Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Funny Ha Ha

Featured Replies

Thanks for the link, Thaddie - totally enjoyed it.

My five minutes is up, and I don't feel like paying for 100 more through abusive PM rants, so I'm off.

One less fool. Back to your regularly scheduled program.

Bye-bye.

*Sorry for my ill-founded attempt on your thread, Moss.

  • Replies 145
  • Views 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

No great loss as far as I'm concerned.

The PM was titled 'Are You OK?' hardly abusive Kat, and pointed out my concern that you were taking things far too seriously,

but you seem to have a habit of twisting things to suit your persecution complex.

Oh I forgot, you put me on ignore, how very... uh yeh whatever.

  • Author
You say tomato and I say oh shut up!
Nice violent outburst demonstration. Maybe it's time for you to visit the pub.

It would appear you two have history but please what is there to learn from the pigeon holing and rocks you are throwing at each other and Kat I did think it would generate some discussion and my, flak-jacket reference was meant to infer some people might take it as a personal sleight, however I think it is a serious question.

Having said that, I have never said that I am in the corner of The PC Brigade, just that I believe people have a right to be spoken to in a civil manner, although Irony is a great tool, for those in need of it, Sarcasm, well that is another matter.

Is this the right room for an argument?

It would appear so, wouldn't it.

Moss

  • Author

As stated previously, I am not going to go into a debate on this as I have no idea from which stance you taking, it is bazaar to me, to suggest,

ome people would find "economy with the truth" to be condescending at times, and also by logic to assume that one is in a superior or better advantaged position to the "truth"
this was my point, because I don't understand it, I am not going to argue against it.
I think that the discussion of irony/sarcasm, ejits and PC-ness as a euphemism are political/cultural discussions.

For example, Brits often state that Americans don't get irony, and that we are idiots. Ironically, it is often used to pigeonhole us.

However, most of what is called social/verbal irony is just a simple oppositional. But, it can also be used to close down, as I stated to Robski above.

I also wouldn't bring in political/cultural view points, not in the context that I read, but it has been a while since I read the article and as I opened the thread, it would appear rather ironic that I would want to shut it down.

Mossfinn brings up the issue of sarcasm and insecurities in his opening title of the thread, I think it is provocative, because it points to some essential differences between cultures, and I think Moss expected it to be provocative or he wouldn't of mentioned needing a flak jacket.

It was meant to be conducive for discussion, it doesn't have to be provocative, that is a choice by the individual poster.

I think both irony/sarcasm and frank or honest speak both have their place, and assigned cultural values. I think very often in British culture, American plain-speaking is held in low or negative value, and British irony/sarcasm and reserve/understatement in high value.

I agree with the Frank and Honest speak have there place and I have stated this, you have to ante-up on occasion, but I am not sure where the cultural values come in, I do hold plain speaking in relative contempt, but only where it has no place, as discussed earlier, it is much better to win people to your discussion and have a win-win situation, rather than tell somebody against their better judgement and have a win-lose situation, or in reality a lose-lose.

Whereas the British social *de-construction of irony and understatement would have a positive value in a culture of restraint, non-demonstrativeness and the stiff upper lip, American plain-speaking honesty has a higher value as openness, honesty, emotional accessibility. Obviously, when you challenge one with the other there is a cultural clash, because they are inversely related, where the positive qualities of each can be perceived as negative, because they contradict established social constructions.

OK, this part of cultural differences is clear and I agree with you, but this just one aspect of the point and can lead to confusion, it is also clear that Robbo and yourself believe yourselves to be honest and plain speaking, perhaps, if I may, by ,'Saying things Right', plain speaking if you like, but if you, ' Said the Right Things', you would both get your point across and we would all be continuing the discussion.

Although I have cut and pasted your reply Kat, this is not a rant against you, I just think my post earlier, where I refused to engage was wrong, but as we are diametrically opposed in opinions, I cannot see us getting very far.

But thanks for the input, Ping I will get back to you, Honest.

Moss

^Have you got a Utube link to it?

I've told you once.......

No you didn't!

(Great post Thad - thanks!)

Am I the only one that doesn't understand half of what's been said in this thread? :o

And there was me thinking that using sarcasm/irony was just a way of being confrontational without being obviously aggressive.

