Sparc said:
I think this is the important point, here. Fenris asked in the OP for a link to the “source” material. sailor posted a link over an hour before Fenris posted. Now, I’m willing to accept that Fenris takes over an hour to compose a post, but it looks suspiciously like a case of “not reading the entire thread before posting” to me. Just sayin’, is all…
First, I want to make it clear that this isn’t just about Sparc. Others have done this before.
And I think I’ve dug up a thread in ATMB where I asked:
both Coldie and Tuba herself point-blank said that stirr.
Empahsis mine
Ok, parody threads aren’t exactly the same thing as playing devil’s advocate, but they’re pretty damned close.
I don’t want to see parody threads stopped or banned, Lib is an artist with them and Sparc’s was awfully good too, but I think that this implies that at minimum, posting a link to the parodied thread in the OP should be considered a must.
Fenris
PS, Necros: I already admitted I didn’t read the entire thread first. I shouldn’t have to when I’m responding directly to the OP. In GD or GQ you have to read the entire thread first. You don’t in most other forums, and in any case, I don’t expect the OP to be a hoax.
I do think that being explicit regarding the target of the parody ruins the humour. However, Sparc, I think part of the problem might be that you are a denizen of GD, and are submerged in what is said there, whereas not everyone else is.
Fenris,
Might I suggest that there is possibly a grey zone. Had I for instance let my thread run when it became obvious that the majority wasn’t catching on, I would agree that it could be equated to trolling. As it was I had good reason to believe that although some people were being wooshed, some people were catching on, which would lead to that most would eventually. Note that I stepped down and posted clarification as soon as I saw that this wasn’t happening, mostly due to your post, which indicated that I was wasting people’s time by not letting them in on the parody.
This is where we seem to disagree. As I said in my previous reply to dantheman, the use of the Pit varies, and I think we need to consider that fact. Parody is one of the known uses, albeit one of the rare ones. This warrants a certain measure of care in reading and posting.
No way. Playing devils advocate is a serious form of rhetoric that can easily be misconstrued as the real thing. Parody has the same nature in as much as that it can be misunderstood, but it is miles off in purpose, intent and form. I wasn’t inviting to debate the awful and bigoted points I was making, I was demonstrating exactly how god-awful and despicable they are - a whole other animal.
Sparc
Whaaa? I think you are confusing satire and parody.
Absolutely, Thomas Swift should not have included a “this is a joke” postscript to A Modest Proposal, because he was writing a satire.
But a parody is not a satire. A parody is a work of literature that imitates the style of another author or work for the purposes of ridicule or comic effect. A parody assumes the reader’s familiarity with the work or author being parodied.
If the reader is unfamiliar, the joke is lost. The Wind Done Gone may stand alone as a work of literature (or it may not - I haven’t read it), but the point of the work is to turn Gone With the Wind on its head and lampoon the assumptions of the original piece. If people didn’t know about GWTW, TWDG loses most of its bite.
Admittedly, I’m sure that nowhere in TWDG does the author say, “this is a parody of GWTW.” But the author didn’t have to - GWTW is part of popular culture. When someone parodies one of over 2 million posts on this board, there should be no assumption that readers have read the post being parodied.
Sua
No. I believe it’s a question of how you define parody. Parody will obviously provoke a reaction. Then there is also the subtlety of humor involved. Parody isn’t good if it isn’t damned close to the real thing, but skewed as to having exactly the reverse effect. It needs to be so close as for it to almost be believable, but still absurd enough in its emulation of the original to differ. Inevitably some people will not get it at first, but as I said, if you let that go on forever, you’re being mean spirited PLUS failing in making the point intended. Further parody always has a point, which is to demonstrate how fucked up or untenable the original is, the reaction by those whooshed proves that.
All that being said Sua and jjimm just made points that made me see a problem with my parody here examined. In my submersion in GD I think I took a little too much for granted that more people would get the parody without a blinking warning sign on it. That I appologize for.
Sparc
Wait a second…
Ha! Made you scroll down to see this! Aren’t I funny?
A last point of clarification from my side. In the event any of you think I was just trying to be funny, or show off my skills in parody;
Humor might have been my weapon, but the task of using that weapon to attack the offensive crap posted by ElJeffe was taken on with dead serious intent.
