PeteMorris Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 That's one thing I've often wondered about... ... where do mods go on their holidays? (I guess some of us are just no good at this sarcasm thing... ) It depends if we're sent, or go voluntarily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloke Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 It depends if we're sent, or go voluntarily Advantage Mr Morris... ... new balls please! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Advantage Mr Morris... ... new balls please! I can always rely on you to make me smile MrB .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloke Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 I can always rely on you to make me smile MrB .... There's no need to be sarcastic... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 There's no need to be sarcastic... As if!!!!.... 'Polish' the thought. That's not what I wrote!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Hmmmm...I can see the point you're making! But veiled insults, however well disguised merely lowers the tone of your argument. Like stooping to their level , if you like. The example you gave would surely be reported and most likely removed anyway! It's actually not necessary to insult people either directly or indirectly....The 'report' link can be your friend! It saves you from having to resort to bickering and petty arguments....and ultimately the short holidays you mention. I'm of course not advocating it's use when someone says something that perhaps you don't agree with. Of course when you're heavily involved in perhaps a heated debate about whatever, it's difficult to just 'rise above' it. But surely better then ending up on a holiday? Getting back to the point though...I do think spelling and particularly punctuation can have a dramatic effect on any sarcasm that might be used. A comma or full stop in the wrong place, or something elementary misspelt can change the whole meaning of something that's written. The target of the sarcasm sees it as something totally different to the intended meaning, and then comes the fireworks! Yes but we're on a family friendly forum where eye contact is impossible. The alternative to verbal sarcasm is the SF advocated ":rolleyes:" smiley which SF has no problem with...even though it's sarcasm in a different media form and can have just as much a negative effect as verbal for the shall we say..sensitive among us. I have no problem with sarcasm if it's directed at the comment. If someone wishes to interpret that sarcasm as a personal comment then they would need to read the text. Surely to be fair the text would also need to be scrutinized by moderation before rather than press ban because of their own possible suspect bias. A recent prime example was Glenda Jacksons attack on Thatcherism which the right went into a fit of rage and instantly interpreted it as an attack on Thatcher..which the speaker (moderation) swiftly put to rights in defense of Glenda Jackson. Excellent moderation in my view...although he did moderate with a slight look of sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeteMorris Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Yes but we're on a family friendly forum where eye contact is impossible. The alternative to verbal sarcasm is the SF advocated ":rolleyes:" smiley which SF has no problem with...even though it's sarcasm in a different media form and can have just as much a negative effect as verbal for the shall we say..sensitive among us. I have no problem with sarcasm if it's directed at the comment. If someone wishes to interpret that sarcasm as a personal comment then they would need to read the text. Surely to be fair the text would also need to be scrutinized by moderation before rather than press ban because of their own possible suspect bias. A recent prime example was Glenda Jacksons attack on Thatcherism which the right went into a fit of rage and instantly interpreted it as an attack on Thatcher..which the speaker (moderation) swiftly put to rights in defense of Glenda Jackson. Excellent moderation in my view...although he did moderate with a slight look of sarcasm. Ah, but the good ol' roll eyes smiley would always be preceded with some kind of sarcastic comment. Presumably that's what it's there for, to 'indicate' that the previous sentence is 'sarcasm' It's one I rarely use to be honest...I also dislike the 'loopy' one!.....That's one that definitely winds people up! Moderating in the houses of parliament is somewhat different to doing it in a forum though. How many MP's do you see calling each other <insert word of choice> in the commons? Yes it can be a bit of a bear garden (wonder where that phrase comes from?)..but this forum is a different ball game entirely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johncocker Posted April 11, 2013 Share Posted April 11, 2013 Ummmm...can someone translate please? pant-y-wacco adj.) The final state of mind of a retired colonel before they come to take him away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.