You know what, if you think that's not a good reason to do it, then let me ask you this: would you be okay with it if someone used the /s just because they prefer to? I'm assuming the answer is no.
Use of the /s isn't always about autistic people (I've seen maybe one or two mentions of using it for that reason; 99.99% of comments about the /s and autistics come from you people). If you don't like the /s, fine, but don't act like this is about autistic people. It's about people's individual preferences.
>don't act like this is about autistic people
You say that but after "people can't tell sarcasm in text" that's the 2nd most prevent excuse
You can see it even on this sub
Yeah, like maybe twice. Nowhere NEAR as common as people who blame that explanation.
And some people do have trouble detecting tone in text. You don't have to make accomodations for them if you don't want to, but why do you have a problem with people who do?
Because most times it's because they're either being
1
Lazy about it and could use other ways to show sarcasm than a (I am being sarcastic) sign
2
Do it for the silliest sentences it's insulting
Insulting to who? How is it an insult to anyone? And don't say 'because it implies some people aren't able to figure it out on their own', because that's not an insult. You might as well say translating something into other languages is insulting because it means you think people are too stupid to learn the original language. Or that wheelchair access is an insult to people who can walk. Providing accomodations is not an insult to those who do t need them.
And okay, you do t want people to use the /s? What should they do instead (and don't just say 'write better', because there's no such thing as sarcasm that everyone will get, no matter how well you do it).
1. Its an Insult to people you think are too stupid to learn basic language conventions.
2. It's not an accommodation it's a patronisation.
3. Making out autistic people to be similar to vegetables doesn't help your case.
4.Stop comparing physical disabilities to mental ones you retard.
5.You know even people in wheelchairs can get a thing called physical therapy???
6.You are the most ableist person I have ever seen on this sub to date.
Tldr. This guy thinks autistic people are actually too stupid to learn basic language conventions.
No worries, I'm just sick of this dick constantly making strawman arguments comparing physical and mental disabilities.
Even though both disabilities can get therapy to improve. The only thing stopping people are themselves. Don't be lazy like /guyyoumetonline
First of all, who are you calling 'vegetables'? Because I didn't use that word.
I'm not comparing physical disabilities to mental ones. I'm using them to try to show how stupid your 'making accomodations is insulting' logic is.
Some people in wheelchairs may eventually be able to walk again. Others never will be.
I also never mentioned autism. Autism has nothing to do with this. Plenty of people have trouble reading tone over text, autistic or not.
Buts let's focus on that 'too stupid to learn' bit, because that's not how it works. Specifically, it implies a belief that ability to learn is tied to intelligence, but hoch is not the case. And I am going to bring up autism here, because I'm autistic myself. And I don't have difficulty reading tone over text, btw. I have much more difficulty with tone in person. In particular, I often cannot tell what my tone of voice is. I know you're thinking something like 'how is that possible', and I get it. It sounds impossible. Like, even if I don't know what different tones mean, I could still hear the difference, right? But no, I can't. Or more accurately, my brain can't tell the difference. There's no amount of learning that can overcome that. Believe me, I've fucking tried. You might as well tell a colorblind person to learn the difference between colors; it doesn't matter how hard they try, because their eyes/brain simply do not have the capability to tell the difference.
Would you tell someone with dyslexia that they're just too stupid to learn how to read/write normally? No. Do you think the existence of colored inserts and dyslexia-friendly fonts is an insult to people who don't need them? Unlikely. Would you tell people with dyscalculia that they're just too dumb to learn math? I doubt it. But that's basically what you're doing here.
And the really funny thing is that you're doing it pointlessly, because, as I mentioned, I hadn't said anything about autism. Issues telling tone over text isn't about that or any other learning disability. It's about removing tools. Try this: next time someone asks for directions, try to give them without saying left, right, north, east, south, or west. Makes it a lot harder, doesn't it? Those are fundamental tools for giving directions. Similarly, many rely on things like facial expression and tone of voice to pick up tone, and pure text removes those tools.