Sparc
Sparc: I’m in complete agreement with you that humor is a great weapon against buffoons like ElJeffe. All I’m saying is that without a link to the buffoon in question, it’s not effective.
Fenris
let me chime in here.
chime.
This is a written medium. and, as such, in some ways easier for people to understand, and yet in other ways, much harder. We have an accurate rendition of the specific words some one actually used, without any inflection. Hence the use of smilies, or (ahem) links in order to allow our true message to ring through.
I’ve been around for over 2 years now. and have (mumble mumble, apparently no personal life) quite a few posts, however, recently, I posted something in a pit thread which was open to misinterpretation (my fault), and even people who regularly knew me, have emailed me off the boards etc. were at least briefly taken aback.
Given that experience, I’d much rather have (as Fenris suggests) a link somewhere.
plus let’s not forget that there’s newbies and visitors to this place who will not have any frigging clue about your posting record and will simply react to what you said. If your intent is not to intentionally mislead people, get them to react, then please, by all means, select your actions accordingly.
If your intent is to allow people to falsely believe your post is your true opinion, then that’s trolling. Period.
(and the above goes double for whoever that poster is who recently has come along and some folks insist that they’re posting as a parody, yet they’ve -to my knowledge - never acknowledged that)
I am in need of help, desperate help. Everywhere I go, I think that I see trolls. I need to know once and for all form you, the smart and capable dopers, just what is a troll?
You see, there have been several threads of late (this one is a good example,, Another fine example is the pit thread about taggert ) where outrageous things are being said, presumably to provoke a reaction. And then people start to get pissed when in steps the OP or his apologists to say no-no it PARODY.
And this is the big point. There are people out there that actually believe outrageous, hateful things. If you post using their voice (but just joking, honest), you will start a pile on. Is that your point? Are you trying to make people mad? Are you getting some sort of hard-on by whooshing them? This critique also applies to the people who got the joke, and are now defending. This seems to me to be petty and small.
Oh Bollocks with it all!
If I should ever again, against better judgment venture to parody something or someone I’ll put a friggin’ warning label at the beginning of the OP .
[ol]CAUTION
CONTENTS MAY BE OFFENSIVE AND STINGING
This product has not been tested on an audience
and may cause irritation and cross ligament damage
in the sarcastically impaired or uninitiated reader.[/ol]
Don’t do that!! Its just fuel for sixteen more parody threads, and 37 more that parody those 16!!! Soon, parody threads will number in the millions, and their shear numbers will overwhelm us all, and then they gain sentience, and send cyborgs back in time to kill Sarah Conner…Doom!!! Doom!!! DOOM!!!
Sparc, all people are asking for is a link to the original thread. You don’t have to warn us about your post. 
Besides, I don’t get the impression that people are offended - and, as pointed out, you’re not the only one who’s done this recently. I’m only bitter because I fell for one of those things, when I should have known better. Still, a linky would have been oh-so-nice.
Sparc Once more: I thought your post was funny once I saw the original. Do what you think is best, but all I’m requesting is a link to the source so we can all see why it’s funny, as opposed to only those GDizens who read the original getting it. Sua said it best:
Fenris
Point somewhat taken Fenris. Glad you appreciated it in the end, and I’ll try to be more inclusive in the future.
And kudos and respect to dan for being candid.
Sparc
And now this ‘disgruntled Europhile’ will just piss off into the dark and bitter ‘heart of wildest Euroland’, hunker down in front of his ‘flickering 50hz monitor, sadly built to European standards’ and temporarily sink back into the murky waters that is the quagmire of great debates while he searches himself a real ‘European message board to subscribe to’ where his humor and ire might be more readily received. [?]
Here’s my Official Judgement on it:
Post a link to the thread or person you’re parodying. And make a note that it’s a link. Otherwise, it’s trolling, and it’s likely to get you warned and/or banned.
Lynn Bodoni
For the Straight Dope
Of course, sufficiently obtuse threads which attack the parody by becoming the parody are seen as MPSIMSish joke threads and get closed.
sigh
I hate parody threads.
I read it all and the link. I still don’t get it.
Oh, well.
Guess what?