Total Posts:34|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Petition To Make Airmax A Sexy Nun!

Ajabi
Posts: 1,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2014 2:36:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
More importantly I just wanted to discuss the policy about votes. I mean there are people who give votes (even correct ones) without providing any solid reason but their vote can stay.

For example I would be happy with any vote YYW may give, but lets say another person awards the same side and gives a sucky RFD I am not all right with. The problem is we cannot start moderating every single vote, unless a lenghty process of making a committee and granting it trust is done.

So I petition to make airmax a sexy nun so he can go around and spank people, anyone with meh?
lannan13
Posts: 23,017
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2014 2:39:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 2:36:07 PM, Ajabi wrote:
More importantly I just wanted to discuss the policy about votes. I mean there are people who give votes (even correct ones) without providing any solid reason but their vote can stay.

For example I would be happy with any vote YYW may give, but lets say another person awards the same side and gives a sucky RFD I am not all right with. The problem is we cannot start moderating every single vote, unless a lenghty process of making a committee and granting it trust is done.

So I petition to make airmax a sexy nun so he can go around and spank people, anyone with meh?

So you're purposing a character min. for debate votes?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2014 2:40:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 2:36:07 PM, Ajabi wrote:
More importantly I just wanted to discuss the policy about votes. I mean there are people who give votes (even correct ones) without providing any solid reason but their vote can stay.

For example I would be happy with any vote YYW may give, but lets say another person awards the same side and gives a sucky RFD I am not all right with. The problem is we cannot start moderating every single vote, unless a lenghty process of making a committee and granting it trust is done.

So I petition to make airmax a sexy nun so he can go around and spank people, anyone with meh?

Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sex nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).

1. Ajabi
2. JMK
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2014 2:41:13 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 2:40:49 PM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/22/2014 2:36:07 PM, Ajabi wrote:
More importantly I just wanted to discuss the policy about votes. I mean there are people who give votes (even correct ones) without providing any solid reason but their vote can stay.

For example I would be happy with any vote YYW may give, but lets say another person awards the same side and gives a sucky RFD I am not all right with. The problem is we cannot start moderating every single vote, unless a lenghty process of making a committee and granting it trust is done.

So I petition to make airmax a sexy nun so he can go around and spank people, anyone with meh?


Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sex nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).

1. Ajabi
2. JMK

*Sexy nun

Woops.
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
dynamicduodebaters
Posts: 191
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).

1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
DDD

Vote on my debates. Like this one!

"That moment where you're bored and want to do a debate, then you're doing four all at once."-Vedney
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2014 5:02:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Maybe we should maybe airmax TP. I'm not exactly comfortable with a town affiliation for such an admittedly scummy role.

Any thoughts?
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
ESocialBookworm
Posts: 14,354
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2014 5:24:00 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Vtl JMK.

Saying Max was a sex nun was a scum slip
Solonkr~
I don't care about whether an ideology is "necessary" or not,
I care about how to solve problems,
which is what everyone else should also care about.

Ken~
In essence, the world is fucked up and you can either ignore it, become cynical or bitter about it.

Me~
"BAILEY + SOLON = SAILEY
MY SHIP SAILEY MUST SAIL"

SCREW THAT SHIZ #BANNIE = BAILEY & ANNIE

P.S. Shipped Sailey before it was cannon bitches.
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2014 5:36:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 5:24:00 PM, ESocialBookworm wrote:
Vtl JMK.

Saying Max was a sex nun was a scum slip

Making a typo is a scum slip?

Two can play at that game.

You didn't place a period at the end of a declarative statement.

VTL Annie.
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
YYW
Posts: 36,242
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/22/2014 8:32:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 2:36:07 PM, Ajabi wrote:
More importantly I just wanted to discuss the policy about votes. I mean there are people who give votes (even correct ones) without providing any solid reason but their vote can stay.

For example I would be happy with any vote YYW may give,

Cheers, man.

but lets say another person awards the same side and gives a sucky RFD I am not all right with. The problem is we cannot start moderating every single vote, unless a lenghty process of making a committee and granting it trust is done.