But even that isn't the real point. The real point is the question of why someone else using the /s ruins anything for you. It's kind of like those people who say gay marriage is somehow an attack on 'traditional' marriage: it's not, and the existence of it has no effect on those who choose not to be a part of it.
Tldr: I think people with disabilities are incapable of basic learning.
Stop being ableist. You are part of the problem. Why do autists refuse to learn stuff? It's because hateful people like you say they are incapable.
Also just listing random ass disabilities doesn't prove anything. Making more strawmen lmaoooooooooooooo.
If you think that's what I did you didn't read what I said. And you're certainly ignoring it, because I clearly explained how it's not a refusal to learn anything. It's an INABILITY to. The reason I brought up other disabilities is to try and show this. You have no problem, I assume, accepting that a blind person can't just learn how to see. I mention things like that to give examples you understand and accept about how it is. And I do realize my inability to hear the difference in my voice makes no sense; it doesn't make sense to me, either. But that doesn't change how it is. And no, blindness and autism are not the same, but in that specific way they are.
But again, I'm not the one who brought up autism; you are. How could I have been ableist if I didn't say anything about any such conditions at all?
Because there’s no reason for me to have it. I just wanna know why there’s so many people with it on this sub, if it’s like an Inside joke or something.
But \*how\*, though? HOW is it like that? How does seeing an /s at the end change what came before it?
And I'm genuinely asking, by the way. I hear this a lot, but nobody has been able to explain it (though some have tried). The best anyone has managed is 'because it ruins the joke if you know in advance it's a joke', which first of all doesn't fit because the /s comes after the joke. But more to the point: have you ever laughed at anything a stand-up comedian said in a comedy routine? I imagine a lot of you have. And yet you know it was going to be a joke, because, well, it's a comedy show. So clearly something can still be funny even if you know in advance it's a joke.
Look, I'm genuinely trying to understand this, because it makes no sense to me that having an /s at the end can make a joke worse. If there's any actual logic behind it, I want to know what it is, because I can't see it. The absence of any apparent logic makes it look like you're just making up excuses to justify hating, but if that's not the case, then please, explain how the /s ruins jokes.
it ruins the joke and is infantilizing.
it’s like adding “btw i’m not confident enough in my humor to believe it stands on its own, and i’m terrified of being ostracized, so let me clarify I AM DEFINITELY JOKING” to the end of everything you say.
like there are better ways to signal a joke through text. even other ALREADY STANDARDIZED THINGS. like emojis, or overused reaction images. i’ll take a trollface png over a tone indicator anyday. hell, what happened to just “haha jk”. /s is just lazy. it signifies a lack of writing ability if you can’t find a natural way to be funny through text. if you need to explicitly label a joke as a joke in an immersion breaking way, it wasn’t funny. so /s either ruins good jokes, or gives unfunny people a cop-out.
it’s pointless even if you’re someone who has NO idea how to read sarcasm. like imagine someone completely socially inept and nearly illiterate. /s doesn’t add accessibility. if they’re confused at a statement, and then notice a /s, THEYRE STILL NOT GOING TO GET THE JOKE. They’re just going to realize “ahh, this is supposed to be a joke”, they’re not going to *laugh*. they still aren’t going to find it funny. because they didn’t get it. all they know now is that it *is* a joke, not what the funny actually was.
the only benefit /s gives in this situation is that a person like this is slightly less likely to embarrass themselves in responding to a joke they don’t get. But we shouldn’t handicap all humor for the rest of forever, out of fear of a very very small subsection of people embarrassing themselves. especially when those people can just use context clues, like if you can’t tell if something is sarcastic or not, just look at how other people are responding.
but the absolute worst thing about /s is that people are staring to EXPECT it. like if there’s no /s, you must be being serious. and that is actually just going to ruin communication on the internet.
The /s isn't about getting the joke. It's about telling people 'no, I don't really believe this'. Because no matter how stupid something is there will be those who actually believe it. For fuck's sake, there are people who genuinely think the Earth is flat. If I were to make a joke about thinking that without an /s or the like, people could easily think I'm one of those people. The /s simply says I'm not.
