I do. Simply to avoid the annoyance of someone missing obvious clues that scream “this is sarcastic and ironic, should not be taken literally!” and creating drama out of nowhere.
This is a very short story about sarcasm:
Ted opposes racist rants.
Yesterday - Ted posted a few exaggerated racist rants (sometimes with the /s).
2,177 people saw Ted’s racist rants.
-
50% of them guessed he was joking.
-
98% of them would not have seen a racist rant yesterday, if it weren’t for Ted’s little gag.
So the question is:
Despite the sarcasm… isn’t Ted just spreading more of what he honestly deplores?
Is Ted subverting his own integrity?
Why not say how we actually feel?
i think there’s merit to sarcasm depending how it’s done. satire can be a powerful tool to poke holes into ideas.
but like many things in life, you need tact and a bit of self awareness
I agree, there is a time for purposeful sarcasm.
To me, it requires two conditions:
-
A person has already expressed their real perspective to a specific ‘opponent’, and
-
That specific opponent cannot see the hole in their own logic.
This Norm MacDonald radio clip is a good example.
He explains his true perspective, and only switches to sarcasm for one sentence (at 5:25), to show the opponent how she is being goofy [and it works].
His foundation of sincerity gives context to the sarcasm.
Conversely - nowadays - a common ‘communication style’ is to just spray aimless sarcasm at distant or imaginary foes,
which (to me) reflects a deeper cultural issue…
a hiding behind mockery, a suppression of real constructive bravery,
just dunking on one-dimensional charicatures of strangers (who might not actually exist).
[So I agree with you - there are times for purposeful sarcasm.]
-
-
On here, for pretty much every opinion you can find someone who supports it. Sarcasm can really only be understood by people who know you, as they can compare it against what you usually say and do. The pure text form makes it even harder to understand sarcasm, as it removes any cues in your voice or facial expression.
It might somewhat ruin the joke, but in an environment like this, you have to be blunt if you want people to understamd you’re being sarcastic, for example by adding a tag like “/s”.
I don’t think it ruins the joke nor does it bother me. If it helps people see the joke it’s fine. Also it’s probably useful for those who have a hard time understanding others, like people with autism.
I do, because I care about people who may not have the ability to recognize satire for any number of reasons (neurodivergence being one)
In most cases they tend to be nicer people than ones who say the tag is unnecessary, anyway
Yes. /s
Wait.
I try to avoid it and be obvious in how I phrase stuff. Though sometimes I can’t find the right words to make the sarcasm clear that would be obvious in my voice so that’s when I do add a tag.
I don’t, but I know that I’m rolling the dice when I do it that way, and I’m willing to live with the consequences.
And I say this as someone who regularly misses sarcasm when it’s delivered to me in person :)
That comment was some very obvious sarcasm. There will always be a few idiots, don’t worry about those.
But I do think /s has its place around autism communities because many of those people really can’t tell.
No, absolutely never. /s
Came here to say this.
/s is like explaining a joke you just made right away.
I saw your comment in the wild, and it seemed pretty obvious considering the context and the references to North Korea, so I don’t think it was necessary.
Having said that, the tag helps when tone of voice is missing in text, and for people with autism who may struggle to pick up on the clues, so it is a useful tag to avoid confusion. Use if you feel it’s necessary. Edits work in other instances when needed.
As a person in a world where some people honestly believe crazy things like that the Earth is flat, it’s entirely reasonable for non-disabled people to have trouble telling sarcasm from a genuine reply too! Some time ago, a long screed on why the Earth is flat would be taken as sarcasm because it’s so outlandish, but nowadays I need the /s tag to determine whether you’re joking or if you’re a flat-Earther genuinely holding this belief. Remember Poe’s Law (warning for TVTropes link): satire of extreme views becomes indistinguishable from genuinely holding extreme views.
As an autistic person, I will admit that I can usually pick up on sarcasm, both in real life and online. But a good deal of us struggle with that, so it’s disheartening to see people calling others idiots for needing an /s tag. And I’m sure most people who can usually detect sarcasm have still encountered situations where it’s ambiguous. Clarification is always nice.
If I interpret a post as sarcastic, the addition or omission of an /s does nothing for me. Doesn’t make it less funny if I already knew it was sarcastic. I guess I’ll personally never see how including the /s makes it less funny, but given so many attest to it as a reason why they won’t use /s I figure it’s a real phenomenon.
I don’t use /s unless I think it might be ambiguous to most people as to whether I am being sarcastic or not. I’m fine with people who do use it and don’t use it. My only objection is to passing judgment on those who want an /s or use one. Some people are disabled. Some people are learning English as a second language. Some peoples’ sarcasm is incredibly ambiguous. Some people rely on tone of voice, body language, and context to determine sarcasm; and we lose the first two in online communication. Sometimes the context you post in is not enough to make it clear you are being sarcastic. People who use /s may have these people in mind, and prefer being clear to potentially being misunderstood. Not sure how clarifying your intention is an indicator of any kind of bad trait, such as cowardice. At most, I’ll it means you aren’t well-versed enough in communication or English to let your words speak for themselves without an explicit statement of intent.
I have the opposite problem where people think I’m being sarcastic, but I’m not. Is there a tag for that?
/s has been around forever, but zoomer/tumblr types have taken it and built an entire tone indicator system around it. So yes, it exists; the tag you’d want is /gen.
But… tone indicators are not well known or commonly used outside that demographic, so using them will make people assume you’re a certain age or type of person, and you may not be comfortable with that.
Here’s a jan Misali video that’s somewhat relevant to your second paragraph
Mmm could you say a bit more? I’m too exhausted tonight to commit to an 18-minute watch based only on “somewhat relevant.”
From my POV, as a person coming up on 40, I just don’t want to make myself seem younger than I am to such a degree that teens and tweens might feel more comfortable approaching me as a casual friend.
Totally, fair enough. It’s specifically about the /hj tone indicator, how it is mostly useless because of its ambiguity and it not being known by people in general, and how that extends to most tone indicators. It’s basically what you said but goes way more in depth (almost crazily so but that’s sorta their thing)
Personally, I don’t use tone indicators for pretty much the same reasons as what you said above. I also think that anything that could be conveyed using them is probably just better off being spelled out
Appreciate the explanation! I’ll put on the watch list for another time.
Hell no, let’s please leave that shit on Reddit.
Yeah. I’m autistic and so sarcasm can be hard for me to read/express in person, let alone in text form.