So I petition to make airmax a sexy nun so he can go around and spank people, anyone with meh?
Ajabi
Posts: 1,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 12:43:28 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 2:39:42 PM, lannan13 wrote:
So you're purposing a character min. for debate votes?

Exactly why not make a voting system or something where the voter has to give a minimum character RFD, or write a few lines on each round independently.
Oryus
Posts: 8,280
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 12:45:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).

1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
: : :Tulle: The fool, I purposely don't engage with you because you don't have proper command of the English language.
: :
: : The Fool: It's my English writing. Either way It's okay have a larger vocabulary then you, and a better grasp of language, and you're a woman.
:
: I'm just going to leave this precious struggle nugget right here.
Daltonian
Posts: 4,797
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 1:23:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian

The sexy nun shoots all the bad voters with his sexy gun. Spanking can be interpreted as too pleasurable. No mercy. ^.^
F _ C K
All I need is "u", baby
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette

It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:16:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.

Solipsism is 3edgy4me.
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:19:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:16:27 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.

Solipsism is 3edgy4me.

Indeed it is, even more so than hardline materialism. I actually don't buy it.

(I'm assuming that I once again missed the sarcasm or the implicit pun, so at risk of seeming even more foolish, I'm going to issue my preemptive mea culpa.)
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:23:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:19:30 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:16:27 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.

Solipsism is 3edgy4me.

Indeed it is, even more so than hardline materialism. I actually don't buy it.

(I'm assuming that I once again missed the sarcasm or the implicit pun, so at risk of seeming even more foolish, I'm going to issue my preemptive mea culpa.)

I'm going to assume that foreign phrase means 'I am silly'.
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:24:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:23:39 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:19:30 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:16:27 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.

Solipsism is 3edgy4me.

Indeed it is, even more so than hardline materialism. I actually don't buy it.

(I'm assuming that I once again missed the sarcasm or the implicit pun, so at risk of seeming even more foolish, I'm going to issue my preemptive mea culpa.)

I'm going to assume that foreign phrase means 'I am silly'.

Yeah, pretty much.
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:25:14 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:24:43 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:23:39 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:19:30 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:16:27 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.

Solipsism is 3edgy4me.

Indeed it is, even more so than hardline materialism. I actually don't buy it.

(I'm assuming that I once again missed the sarcasm or the implicit pun, so at risk of seeming even more foolish, I'm going to issue my preemptive mea culpa.)

I'm going to assume that foreign phrase means 'I am silly'.

Yeah, pretty much.

I'm so clever :D
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:26:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:25:14 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:24:43 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:23:39 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:19:30 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:16:27 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.

Solipsism is 3edgy4me.

Indeed it is, even more so than hardline materialism. I actually don't buy it.

(I'm assuming that I once again missed the sarcasm or the implicit pun, so at risk of seeming even more foolish, I'm going to issue my preemptive mea culpa.)

I'm going to assume that foreign phrase means 'I am silly'.

Yeah, pretty much.

I'm so clever :D

Well, I did notice that we both sniped the same person earlier (twice each, might I add) so I feel somewhat inclined to take credit for that. :)
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:29:00 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:26:35 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:25:14 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:24:43 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:23:39 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:19:30 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:16:27 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.

Solipsism is 3edgy4me.

Indeed it is, even more so than hardline materialism. I actually don't buy it.

(I'm assuming that I once again missed the sarcasm or the implicit pun, so at risk of seeming even more foolish, I'm going to issue my preemptive mea culpa.)

I'm going to assume that foreign phrase means 'I am silly'.

Yeah, pretty much.

I'm so clever :D

Well, I did notice that we both sniped the same person earlier (twice each, might I add) so I feel somewhat inclined to take credit for that. :)

Yeah, I noticed. I wanted that other short, 1 round one, too. Stuff you for stealing my freelo.
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:29:39 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:29:00 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:26:35 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:25:14 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:24:43 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:23:39 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:19:30 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:16:27 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.

Solipsism is 3edgy4me.

Indeed it is, even more so than hardline materialism. I actually don't buy it.

