misconstruedKolya on 1/12/2009 at 18:55
I called you a princess because you're playing hard to get instead of getting on with the actual discussion. And I'm not as reliant as you on people accepting me on the net. So I don't care if people cheer for you or me and try not to talk for them.
Rug Burn Junky on 1/12/2009 at 19:13
That's all well and good, but it still makes you an utter hypocrite resorting to name calling, since that seems to be your fundamental criticism of me. If that cognitive dissonance doesn't bother you, it's fine by me.
It has nothing to do with "cheering," and I don't know why you're so obsessed with this idea of popularity or acceptance, I haven't brought it up once. Me thinks the lady doth protest too much. In a logical discussion, the fact that you're alone so far out on a limb - over something so small and trivial that only you are magnifying - should tell you that perhaps you've maybe made a mistake.
And there's nothing to really discuss, since you completely lack the ability to acknowledge the rather reasonable point I made. One that everyone else seems to agree with. Me repeating it with different words won't help, since you seem so adamant as to your inability to recognize simple patterns.
Ask yourself this question: is there ANYTHING I could possibly say that would get you to say: "Hrm, RBJ is right about this. I'll stop now."
Since I'm pretty confident in my assessment of your ridiculous stubbornness, I think it's safe to assume that the answer is "no," in which case you make a lousy discussion partner, and I have no motivation for explaining my rather simple point further.
Kolya on 1/12/2009 at 19:20
Well you could try and explain your point just once instead of repeating that "you're too dumb to get it" routine over and over. That doesn't add anything to your credibility in my eyes.
steo on 1/12/2009 at 19:33
Frankly, I agree with Kolya, but I'm not eager to get into a shit-slinging contest about it. I suspect I'm not alone.
RL > internet for the purposes of identifying sarcasm. Maybe it's easier for some to identify patterns when communication is limited to text, but that nowhere near makes up for tone, body language etc. and if you know someone in RL, you know when they're being sarcastic.
Rug Burn Junky on 1/12/2009 at 19:40
Quote Posted by Kolya
Well you could try and explain your point just once instead of repeating that "you're too dumb to get it" routine over and over. That doesn't add anything to your credibility in my eyes.
You've given up any claim as an arbiter of credibility. But honestly, there is no possible way to understate the level of stubborn stupidity that you display with this post.
I've stated it rather succinctly, multiple times. Here, I'll put it all in one place. Reread it, go to town, and feel free to get back on the GOTCHA carousel that you've keep falling off of, but it's not likely to do you any good.
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
Internet communication does still have context, and because of the more stylized form of communication, that context can work in ways that RL doesn't.
[INDENT]
Quote:
"stylized form of communication" = easier to detect patterns over time.
[/INDENT]
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
Obviously you're not going to catch every pattern, but for any regular contributors there
are going to be patterns. These patterns will allow for detection of sarcasm in ways that RL doesn't in many scenarios, and may make up for some of what is lost in verbal and physical cues.
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
I'm not saying they don't exist in real life. I'm saying that since the internet is more limited form of communication, patterns can be easier to detect. You'll have similar contexts arise over and over again and play out in similar fashion, often with the same word choice.
In RL, the complexity of information may hide certain of these patterns that are blindingly obvious when reduced to a turn-based, text environment. It's somewhat akin to the difference in spotting patterns in a chess game versus a soccer match.
I'm not saying that internet is superior in this regard, only that it has certain advantages that serve to reduce its deficiencies.
Quote Posted by Rug Burn Junky
By limiting variables and exaggerating short bursts of interaction, some patterns are easier to spot, mitigating the disadvantages of text based communication.
It's not really a controversial statement. It applies to a good number of posters and even to other linguistic quirks besides simply sarcasm.
And I'll even throw in hopper's pitch perfect restatement:
Quote Posted by hopper
What RBJ says is that written information lacks the secondary non-verbal information cues that face-to-face communication provides, and which helps us determine whether someone is being sarcastic or not - but that the very lack of such non-verbal cues in written information (emoticons etc. aside) lets us see behavioural patterns in the verbal communication itself, which in turn helps us in detecting sarcasm, provided we know the author well enough, thus making up for at least some of the loss due to the missing non-verbal cues?
Anyway, I'm done with you. You no longer amuse me and this is tedious even for me. Keep flailing away if you so choose.
Rug Burn Junky on 1/12/2009 at 19:43
Quote Posted by steo
Frankly, I agree with Kolya, but I'm not eager to get into a shit-slinging contest about it. I suspect I'm not alone.
RL > internet for the purposes of identifying sarcasm. Maybe it's easier for some to identify patterns when communication is limited to text, but that nowhere near makes up for tone, body language etc. and if you know someone in RL, you know when they're being sarcastic.
Then you too are misunderstanding what I wrote. I never once stated that the internet was > RL. I agree that it's quite the opposite. I only stated that certain aspects of internet communication mitigate its disadvantages.
Why is this so hard to understand?
steo on 1/12/2009 at 19:47
So the entirety of your argument is that pattern recognition is easier in text than face to face?
D'Juhn Keep on 1/12/2009 at 19:58
Quote Posted by Aerothorn
P.S. A lot more useful would be "TTLG Memberlist ordered by number of pissing matches with RBJ."
This would be fantastic, someone make it happen.
Thief13x and SubJeff must be up there.
