dimpy.handa
Dimpy Handa
I know you people like your sarcasm, and I would never suggest that such a thing shouldn't be allowed, but as with anything, some things are used by some and abused by others.
The way I understand it, sarcasm can be useful to point out and highlight a point of irony. This is the only genuine use I see in it. Some of course will use it in a way not just to merely poke holes in an argument but show their own very bitter feelings on an entire subject. Religion of course seems to be the favorite. Oops, did I say religion? That was me using sarcasm in one instance to point out a conservative use of sarcasm and highlight my point. However, when a subject becomes taboo in a debate forum, something's probably gone wrong.
Now what if my entire post was nothing but a marathon of me exercising my use of nothing but distasteful sarcastic remarks to burn holes in an argument which would require much less than that. If I use it unnecessarily then is it not abuse?
I say it is because by over-using it you're removing the main use of it which is to highlight main points of irony. You can't sensibly highlight an entire post. Then one can only assume the purpose of it in it's massive extent in certain instances is not to merely poke holes but to attack the subject at hand or perhaps even the person.
So I assert that abuse should not be allowed to be hidden behind grammatically correct sarcasm when the intent in it's sheer volume is plain to see as malicious.
The way I understand it, sarcasm can be useful to point out and highlight a point of irony. This is the only genuine use I see in it. Some of course will use it in a way not just to merely poke holes in an argument but show their own very bitter feelings on an entire subject. Religion of course seems to be the favorite. Oops, did I say religion? That was me using sarcasm in one instance to point out a conservative use of sarcasm and highlight my point. However, when a subject becomes taboo in a debate forum, something's probably gone wrong.
Now what if my entire post was nothing but a marathon of me exercising my use of nothing but distasteful sarcastic remarks to burn holes in an argument which would require much less than that. If I use it unnecessarily then is it not abuse?
I say it is because by over-using it you're removing the main use of it which is to highlight main points of irony. You can't sensibly highlight an entire post. Then one can only assume the purpose of it in it's massive extent in certain instances is not to merely poke holes but to attack the subject at hand or perhaps even the person.
So I assert that abuse should not be allowed to be hidden behind grammatically correct sarcasm when the intent in it's sheer volume is plain to see as malicious.