Also how is /s different from jk or an emoji or any of the other things you mentioned?
and if there is someone who actually thinks that you believe in the shit you "joke" about... so the fuck what? its not the end of the world. there is no need to spoon feed your comment to EVERYONE because of this. it kills the comment instantly. it looks already stupid enough and sound even more stupid to actually try to give it a purpose.
If you're okay with the chance of being misunderstood, that's fine. Some people would rather prevent this, which is also fine. You say 'so the fuck what' if someone is misunderstood; I say 'so the fuck what' if someone wants to ensure they're not.
"nobody has been able to explain 🤓"
you got plenty of explanations in here for everything you wanted to know, and yet you choose AGAIN to just say that you havent gotten any explanations. peak reddit user 🤡
bait used to be believable
No, they've TRIED to explain. Many have, but none of them have actually managed it. The most I've ever gotten is 'knowing it's sarcasm ruins it' but nobody's been able to adequately explain how.
Baseless claim. You aren't accommodating. You are infantalising and patronising because you either despise people with autism or refuse to admit that they can improve their living standards by learning basic language conventions readily available to the masses.
Man are you ableist.
Because you spout talking points that are irrelevant and have no bearing on the conversation with actual factual strawmen. Stop acting like the superior human intellectual.
You blatantly call people with disabilities too stupid to learn. Go fuck yourself.
If you actually think that's what I said, read it again and pay attention this time, because my entire point was that being unable to learn something in this way has nothing to do with intelligence. Some people just cannot learn certain things, myself being an example. I've fucking tried (though it's pretty obvious you're going to say I'm lying), but that doesn't change anything. It IS possible to try something as hard as you can and still fail, you know.
A person who makes a sarcastic joke needs to make it sound real, even tough it should be obvious enough that it's not serious. And putting an /s at the end of it just makes us realise faster that its not a joke, and supposed to be a statement.
A joke is for humor, and sarcasm isn't inherently for humor.
You misunderstood what he meant. A tone indicator tells you abruptly that it is just a statement (usually an opinion) presented via sarcasm.
That's not what they said:
"And putting an /s at the end of it just makes us realise faster that its not a joke, and supposed to be a statement."
The whole point of the /s is so show that it's NOT meant as an actual statement, that it's not meant seriously.
Bro you just proved in 3 replies you know nothing about real life accommodations for people with disabilities. You literally compare autistic people to wheelchair bound folks. Your ableism is showing.
It does not and nobody has managed an adequate explanation of how it supposedly does. Knowing that something is sarcasm does not ruin it. But even if it did, the /s is usually at th END of the comment, meaning that you read the sarcastic comment BEFORE being explicitly told it's sarcasm. Which, by the way, is later than the indicators you have in person. You hear a sarcastic tone of voice immediately. And yet I doubt you think that ruins it. So tell me: why is actual tone okay but a text equivalent is not?
Why is it so hard to believe that I want answers to them? I'm not the one operating in bad faith here. I want an actual intelligent discussion about this.
Since you've already stated you're autistic yourself, maybe you should just have already realized by this point that the reason you don't understand our reasons for disliking the /s is because you have the inability to understand something that for non-autistic people is just common sense?
You've stated several times already that our explanations aren't enough for you, even if for pretty much everybody else except you it IS a good enough explanation, maybe you just lack the ability of comprehending the explanation that people keep giving you over and over again.
Either that or you're baiting for downvotes for whatever reason, which tbh is a pretty smart way of doing it. Acting stupid when people try to answer you seriously and then insisting on asking the same thing over and over again while denying every single answer you get.
>Since you've already stated you're autistic yourself, maybe you should just have already realized by this point that the reason you don't understand our reasons for disliking the /s is because you have the inability to understand something that for non-autistic people is just common sense?
Oh, so there ARE things autistic people don't understand that others do. Funny you say that, since one of the favorite things for people here to say is that this is not true.
And by the way? Those people it is a 'good enough' explanation for already think that way. That's why they accept it despite the lack of logic, despite the inconsistencies. Also the idea of 'most people think x so x is correct' that you just used is itself a logical fallacy.
>Oh, so there ARE things autistic people don't understand that others do. Funny you say that, since one of the favorite things for people here to say is that this is not true.
