985
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
985 points (99.2% liked)
Piracy: ꜱᴀɪʟ ᴛʜᴇ ʜɪɢʜ ꜱᴇᴀꜱ
54390 readers
246 users here now
⚓ Dedicated to the discussion of digital piracy, including ethical problems and legal advancements.
Rules • Full Version
1. Posts must be related to the discussion of digital piracy
2. Don't request invites, trade, sell, or self-promote
3. Don't request or link to specific pirated titles, including DMs
4. Don't submit low-quality posts, be entitled, or harass others
Loot, Pillage, & Plunder
📜 c/Piracy Wiki (Community Edition):
💰 Please help cover server costs.
 |
 |
|---|---|
| Ko-fi | Liberapay |
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I wish more people left the /s off.
With Poes Law and all it's kinda dumb to do that. Without hearing the tone it's too easy to think they're seriously stupid.
Announcing your sarcasm defeats sarcasm. If your sarcasm can't be inferred through context or some other means, the solution is simple...just don't be sarcastic.
Right. Thank God Shakespeare added /s to his plays.
Plays include tone from the actors. Similarly, books include tone from context. One sentence does not.
So, use more than one sentence.
I recommend you learn how to understand context. Otherwise I can't help you with basic language skills.
I recommend you learn how to make an argument that actually suits the context before commenting on the media literacy of others.
🤡
He's got a point though. Shakespeare goes into painstaking details to set up contexts and the portrayal of character emotions with the limited tools he had (remember these are 15th century plays).
A Reddit/Mastodon comment has very little background information to work from. You may know the comment they're replying to, but you don't know the content of their character. Are they a bit of a facetious troll? Do they genuinely believe what they are writing? Chances are you'll never know unless they explicitly state it.
Text communications also lack the nuances of vocal tones, of facial expressions, of body language. We have to explicitly state our emotions over text, and that's something many people aren't used to doing.
Like how I rolled my eyes when you said 'I recommend you learn how to understand context.', to which the main reasonable response is often 'what context? There is too often no context that decisively points one way or another'.
I'm sorry, but if someone's defense is "I can't read" there's not much you can do to help them.
It's not that they can't read, it's that you didn't put enough info in there to distinguish it from the genuine article.
If, for example, I were to satirise an antivaxxer over text (like here!) without being able to use any giveaway symbols like /s or alternate casing, I would have to go for the most batshit insane example, to the point where its not funny, just stupid. Something like 'I got vaccinated and turned into a fucking velociraptor. Jurassic Park is real! Don't believe the lies!'
Fair enough if that's your humour, but if I try to go for anything more subtle than this, I can easily be mistaken for a genuine antivaxxer, because it's not far off the BS they actually spew. In real life I can put on an exaggerated Karen voice with exaggerated resting-bitch-face and people will know I'm playing a character, rather than espousing my genuine beliefs. I can't do that over text though, so what's the alternative?
I didn't make the comment
He actually did. Shakespeare's plays are meant to be portrayed by actors and not read as a book, so there is plenty of written notes for how the actors should be expressing when they say their lines.
Ah yes, because something you know ahead of time is a comedy/tragegy/what have you is totally the same as randoms on the internet
How do you know that, though?