(I'm assuming that I once again missed the sarcasm or the implicit pun, so at risk of seeming even more foolish, I'm going to issue my preemptive mea culpa.)

I'm going to assume that foreign phrase means 'I am silly'.

Yeah, pretty much.

I'm so clever :D

Well, I did notice that we both sniped the same person earlier (twice each, might I add) so I feel somewhat inclined to take credit for that. :)

Yeah, I noticed. I wanted that other short, 1 round one, too. Stuff you for stealing my freelo.

But the long one wasn't even long because he responded quickly lol.
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:31:29 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:29:39 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:29:00 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:26:35 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:25:14 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:24:43 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:23:39 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:19:30 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:16:27 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.

Solipsism is 3edgy4me.

Indeed it is, even more so than hardline materialism. I actually don't buy it.

(I'm assuming that I once again missed the sarcasm or the implicit pun, so at risk of seeming even more foolish, I'm going to issue my preemptive mea culpa.)

I'm going to assume that foreign phrase means 'I am silly'.

Yeah, pretty much.

I'm so clever :D

Well, I did notice that we both sniped the same person earlier (twice each, might I add) so I feel somewhat inclined to take credit for that. :)

Yeah, I noticed. I wanted that other short, 1 round one, too. Stuff you for stealing my freelo.

But the long one wasn't even long because he responded quickly lol.

Mmm yes, I saw that too, lol. I normally don't take the longer ones, without having a quick brainstorm of everything, just in case he/she provides a solid counter-response. I'm not sure if I'm being too scared.
JohnMaynardKeynes
Posts: 1,512
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:33:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:31:29 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:29:39 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:29:00 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:26:35 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:25:14 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:24:43 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:23:39 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:19:30 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:16:27 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:15:26 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:14:44 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:10:33 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:08:57 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:07:06 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:01:52 AM, Zarroette wrote:
At 7/22/2014 3:30:58 PM, dynamicduodebaters wrote:
Petition: We hereby petition the heads of this great establishment to afford to airmax the role of "sexy nun" (Each day phase you can go around and spank people for giving bad votes. You win with the town).
1. Ajabi
2. JMK
3. DDD
4. Oryus
5. Daltonian
6. Zarroette


It'll give him something to do, since he doesn't so all that much.

Ouchhh.

You should debate him on that!

Sarcasm is "a sharp, bitter, or cutting expression or remark; a bitter gibe or taunt."[1][2] Sarcasm may employ ambivalence,[3] although sarcasm is not necessarily ironic.[4] "The distinctive quality of sarcasm is present in the spoken word and manifested chiefly by vocal inflections".[5] The sarcastic content of a statement will be dependent upon the context in which it appears.[6]