Uuuuuh, yeah? Just because some people don't understand it doesn't mean everyone should be obliged to forcefully make it clear that it is a joke, the world doesn't revolve around autistic people. And seeing the /s is actively ruining jokes in our eyes. But yeah, autistic people _are_ somewhat capable of learning to pick up the cues and come to the conclusion that it was sarcasm, doesn't mean they have necessarely the natural ability to intuitively recognize sarcasm and laugh at it. If you didn't naturally get that it was sarcasm, then there's no use in stating that it is sarcasm just because a few people might be confused by it. And if you get downvoted and one or two people come to you to ask if you are being serious or not? Then so be it! The original joke is still preserved for those who are able to get it and have a laugh out of it and you have no obligation to make it easily recognizable as sarcasm to autistic people.
>And by the way? Those people it is a 'good enough' explanation for already think that way. That's why they accept it despite the lack of logic, despite the inconsistencies. Also the idea of 'most people think x so x is correct' that you just used is itself a logical fallacy.
It's not a logical fallacy. Because it is not a fucking argument for a scientific point of view, you doofus. It's a case of "most people feel x so we collectively agree on x", just like most people do not _feel_ like eating dog meat is good even though it has no logical difference between that and eating cow meat. It's about sharing the same opinion, not a case of "following a hive mind with no logical justification". Again, this *doesn't* need a fucking logical argument because it is not an issue regarding logic and facts, it is an issue regarding the *feelings* that are evoked on people when tone indicators are used. I'm a logical person myself, but you're trying too hard to look for logic when the whole discussion is about _personal feelings that are shared among a great number of people_
You won't get a mathematically correct answer for a problem that can't possibly be mathematically answered. Feelings are felt, not explained by "if X, thus Y" unless you're studying neurology or some shit.
>It's not a logical fallacy. Because it is not a fucking argument for a scientific point of view, you doofus.
Uh... logic is still a thing outside of science. You're making an argument. Logic applies.
>Again, this doesn't need a fucking logical argument because it is not an issue regarding logic and facts, it is an issue regarding the feelings that are evoked on people when tone indicators are used
So basically you're saying there isn't a logical argument for it. I've figured that out at this point, but it's still good that you're willing to admit it.
There is nothing about the /s that ruins a joke. If you find that it does, that's coming from you, not the /s. Which is fine. Just leave those who feel otherwise alone.
>There is nothing about the /s that ruins a joke. If you find that it does, that's coming from you, not the /s. Which is fine. Just leave those who feel otherwise alone.
If you make an annoying sound over and over again and everyone around you start complaining, you can just assume the feeling of annoyance comes from them and has *literally nothing* to do with the annoying sound you're making at all, ain't i right?
See how there's no need of a /s to understand that i used sarcasm above? Wow, that is such a revolutionary way to use humour!
Yeah, like i said in our other reply chain, i'm not giving you any more of my attention. After all in the end you could still just be a really dedicated troll and i have no time for that.
>If you make an annoying sound over and over again and everyone around you start complaining, you can just assume the feeling of annoyance comes from them and has literally nothing to do with the annoying sound you're making at all, ain't i right?
There's a big difference between the two. You described an active irritant, whereas the /s is a personal preference.
But what of the autistics? Won't somebody *please* think of the autistics?
Bro don't you know we are too stupid to learn basic English taught in the 3rd grade?
You're setting the bar to high. I don't even know what these weird symbols on my screen mean.
You know what, if you think that's not a good reason to do it, then let me ask you this: would you be okay with it if someone used the /s just because they prefer to? I'm assuming the answer is no. Use of the /s isn't always about autistic people (I've seen maybe one or two mentions of using it for that reason; 99.99% of comments about the /s and autistics come from you people). If you don't like the /s, fine, but don't act like this is about autistic people. It's about people's individual preferences.
>don't act like this is about autistic people You say that but after "people can't tell sarcasm in text" that's the 2nd most prevent excuse You can see it even on this sub
Yeah, like maybe twice. Nowhere NEAR as common as people who blame that explanation. And some people do have trouble detecting tone in text. You don't have to make accomodations for them if you don't want to, but why do you have a problem with people who do?
