Post #3631627

2026-07-06 16:05 UTC

@nycki@critters.gay my wants don't come into it. in fact, if I used sarcasm in such an instance, I would be happily surprised if they agreed with the inference, because it would mean that they had (contrary to my expectations at such an impasse in conversation) actually said what they meant in the first place.

Replies (2)

@mxchara@seattle.pink 2026-07-06 16:06

@nycki@critters.gay whereas if I use the sarcasm, and the person refuses the follow the logical inference, then I know that their earlier words were ill thought out. They said something they didn't actually have the thoughts to support.

Open ##3631750
@nycki@critters.gay 2026-07-06 16:09

@mxchara@seattle.pink ahhh. okay, if you're saying "this absurd thing follows" because you think they might actually believe that thing, then I suppose that might be a weak point of this definition. I wouldn't call that sarcasm, I'd say that's more like a question without a question mark. "You believe that, so do you believe this?" I wouldn't call that sarcasm, since I've always been told sarcasm is supposed to be funny or satirical, and this just sounds like a good faith argument. But I can understand now why someone might disagree with me.

Open ##4247810