That would not be the same thing bj0rn. In fact, it would be the exact opposite. Interpretation is done by the reader. If one single reader (out of a considerable group) mistakenly assumes no sarcasm when it was intended (or the other way around, har-dee-fucking-har), it is only fair to reason that said reader is indeed “at fault”, if such a term is even applicable.
And please, don’t try to confuse us with using overstated sarcasm. You said you didn’t like sarcasm, therefore I assume you don’t use it, no matter how many emoticons you throw in. I will take all of your posts at face value, and as literally as possible. That’s what you always wanted, right?
If you don’t remember the answer to that, re-read your own damn OP.
thank you coldfire…i hope you know there is more to this thread than the op…remember this?
but you are correct, i really do not use sarcasm.
now, this time around i hope you are going to get it:
i gave you two examples, both the examples are identical, the only differance is that one post includes sarcasm the other one doesnt. in both examples the reader misunderstands given text. first he fails to see sarcasm intended, then sees sarcasm where there isnt any.
true that the examples are opposites, but its not the example that matters, its the reader and what he understands.
got it?
bj0rn - chickens for sale…!
(You know, I find it helps to copy it to WordPad and then fix all the punctuation errors, etc., so they’re not so distracting. Then I usually light some incense, sacrifice a chicken to the spirit of Kate Turabian, and get really drunk. Then it actually starts to make sense.) - notthemama
Hey, Wally, I tried to send you e-mail, but the address you have listed bounced back to me. Drop me a line at esprix@aol.com so I can write back, ok? Thanks.
Esprix, I’m afraid you’re right. Nothing can convince our stubborn little Viking. I think my work here is done. No doubt, bj0rn will try to bait another response out of me (and others?)… I hope I can refrain. I’m obviously wasting my time. His schpiel seems to be to respond to a totally true and irrefutable post by adding yet another totally nonsensical post, thus fishing for more “WTF”-responses. Trolling, perhaps? Either that, or he’s even dumber than we all can imagine.
Happy kake day, bj0rn.
Coldfire - windmill is logic, so joint is pen and wooden shoes is spelling - aw, fuck it.
calling a speaker dumb because you didnt understand him is…well, dumb!
and even though your post might have been true, it failed to see the truth in what it was replying to, thus not becoming truth in the given subject, but another subject entirely.
bj0rn - bolludagur = kakeday!
(You know, I find it helps to copy it to WordPad and then fix all the punctuation errors, etc., so they’re not so distracting. Then I usually light some incense, sacrifice a chicken to the spirit of Kate Turabian, and get really drunk. Then it actually starts to make sense.) - notthemama