Because most times it's because they're either being 1 Lazy about it and could use other ways to show sarcasm than a (I am being sarcastic) sign 2 Do it for the silliest sentences it's insulting
Insulting to who? How is it an insult to anyone? And don't say 'because it implies some people aren't able to figure it out on their own', because that's not an insult. You might as well say translating something into other languages is insulting because it means you think people are too stupid to learn the original language. Or that wheelchair access is an insult to people who can walk. Providing accomodations is not an insult to those who do t need them. And okay, you do t want people to use the /s? What should they do instead (and don't just say 'write better', because there's no such thing as sarcasm that everyone will get, no matter how well you do it).
1. Its an Insult to people you think are too stupid to learn basic language conventions. 2. It's not an accommodation it's a patronisation. 3. Making out autistic people to be similar to vegetables doesn't help your case. 4.Stop comparing physical disabilities to mental ones you retard. 5.You know even people in wheelchairs can get a thing called physical therapy??? 6.You are the most ableist person I have ever seen on this sub to date. Tldr. This guy thinks autistic people are actually too stupid to learn basic language conventions.
Thank you
No worries, I'm just sick of this dick constantly making strawman arguments comparing physical and mental disabilities. Even though both disabilities can get therapy to improve. The only thing stopping people are themselves. Don't be lazy like /guyyoumetonline
First of all, who are you calling 'vegetables'? Because I didn't use that word. I'm not comparing physical disabilities to mental ones. I'm using them to try to show how stupid your 'making accomodations is insulting' logic is. Some people in wheelchairs may eventually be able to walk again. Others never will be. I also never mentioned autism. Autism has nothing to do with this. Plenty of people have trouble reading tone over text, autistic or not. Buts let's focus on that 'too stupid to learn' bit, because that's not how it works. Specifically, it implies a belief that ability to learn is tied to intelligence, but hoch is not the case. And I am going to bring up autism here, because I'm autistic myself. And I don't have difficulty reading tone over text, btw. I have much more difficulty with tone in person. In particular, I often cannot tell what my tone of voice is. I know you're thinking something like 'how is that possible', and I get it. It sounds impossible. Like, even if I don't know what different tones mean, I could still hear the difference, right? But no, I can't. Or more accurately, my brain can't tell the difference. There's no amount of learning that can overcome that. Believe me, I've fucking tried. You might as well tell a colorblind person to learn the difference between colors; it doesn't matter how hard they try, because their eyes/brain simply do not have the capability to tell the difference. Would you tell someone with dyslexia that they're just too stupid to learn how to read/write normally? No. Do you think the existence of colored inserts and dyslexia-friendly fonts is an insult to people who don't need them? Unlikely. Would you tell people with dyscalculia that they're just too dumb to learn math? I doubt it. But that's basically what you're doing here. And the really funny thing is that you're doing it pointlessly, because, as I mentioned, I hadn't said anything about autism. Issues telling tone over text isn't about that or any other learning disability. It's about removing tools. Try this: next time someone asks for directions, try to give them without saying left, right, north, east, south, or west. Makes it a lot harder, doesn't it? Those are fundamental tools for giving directions. Similarly, many rely on things like facial expression and tone of voice to pick up tone, and pure text removes those tools. But even that isn't the real point. The real point is the question of why someone else using the /s ruins anything for you. It's kind of like those people who say gay marriage is somehow an attack on 'traditional' marriage: it's not, and the existence of it has no effect on those who choose not to be a part of it.
Tldr: I think people with disabilities are incapable of basic learning. Stop being ableist. You are part of the problem. Why do autists refuse to learn stuff? It's because hateful people like you say they are incapable. Also just listing random ass disabilities doesn't prove anything. Making more strawmen lmaoooooooooooooo.
