4 ms·

It was sarcasm.

• jshen 15y ago
  Hint, sarcasm doesn't come through in text very well.
  • bryanlarsen 15y ago
    It should if the word "sarcasm" is in the post.
    • jrockway 15y ago
      Was that sarcasm?
      • ph0rque 15y ago
        No no, the quotes desarcasmize it.
    • jshen 15y ago
      writing two paragraphs that could be serious before saying "obvious sarcasm aside" is not making things better. People are confused for two paragraphs, then are trying to figure out what is and isn't "obvious sarcasm". None of it was obvious. The first two paragraphs are not obvious sarcasm. There are a whole bunch of people that would have written it and been dead serious. sarcasm. Look, the word sarcasm is in my comment, which parts of it are sarcasm? Obvious sarcasm aside.
      • vacri 15y ago
        People that don't bother reading as far as the fifth sentence before responding kinda deserve whatever's coming to them.
        • jshen 15y ago
          You missed my point. It was not obvious to me what was or wasn't sarcasm. I'll be it wasn't obvious to most people. Saying "obvious sarcasm aside" does not make it obvious.
          • vacri 15y ago
            Usually when someone says "-foo- aside", they're referring to the immediately previous text. Add in to this that the terms in the immediately previous sentence were exaggerated, and it should at least give a hint at where the sarcasm lay.
            • jshen 15y ago
              "Add in to this that the terms in the immediately previous sentence were exaggerated" This isn't true, and that's my point. If you take out the last paragraph, it could easily be a serious statement from many people around here. "In Canonical's case, it's an even worse idea, isn't it? Why spend engineer resources targeting the tiny Android market rather than the huge desktop ... market?" What is exaggerated? Oh, maybe adding the word Linux makes it an exaggeration? I think my point holds that sarcasm doesn't come through well in text!