Wednesday, September 27, 2006

I hate how sarcasm doesn't really work over the Internet.

Yesterday's post, entitled "I hate it when people misuse apostrope's [sic]," sparked a (brief)(and also not that exciting) comment war between me and Anonymous, who wrote:
Should'nt [sic] that be "explaining it's uses"?

Sorry, could'nt [sic] resist."
And I was all, "STUPID." And I laughed and laughed because I love it when people use poor grammar in comments that are intended to make the blogger look like an idiot. I didn't even notice the misused apostrophes in "shouldn't" and "couldn't!" HA!

So I responded, "No," and I explained that "its" wasn't a contraction. Ooohh, diss, Anonymous!

For a split-second I thought, "Maaaybe that was ironic... ... ...Nope! Anonymous is just dumb! HA HA HA!"

And then Megan emailed me and mentioned how I misused the plural form of "apostrophes" in the title, and I was all, "GOD. WHY DOESN'T ANYONE GET THAT I'M BEING IRONIC? GOD."

Then Anonymous left another comment:
I'm fully aware that "it's" is a contraction and I hope that clarification was offered ironically in response to my sarcasm.

And the moral of the story is: sarcasm and irony do not work on the Internet.


meg meg said...

Well said.

Anonymous said...

I hate that too, so I propose we adopt the mechanism the British have begun to use with the written word and follow each sarcastic word with (!).

And just so you know, I'm fully anticipating a response that's something along the lines of:


p.s. Look! I used the apostrophe right!