Moss - I think any response you give to me is going to be difficult in terms of context given that the original issue has been broadened. I was merely discussing the 'sarcasm' aspect, whereas other elements have been introduced. For example, your statement that '...it is much better to win people to your discussion and have a win-win situation' is my view entirely. I have to say that in some aspects of business, there can be occasions where this is not the most effective approach, but that is a whole different issue. In my initial post, I was confining my discussion to irony/sarcasm and the one issue of the relative merits of a sarcastic response as against a direct response; a deliberately narrow context to avoid writing reams about associated considerations. Where circumstances so permit, it is clearly preferable to avoid comments that can lead to tension, but human nature (being what it is) can make this quite difficult. For example, if it is clear that a person is being deliberately confrontational and holds you in contempt, most occasions would either call for a diplomatic retreat or 'helpful' advice as to the uncomfortable use that should be made of certain objects.

I should think that all members of Bedlam would have a reasonable idea of the 'ideal' approach to social interaction without the need of our pontification. The mere fact that the 'ideal' is often far from the reality is largely attributable to some of our innate character traits as 'imperfect' beings. The imperfection on point, however, is a product of our competitiveness (read aggression) and ego and without this imperfection, we would probably not be around.

Am I the only one that doesn't understand half of what's been said in this thread? :D

And there was me thinking that using sarcasm/irony was just a way of being confrontational without being obviously aggressive.

No you are not the only one NR and I think you are right in your definition of sarcasm, but hey that doesn't fill seminars or broadsheets.

As far as I can see the article in the OP does state that simply, but is meant to spark an exercise in post-modernist discourse,

where the ability wrap the subject in lengthy opinion becomes more important than the subject itself, which I would define as:

length of words X length of speech X hyperbole = size of salary/research grant/status

Of course we could both be wrong. :o

Another good example, Rob. Some would assume your comments as an attempt at humour; others would seem them as being sarcastic. :o

  • Author
others would seem them as being sarcastic. :D

I think it has a good case for Irony :o

Moss

No great loss as far as I'm concerned.

The PM was titled 'Are You OK?' hardly abusive Kat, and pointed out my concern that you were taking things far too seriously,

but you seem to have a habit of twisting things to suit your persecution complex.

Oh I forgot, you put me on ignore, how very... uh yeh whatever.

Toys, the, pram, out, thrown, her, of :o

QUOTE (Ping @ 2008-02-21 20:59:51)

others would seem them as being sarcastic.

QUOTE (Mossfinn @ 2008-02-21 20:22:18)

I think it has a good case for Irony

Moss

I have to swear.

@~#=+%*^$?@#*%&£!!&**@@# off!

That's better.

Yeah fair enough, I shouldn't have wound that one in - apologies Rob.

Uh! :D No offence taken Ping, I could see it was ironic... :D or was it sarcastic...? :D

It's all Moss's fault anyway, he's @#%")=!@&£/+!! ( I just like to swear some times )

Moss "Hey guys I just came accross this rather interesting article, what do you think it means?"

Bedlam " :D:o:D "

Moss "I don't know how that happened!"

:D

  • Author

Brilliant :o

Moss

And I really don't know how it happens, where's the next one? :D

555 You can have it all to yourselves! :o

  • Author
Where is the next thread, I just can't wait! :D

I think you are going to like it, not so sure about the mods, but you will :o

Moss

Uh! :D No offence taken Ping, I could see it was ironic... :D or was it sarcastic...? :D

It's all Moss's fault anyway, he's @#%")=!@&£/+!! ( I just like to swear some times )

Moss "Hey guys I just came accross this rather interesting article, what do you think it means?"

Bedlam " :D:oB) "

Moss "I don't know how that happened!"

:burp:

:D :D :D

It wouldn't be a troll, would it? :o

  • Author
It wouldn't be a troll, would it? :o

Are you calling me a Troll, Ping?

Moss

:o No, I was just admiring your bridgework :D
  • Author

That's OK then, I have built a few of them :o

Moss

Each one bigger and better than the previous one. After all, you can only hide under one at a time... :o

Hi Moss:

Sorry to return to this thread a few days late, but since you took some time to respond to some of my comments, and also after I announced leaving the thread, I hope my late return after the fact is not too inconvenient.

You say tomato and I say oh shut up!
Nice violent outburst demonstration. Maybe it's time for you to visit the pub.

