Maybe it’s just a reddit/Threadiverse thing, maybe it’s stronger in political communities, but I constantly see sarcasm everywhere online, far more than anywhere else. Scroll down and you’ll even see it here.
Funnily enough, in a vacuum, one might expect online forums to avoid it more, since written text can mask tone and make sarcasm unintentionally ambiguous, to the point where it’s common to see people adding </s> tags to clarify. It’s not rare to see arguments started when people don’t recognise non-literal language.
Is it merely a habit being repeated? Is it a widespread coping mechanism for frustration? Is it simply the lowest form of wit, a simple and popular way to make fun? Is it an effective way to normalise unpopular views with the plausible deniability of just making jokes?
@comfy There’s a certain art to using sarcasm and other forms of irony on the Internet.
Irony only works if everybody is in on the joke. Even the butt of the joke, unless it is your explicit intention to offend them. Otherwise, it’s just being an insufferable asshole. Because you end up just confusing and/or offending random people. No bueno.
My recipie: read the room. If you’re unsure your irony will be recognized, don’t use it. Just fucking don’t.
I personally don’t mind sarcasm online in text form because without that /s I might not even know you’re being sarcastic since my sarcasm meter is set to slightly above autism mode due to practice.
I hung around on Reddit for like 15 years before I left, and I saw a progression from earnest debate to sarcasm becoming dominant in a lot of subs, particularly the busy ones. I imagine this holds true for any popular, long-term forums.
This is what I see:
Person A comes in and gives an opinion that is opposed to the general consensus in the community (“hive mind”).
Person B responds with a detailed explanation of why that opinion has been soundly rejected and how it maps to “the consensus”. This is the kind of quality post that made Reddit shine. It gets upvotes like crazy not because it’s “right”, but because it clearly explains how you get from opinion A to opinion B in a way anybody can follow.
Five years passes.
Person ZZZZ comes in and gives the SAME opinion as Person A.
Person B, inexplicably still a member of the community, responds with a short blast of sarcasm that makes it clear they disagree with that opinion, but long gone are the days where they bother to thoughtfully contrast the opposing views. It’s basically a snappy “you’re dumb and wrong; get fucked” comment. It gets upvoted like crazy this time not because it explains anything, but because it echoes the tired sentiment of the community.
I don’t even know if that’s a Reddit thing or just a general human experience thing. If someone were to approach you alone IRL and say they have concerns about trans athletes, you might have enough energy (and recent context) to be willing to explore the issues and explain your take on several facets of the arguments people commonly make.
If someone came up to you and said they aren’t sure about “this women voting thing”, I can’t imagine you’re going to be nearly as patient or willing to engage. Women’s suffrage has SAILED. The time for debate ended when your great grandmother died.
I saw a similar thing with the current wars. Early on there were interesting points raised. Now if someone comes in with a “unique” opinion on Ukraine or Gaza, they get buried in downvotes or told to fuck off. The time for debate has passed.
Maybe it’s an issue of people joining a debate late and wanting to understand the issues become indistinguishable from bots and trolls with a paid agenda. Volunteers can’t be arsed to waste time educating them.
That’s a great point. While not the same, I think this relates to the bullshit assymetry principle (aka. Brandolini’s law), where as a result of the time it takes to respond to basic repetitive questions, especially those which are pretty easy to search around for existing answers, then entire communities can get tired of tolerating them. In some cases people just become rude and dismissive and in other cases staff actually just ban the person asking the question, which is already the case in some Lemmy instances.
One potential way around it I’ve seen is having a decent FAQ available and well-known within the community, so one literally just reply with little more than a link to a page with the answer already written. In fact, one site used to (not anymore) have a culture where people would just attach a whole book as a PDF and simply reply ‘read this’, maybe listing a chapter if you’re lucky, which isn’t very tactful but it’s pretty funny and still provides a low-effort, high-detail answer (albeit maybe too high-detail for the kind of person who asks such a common question to reddit instead of trying to find the answer themselves).
If we consider that phenomenon you described to be a problem, the solution is being able to make it extremely quick and easy to give a canned response and politely tell them to RTFM.
I don’t know where you live, but my offline world is no more or less sarcastic than online.
Is it simply the lowest form of wit
You’re trying to account for taste, but there’s no accounting for taste.
I definitely think it’s cultural/regional. I was highly sarcastic with everyone in real life growing up, but moving across the country I came off as extremely rude and have met people from all different parts of the world that only appreciate certain nuances/layers of sarcasm and have adjusted myself accordingly.
for myself I have always been sarcastic and in meatspace was also well known for devils advocate as well. I actually try to curb it as much as I can manage with online because of how what I view as sarcasm seems to be part of a variety of folks actual beliefs.
lol nice, another fellow user of the term “meatspace”. I find the term quite self explanatory, but I often have to explain it to people when I allow it into my vernacular.
honestly no other word just sums it up. real world is not as exact and is two words. actuality. not online. none are as satisfying.
I am much more sarcastic in real life because it’s easier to read the room and get my point across. It’s a way for me to put some form of entertainment into a frustrating topic and feel smart. But I started using it less and try to actually explain what’s on my mind instead. This not only improves the quality of the discussion but also makes me want to dive deeper into topics so I can better talk about it and maybe even understand/accept opposing views better.
I encounter it no more often online than IRL. If anything, somewhat less.
I love it.
It’s just super
I deploy it a lot on Lemmy, but that’s because I think it the best way to deal with absurd positions. You can’t argue with “pour salt in your eyes” and the blue MAGAs, especially on .world… It also fucks with AI, it’s a super-turing language pattern no giant Turing-level language LLM will ever deal with well (sans </s> tags). I doubt that’s why anyone is doing it, but just a side benefit.
You cited an idiom to dunk on other people’s humor. Was that meant to be sarcastic?