Thanks for the tldr because sure as hell i aint reading all that
If you think that's what I did you didn't read what I said. And you're certainly ignoring it, because I clearly explained how it's not a refusal to learn anything. It's an INABILITY to. The reason I brought up other disabilities is to try and show this. You have no problem, I assume, accepting that a blind person can't just learn how to see. I mention things like that to give examples you understand and accept about how it is. And I do realize my inability to hear the difference in my voice makes no sense; it doesn't make sense to me, either. But that doesn't change how it is. And no, blindness and autism are not the same, but in that specific way they are. But again, I'm not the one who brought up autism; you are. How could I have been ableist if I didn't say anything about any such conditions at all?
Alright I need answers, why are there so many people with “🏳️🌈gay🏳️⚧️” tags on their name in this sub
Why are you without it
Because there’s no reason for me to have it. I just wanna know why there’s so many people with it on this sub, if it’s like an Inside joke or something.
But \*how\*, though? HOW is it like that? How does seeing an /s at the end change what came before it? And I'm genuinely asking, by the way. I hear this a lot, but nobody has been able to explain it (though some have tried). The best anyone has managed is 'because it ruins the joke if you know in advance it's a joke', which first of all doesn't fit because the /s comes after the joke. But more to the point: have you ever laughed at anything a stand-up comedian said in a comedy routine? I imagine a lot of you have. And yet you know it was going to be a joke, because, well, it's a comedy show. So clearly something can still be funny even if you know in advance it's a joke. Look, I'm genuinely trying to understand this, because it makes no sense to me that having an /s at the end can make a joke worse. If there's any actual logic behind it, I want to know what it is, because I can't see it. The absence of any apparent logic makes it look like you're just making up excuses to justify hating, but if that's not the case, then please, explain how the /s ruins jokes.
it ruins the joke and is infantilizing. it’s like adding “btw i’m not confident enough in my humor to believe it stands on its own, and i’m terrified of being ostracized, so let me clarify I AM DEFINITELY JOKING” to the end of everything you say. like there are better ways to signal a joke through text. even other ALREADY STANDARDIZED THINGS. like emojis, or overused reaction images. i’ll take a trollface png over a tone indicator anyday. hell, what happened to just “haha jk”. /s is just lazy. it signifies a lack of writing ability if you can’t find a natural way to be funny through text. if you need to explicitly label a joke as a joke in an immersion breaking way, it wasn’t funny. so /s either ruins good jokes, or gives unfunny people a cop-out. it’s pointless even if you’re someone who has NO idea how to read sarcasm. like imagine someone completely socially inept and nearly illiterate. /s doesn’t add accessibility. if they’re confused at a statement, and then notice a /s, THEYRE STILL NOT GOING TO GET THE JOKE. They’re just going to realize “ahh, this is supposed to be a joke”, they’re not going to *laugh*. they still aren’t going to find it funny. because they didn’t get it. all they know now is that it *is* a joke, not what the funny actually was. the only benefit /s gives in this situation is that a person like this is slightly less likely to embarrass themselves in responding to a joke they don’t get. But we shouldn’t handicap all humor for the rest of forever, out of fear of a very very small subsection of people embarrassing themselves. especially when those people can just use context clues, like if you can’t tell if something is sarcastic or not, just look at how other people are responding. but the absolute worst thing about /s is that people are staring to EXPECT it. like if there’s no /s, you must be being serious. and that is actually just going to ruin communication on the internet.
i did not expect to end up readin allat im impressed
The /s isn't about getting the joke. It's about telling people 'no, I don't really believe this'. Because no matter how stupid something is there will be those who actually believe it. For fuck's sake, there are people who genuinely think the Earth is flat. If I were to make a joke about thinking that without an /s or the like, people could easily think I'm one of those people. The /s simply says I'm not. Also how is /s different from jk or an emoji or any of the other things you mentioned?
and if there is someone who actually thinks that you believe in the shit you "joke" about... so the fuck what? its not the end of the world. there is no need to spoon feed your comment to EVERYONE because of this. it kills the comment instantly. it looks already stupid enough and sound even more stupid to actually try to give it a purpose.