It would appear you two have history but please what is there to learn from the pigeon holing and rocks you are throwing at each other and Kat I did think it would generate some discussion and my, flak-jacket reference was meant to infer some people might take it as a personal sleight, however I think it is a serious question.

No history that should warrant such a remark as the first one and hence my response, but I didn't come here to dwell on those comments. I came here to respond to you.

Having said that, I have never said that I am in the corner of The PC Brigade, just that I believe people have a right to be spoken to in a civil manner, although Irony is a great tool, for those in need of it, Sarcasm, well that is another matter.

I did not intend to give the impression that I thought of you as in the PC Brigade. Most of my comments were general comments or general observations about your statements, and were not meant to implicate you directly or personally. If I had meant to make a statement about you or for you, as a direct person I would not rely on subtext or implication. :o

I do not disagree with you about people having "the right to be spoken to in a civil manner." I think I may just disagree that direct-speak is not necessarily uncivil, and irony or subtext is not necessarily civil.

Moss

As stated previously, I am not going to go into a debate on this as I have no idea from which stance you taking, it is bazaar to me, to suggest,
ome people would find "economy with the truth" to be condescending at times, and also by logic to assume that one is in a superior or better advantaged position to the "truth"
this was my point, because I don't understand it, I am not going to argue against it.

I didn't elaborate at first because I thought it would be obvious that if someone thinks they have a superior grasp on the truth as to withhold it, or to avoid transparency in stating a truth so as to avoid scrutiny and challenge in an open manner, that reflex or "economy" can actually be bred from condescension. However, I should have stated more directly at the time that I wasn't applying that to your particular statement or use of economy in your example, just that if there are downsides to different approaches that can be one. I think the example that you used in the first post back actually stems from altruism, rather than anything else. If so, I agree with your statements there. Sorry I wasn't more clear about this in my first comment.

I think both irony/sarcasm and frank or honest speak both have their place, and assigned cultural values. I think very often in British culture, American plain-speaking is held in low or negative value, and British irony/sarcasm and reserve/understatement in high value.

I agree with the Frank and Honest speak have there place and I have stated this, you have to ante-up on occasion, but I am not sure where the cultural values come in, I do hold plain speaking in relative contempt, but only where it has no place, as discussed earlier, it is much better to win people to your discussion and have a win-win situation, rather than tell somebody against their better judgement and have a win-lose situation, or in reality a lose-lose.

I agree with almost all of your comments here, except that I don't hold direct-speak in contempt. I think we may have different examples or definitions of direct-speak, because I don't see it in conflict with anything you stated here. In fact, in my experience, direct-speak has been invaluable in reaching consensus among multiple points-of-view. Again, we may be thinking of different examples that represent different values within our own cultural context, which is why I thought culture was an important component of this discussion. We may be talking over one another rather than to each other on this one.

Whereas the British social *de-construction of irony and understatement would have a positive value in a culture of restraint, non-demonstrativeness and the stiff upper lip, American plain-speaking honesty has a higher value as openness, honesty, emotional accessibility. Obviously, when you challenge one with the other there is a cultural clash, because they are inversely related, where the positive qualities of each can be perceived as negative, because they contradict established social constructions.

OK, this part of cultural differences is clear and I agree with you, but this just one aspect of the point and can lead to confusion, it is also clear that Robbo and yourself believe yourselves to be honest and plain speaking, perhaps, if I may, by ,'Saying things Right', plain speaking if you like, but if you, ' Said the Right Things', you would both get your point across and we would all be continuing the discussion.

Well, yes, the cultural difference aspect was one of my main points. I disagree with your assessment of why discussion may have stopped here. But, I think you have a point about saying "Saying the Right Things" in addition to "Saying Things Right", such as my elaborating a little further on my first example on "economy of truth" as I did above. I am always most concerned with "What is Right", but I agree that you have a point. However, I think the greater value of each approach will depend on the context in which they are used and to what end, intent, and the corresponding cultural values.

Although I have cut and pasted your reply Kat, this is not a rant against you, I just think my post earlier, where I refused to engage was wrong, but as we are diametrically opposed in opinions, I cannot see us getting very far.

Well, the main utility of communication is understanding and not necessarily agreement, although I do agree that the latter is preferable. :D

*My newest comments are interspersed in pink.

I didn't want to hazard separating quotes. I put my newest comments in pink to make it a bit easier, I hope.

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.