General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo sarcasm is really frowned upon here.
I hope this doesn't get taken right down. I am trying to explain something.
I put up a post to show just how ridiculous one woman's attack on Hillary Clinton was. I put it in a joke form saying, "Breaking news"
And I put a GIFY that came up when I typed, "Are you kidding me" into the GIFY maker. It was Kevin Spacey turning a bit and giving a deadpan look like he didn't give a crap what the other person was saying.
It was the stupid, inane thing that Juanita Broadrick said was Hillary's attack on her which was basically her, (Hillary) thanking Broadrick for all the help she had given them on the campaign. Broadrick was the one who asserted it was something in Hillary's tone that sounded menacing, (hence the Kevin Spacey deadpan look)
It was immediately taken down with the explanation that we do not promote right winged talking points.
I suppose maybe I went too far to use a title of "Breaking, Hillary's verbal assault on Juanita Broderick" I seriously thought people would read it and realize how fucking stupid it was.
Anyway, I just want to make things clear that I had no intention of supporting Ms. Broadrick. In fact, I have been gathering some information recently that really discredits her. One of them being her assertion that Hillary verbally threatened her.
EDIT: I just went back and read the 3 comments and 2 of them got my point.
jehop61
(1,735 posts)prefer if you post it as sarcasm somewhere. Check second of "smiles" tab and you'll find an emoji there that will keep you out of trouble
Warpy
(111,232 posts)and even over the top sarcasm can be taken literally since the far right lunatics top it within a day or two.
It's best to use the smilie here for the literal minded.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Warpy
(111,232 posts)but a lot of other people out there are not. For them, one has to label it.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)It's like putting a fig leaf on Michelangelo's David.
Iggo
(47,547 posts)Divine Discontent
(21,056 posts)you cheeky bastard!
lindysalsagal
(20,648 posts)malaise
(268,870 posts)demmiblue
(36,837 posts)Most of us smack our heads at those who are, well... challenged in that department.
You got the short end of the stick, it appears.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)Some people don't get sarcasm. You takes your chance.
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)For the humor impaired. Maybe just a humor smiley for the humor impaired.
Lochloosa
(16,062 posts)librechik
(30,674 posts)Last edited Wed Oct 19, 2016, 12:07 AM - Edit history (1)
Its 'an oldie but a goodie--not in the "DU smilies" list but we need it. Just remove the spaces from the
MicaelS
(8,747 posts)But I think a similar one that screams satire would be nice, too.
Cakes488
(874 posts)after the first debate I started calling Pence...Pu$$y Pence and I was told that I was being sexist and I was reported. I appealed and asked if I said Prick Pence would that also be sexist??? Well Lo and behold pussygate broke and that word as we all know was littered about every thread. I have not heard back on my appeal.
It does seem like everybody is concerned about being politically correct...which is great, but it can sometimes go too far in my book...such as the mere use of the word pussy I was labeled as being sexist.
procon
(15,805 posts)I read your post at tongue in cheek humor, but I was also thinking 'ruh-roh', this won't end well because the sarcasm thingy is missing. In these days thin skinned people, who are quick to take umbrage over anything, you need to shield yourself and add a cautionary asterisk with an explanation of 'sarcasm'.
Oops! Forgot the sarcasm thingy:
Response to Maraya1969 (Original post)
geek tragedy This message was self-deleted by its author.
Maraya1969
(22,474 posts)not trying to be disruptive. The best idea I got here is to use the sarcasm emoji
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)alerts should be saved for things that matter. In no way is this post disruptive.
Go Vols
(5,902 posts)maybe the alerter didn't know of the change?
Positive threads about Democratic Underground or its members are are permitted.
Threads complaining about Democratic Underground or its members; threads complaining about jury decisions, locked threads, suspensions, bannings, or the like; and threads intended to disrupt or negatively influence the normal workings of Democratic Underground and its community moderating system are not permitted.
OKNancy
(41,832 posts)Hayduke Bomgarte
(1,965 posts)There seems to be a sizable segment, here, that is unable to grasp sarcasm, humor or certain "profane" words when used for emphasis, and who also can't wait for even the most asinine excuse to alert on someone.
rug
(82,333 posts)sarcasmo
(23,968 posts)canetoad
(17,148 posts)And the system worked as it should. You know the jury rules: no user names or information; judge the post exactly as you see it written.
A question for you; If you saw that post from someone with a one post history and a joining date of today, how would you have voted?
Divine Discontent
(21,056 posts)I am stunned online at how completely missing the point some people are. SIGH....
I got a perfect score on a comprehension test that a college gave my senior class for some study. I was #1 overall, of course, but no one else got a perfect score. I am not always fully comprehending what some people are trying to imply - but my GOODNESS, if I'm unsure of their intentions, I simply ask, "did you mean this" or such...
Sadly, those with lesser comprehension levels often can get a bit touchy about missing out on a sarcastic joke...
Not your problem.