Understanding the subtlety of this usage requires second-order interpretation of the speaker's or writer's intentions; different parts of the brain must work together to understand sarcasm. This sophisticated understanding can be lacking in some people with certain forms of brain damage, dementia and autism (although not always),[11] and this perception has been located by MRI in the right parahippocampal gyrus.[12][13] Research has shown that people with damage in the prefrontal cortex have difficulty understanding non-verbal aspects of language like tone, Richard Delmonico, a neuropsychologist at the University of California, Davis, told an interviewer.[14] Such research could help doctors distinguish between different types of neurodegenerative diseases, such as frontotemporal dementia and Alzheimer's disease, according to David Salmon, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego.[14]
In William Brant's Critique of Sarcastic Reason,[15] sarcasm is hypothesized to develop as a cognitive and emotional tool that adolescents use in order to test the borders of politeness and truth in conversation. Sarcasm recognition and expression both require the development of understanding forms of language, especially if sarcasm occurs without a cue or signal (e.g., a sarcastic tone or rolling the eyes). Sarcasm is argued to be more sophisticated than lying because lying is expressed as early as the age of three, but sarcastic expressions take place much later during development (Brant, 2012). According to Brant (2012, 145-6), sarcasm is
(a) form of expression of language often including the assertion of a statement that is disbelieved by the expresser (e.g., where the sentential meaning is disbelieved by the expresser), although the intended meaning is different from the sentence meaning. The recognition of sarcasm without the accompaniment of a cue develops around the beginning of adolescence or later. Sarcasm involves the expression of an insulting remark that requires the interpreter to understand the negative emotional connotation of the expresser within the context of the situation at hand. Irony, contrarily, does not include derision, unless it is sarcastic irony. The problems with these definitions and the reason why this dissertation does not thoroughly investigate the distinction between irony and sarcasm involves the ideas that: (1) people can pretend to be insulted when they are not or pretend not to be insulted when they are seriously offended; (2) an individual may feel ridiculed directly after the comment and then find it humorous or neutral thereafter; and (3) the individual may not feel insulted until years after the comment was expressed and considered.
Cultural perspectives on sarcasm vary widely with more than a few cultures and linguistic groups finding it offensive to varying degrees. Thomas Carlyle despised it: "Sarcasm I now see to be, in general, the language of the devil; for which reason I have long since as good as renounced it".[16] Fyodor Dostoyevsky, on the other hand, recognized in it a cry of pain: Sarcasm, he said, was "usually the last refuge of modest and chaste-souled people when the privacy of their soul is coarsely and intrusively invaded."[17] RFC 1855, a collection of guidelines for Internet communications, includes a warning to be especially careful with it as it "may not travel well." A professional translator has advised that international business executives "should generally avoid sarcasm in intercultural business conversations and written communications" because of the difficulties in translating sarcasm.[18]

Oh,

I'd issue my mea maxima culpa at this point, but I think it's pretty widely known that I can't comprehend sarcasm over the internet: heck, I bought for about a half hour that airmax, bladerunner, and Tuf were the same person.

They are the same person, aren't they? Didn't you watch Mikal's video?

Well, even if they were, at the end of the day it doesn't matter since only one mind exists, anyway.

Solipsism is 3edgy4me.

Indeed it is, even more so than hardline materialism. I actually don't buy it.

(I'm assuming that I once again missed the sarcasm or the implicit pun, so at risk of seeming even more foolish, I'm going to issue my preemptive mea culpa.)

I'm going to assume that foreign phrase means 'I am silly'.

Yeah, pretty much.

I'm so clever :D

Well, I did notice that we both sniped the same person earlier (twice each, might I add) so I feel somewhat inclined to take credit for that. :)

Yeah, I noticed. I wanted that other short, 1 round one, too. Stuff you for stealing my freelo.

But the long one wasn't even long because he responded quickly lol.

Mmm yes, I saw that too, lol. I normally don't take the longer ones, without having a quick brainstorm of everything, just in case he/she provides a solid counter-response. I'm not sure if I'm being too scared.

I've done that a few times as well, but I usually still take them if there's a lengthy character limit or the resolution is skewed heavily toward my side. I almost feel an obligation to take the riskier ones, though, to compensate for the freebies.
~JohnMaynardKeynes

"The sight of my succulent backside acts as a sedative for the beholder. It soothes the pain of life and makes all which hurts seem like bliss. I urge all those stressed by ridiculous drama on DDO which will never affect your real life to gaze upon my cheeks for they will make you have an excitement and joy you've never felt before." -- Dr. Dennybug

Founder of the BSH-YYW Fan Club
Founder of the Barkalotti
Stand with Dogs and Economics
Zarroette
Posts: 2,951
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/23/2014 2:36:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 7/23/2014 2:33:19 AM, JohnMaynardKeynes wrote:
At 7/23/2014 2:31:29 AM, Zarroette wrote:

Mmm yes, I saw that too, lol. I normally don't take the longer ones, without having a quick brainstorm of everything, just in case he/she provides a solid counter-response. I'm not sure if I'm being too scared.

I've done that a few times as well, but I usually still take them if there's a lengthy character limit or the resolution is skewed heavily toward my side. I almost feel an obligation to take the riskier ones, though, to compensate for the freebies.

Of course. So you do think about them, rather than size up the opponent's likelihood of response. I see that you still put the effort in, in the first round. So, we basically do the same thing :)

As if! That 100% is worth the shame of being a noob-sniper ;)