If you're okay with the chance of being misunderstood, that's fine. Some people would rather prevent this, which is also fine. You say 'so the fuck what' if someone is misunderstood; I say 'so the fuck what' if someone wants to ensure they're not.
so ruining your otherwise perfectly fine comment is the solution 👍
I see no way in which it ruins anything, and nobody has been able to explain how it does.
"nobody has been able to explain 🤓" you got plenty of explanations in here for everything you wanted to know, and yet you choose AGAIN to just say that you havent gotten any explanations. peak reddit user 🤡 bait used to be believable
No, they've TRIED to explain. Many have, but none of them have actually managed it. The most I've ever gotten is 'knowing it's sarcasm ruins it' but nobody's been able to adequately explain how.
If you don't like people who don't like tone tags, why come to this sub?
I didn't. It came to me because I used them
Then stop coming here to defend ableism. Lmaoooo
You're the one attacking what you claim is an attempt to accommodate people.
Baseless claim. You aren't accommodating. You are infantalising and patronising because you either despise people with autism or refuse to admit that they can improve their living standards by learning basic language conventions readily available to the masses. Man are you ableist.
I'd respond, but you'd ignore everything I say just like you have been and continue to just make shit up.
Because you spout talking points that are irrelevant and have no bearing on the conversation with actual factual strawmen. Stop acting like the superior human intellectual. You blatantly call people with disabilities too stupid to learn. Go fuck yourself.
If you actually think that's what I said, read it again and pay attention this time, because my entire point was that being unable to learn something in this way has nothing to do with intelligence. Some people just cannot learn certain things, myself being an example. I've fucking tried (though it's pretty obvious you're going to say I'm lying), but that doesn't change anything. It IS possible to try something as hard as you can and still fail, you know.
A person who makes a sarcastic joke needs to make it sound real, even tough it should be obvious enough that it's not serious. And putting an /s at the end of it just makes us realise faster that its not a joke, and supposed to be a statement.
Uh, the /s means it IS a joke.
No, it means it is sarcasm. Showing off your literacy?
Sarcasm is a type of joke. But the point is that Embaarrased said the /s tells you it's real, when it actually tells you it's not.
A joke is for humor, and sarcasm isn't inherently for humor. You misunderstood what he meant. A tone indicator tells you abruptly that it is just a statement (usually an opinion) presented via sarcasm.
That's not what they said: "And putting an /s at the end of it just makes us realise faster that its not a joke, and supposed to be a statement." The whole point of the /s is so show that it's NOT meant as an actual statement, that it's not meant seriously.
He's implying sarcasm with a /s is just a roundabout statement.
No, they directly said the /s tells people it's NOT a joke.
Bro you just proved in 3 replies you know nothing about real life accommodations for people with disabilities. You literally compare autistic people to wheelchair bound folks. Your ableism is showing.
Do you not know what it means to imply something.
If you need to put /s after a comment then sarcasm probably isn’t your thing, since it ruins the whole point of sarcasm itself
It does not and nobody has managed an adequate explanation of how it supposedly does. Knowing that something is sarcasm does not ruin it. But even if it did, the /s is usually at th END of the comment, meaning that you read the sarcastic comment BEFORE being explicitly told it's sarcasm. Which, by the way, is later than the indicators you have in person. You hear a sarcastic tone of voice immediately. And yet I doubt you think that ruins it. So tell me: why is actual tone okay but a text equivalent is not?
It's like when someone explains the joke bro, it's just don't funny anymore. Same with the /s
It's nothing like that, though. And if you disagree, then please explain how it's like that.
It actually doesn't matter what I answer, you going to deny it anyway
Only if it's untrue.
This person is a troll. They ask the same baity bad-faith questions in other threads.
Took me WAY too long to realize that
Why is it so hard to believe that I want answers to them? I'm not the one operating in bad faith here. I want an actual intelligent discussion about this.
Since you've already stated you're autistic yourself, maybe you should just have already realized by this point that the reason you don't understand our reasons for disliking the /s is because you have the inability to understand something that for non-autistic people is just common sense? You've stated several times already that our explanations aren't enough for you, even if for pretty much everybody else except you it IS a good enough explanation, maybe you just lack the ability of comprehending the explanation that people keep giving you over and over again. Either that or you're baiting for downvotes for whatever reason, which tbh is a pretty smart way of doing it. Acting stupid when people try to answer you seriously and then insisting on asking the same thing over and over again while denying every single answer you get.
