this post was submitted on 26 Mar 2024
632 points (98.9% liked)

Technology

59342 readers
5486 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RealFknNito 1 points 7 months ago (3 children)

I've met people who say things that should have a sarcastic inflection - without the inflection.

Yes, it's very hard to understand if they're joking and yes, we sometimes have to ask them if they're kidding, but not all the time. Some things are so absurd, so outlandish, phrased in such a way that explicitly explaining it was a joke can ruin the joke. Yes, clear communication in some instances should take priority over the joke in cases where being misunderstood as serious would have consequences, social or otherwise.

But I really don't think anyone here reasonably believed OP valued a phone with a ten year lifespan over the life of a child, nor that we should be using a foreign country as a waste dump until they're 'at capacity'. I think at some point you have to make the determination that something is so absurd that even if you can't tell it's sarcasm, you should be able to tell they're not serious.

[–] soloner 2 points 7 months ago

Would sarcasm without inflection be the same as deadpan? So maybe without the /s it's deadpan and with the /s it's sarcasm? :P

This has been a fun conversation to read. Such nuance.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

And this still doesn't account for the nutcases that say this stuff, actually believing it, and then get showered with validation because the rest of us assume it is sarcasm.

Edit: whether someone is being "too unreasonable to be serious" is unfortunately no longer a reliable way to tell what someone is actually trying to say.

[–] RealFknNito 0 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Then according to you, satire is dead. Time to hold a vigil.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

Hardly.

I'm saying satire that doesn't in some way tell you it's satire, can't be distinguished from the genuinely delusional.

And thereby the way satire tells you it is satire, needs to change. No part of the art requires that there be no way to truly tell, I would argue the opposite.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Agreed, but again, let's not pretend r/fuckthes has a point in it being dumb and unnecessary.

Using it removes even the slightest room for misinterpretation. That is always a good thing.

[–] RealFknNito 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

A large majority of the internet is dumb and unnecessary.

Jokes often rely on you being able to figure them out without explicit explanation, giving room for misinterpretation.

Removing the potential for misinterpretation is not always a good thing.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

Hard disagree.

Clarity has never ruined a joke.