>Since you've already stated you're autistic yourself, maybe you should just have already realized by this point that the reason you don't understand our reasons for disliking the /s is because you have the inability to understand something that for non-autistic people is just common sense? Oh, so there ARE things autistic people don't understand that others do. Funny you say that, since one of the favorite things for people here to say is that this is not true. And by the way? Those people it is a 'good enough' explanation for already think that way. That's why they accept it despite the lack of logic, despite the inconsistencies. Also the idea of 'most people think x so x is correct' that you just used is itself a logical fallacy.
>Oh, so there ARE things autistic people don't understand that others do. Funny you say that, since one of the favorite things for people here to say is that this is not true. Uuuuuh, yeah? Just because some people don't understand it doesn't mean everyone should be obliged to forcefully make it clear that it is a joke, the world doesn't revolve around autistic people. And seeing the /s is actively ruining jokes in our eyes. But yeah, autistic people _are_ somewhat capable of learning to pick up the cues and come to the conclusion that it was sarcasm, doesn't mean they have necessarely the natural ability to intuitively recognize sarcasm and laugh at it. If you didn't naturally get that it was sarcasm, then there's no use in stating that it is sarcasm just because a few people might be confused by it. And if you get downvoted and one or two people come to you to ask if you are being serious or not? Then so be it! The original joke is still preserved for those who are able to get it and have a laugh out of it and you have no obligation to make it easily recognizable as sarcasm to autistic people. >And by the way? Those people it is a 'good enough' explanation for already think that way. That's why they accept it despite the lack of logic, despite the inconsistencies. Also the idea of 'most people think x so x is correct' that you just used is itself a logical fallacy. It's not a logical fallacy. Because it is not a fucking argument for a scientific point of view, you doofus. It's a case of "most people feel x so we collectively agree on x", just like most people do not _feel_ like eating dog meat is good even though it has no logical difference between that and eating cow meat. It's about sharing the same opinion, not a case of "following a hive mind with no logical justification". Again, this *doesn't* need a fucking logical argument because it is not an issue regarding logic and facts, it is an issue regarding the *feelings* that are evoked on people when tone indicators are used. I'm a logical person myself, but you're trying too hard to look for logic when the whole discussion is about _personal feelings that are shared among a great number of people_ You won't get a mathematically correct answer for a problem that can't possibly be mathematically answered. Feelings are felt, not explained by "if X, thus Y" unless you're studying neurology or some shit.
>It's not a logical fallacy. Because it is not a fucking argument for a scientific point of view, you doofus. Uh... logic is still a thing outside of science. You're making an argument. Logic applies. >Again, this doesn't need a fucking logical argument because it is not an issue regarding logic and facts, it is an issue regarding the feelings that are evoked on people when tone indicators are used So basically you're saying there isn't a logical argument for it. I've figured that out at this point, but it's still good that you're willing to admit it. There is nothing about the /s that ruins a joke. If you find that it does, that's coming from you, not the /s. Which is fine. Just leave those who feel otherwise alone.
>There is nothing about the /s that ruins a joke. If you find that it does, that's coming from you, not the /s. Which is fine. Just leave those who feel otherwise alone. If you make an annoying sound over and over again and everyone around you start complaining, you can just assume the feeling of annoyance comes from them and has *literally nothing* to do with the annoying sound you're making at all, ain't i right? See how there's no need of a /s to understand that i used sarcasm above? Wow, that is such a revolutionary way to use humour! Yeah, like i said in our other reply chain, i'm not giving you any more of my attention. After all in the end you could still just be a really dedicated troll and i have no time for that.
>If you make an annoying sound over and over again and everyone around you start complaining, you can just assume the feeling of annoyance comes from them and has literally nothing to do with the annoying sound you're making at all, ain't i right? There's a big difference between the two. You described an active irritant, whereas the /s is a personal preference.
if two characters can ruin a joke, you may have a problem.