An answer to all our prayers...

[Barringtonia]

Someone has invented a symbol denoting sarcasm..

You may not yet have heard of Michigan-based Sarcasm, Inc but it would be no exaggeration to say that it may soon be as big a household name as Tesco or Google.

Its product, perhaps the most innovative and original of the century so far, is a punctuation mark for sarcasm. Although strangers to the mark might mistake it for a squiggle with a dot inside, the "SarcMark" will soon be turning up in our inboxes every day. The question that will baffle future generations is how we managed to live without it for so long.

Genius right (dammit, where's my sarcmark)

Though there've been contenders..

It's surprising, given the brilliance of the idea, that it has never been suggested before. Admittedly, French poet Alcanter de Brahm proposed using a backward-facing question mark to denote irony in the late 19th century. But that's in no way similar to the scribbled brilliance of the SarcMark. And the fact that US writer and satirist Josh Greenman proposed the upside-down exclamation mark as a "sarcasm point" in an article for Slate magazine in 2004 is equally immaterial.

The existence of numerous alternative solutions already in use, from emoticons such as , and to pseudo-html markers such as [/s] and </sarcasm>, is unlikely to be an obstacle to the SarcMark's overnight success.

The real breakthrough of Sarcasm, Inc is the realisation that, despite having used sarcasm and irony in the written word for hundreds of years, humans are simply too stupid to consistently recognise when someone has said the opposite of what they mean.

No, really? (Dammit again!)

The SarcMark solves that problem, and you can download it as a font for the reasonable price of $1.99 (£1.20). Our prayers are answered.

Oh, well worth the price (for f***k's sake, can someone hack it)

You can see the mark here - http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/20 ... e-sarcmark

What else do we need?

[New Kereptica]

This is completely novel؟

(And that is far too complex to ever be used as real punctuation.)

[Khornate Worshippers]

[Yootopia]

Brilliant.

[KiloMikeAlpha]

This is completely novel؟

(And that is far too complex to ever be used as real punctuation.)

That breaks the browser.... Try editing what you wrote now

it screws up how the editor works.

[Maurepas]

Yeah, that'll put alotta butts in seats,

[Barringtonia]

I do, personally, think it's a good idea, and something we could all do with, we certainly ask for it on NSG now and again.

I'm surprised they're charging for it but I also wonder whether that will actually aid its success somewhat in some counter-intuitive psychological reason sort of thing,

Anyway, if it does take off, as soon as it's emailed to me, surely I can just use that,

Anyway, Mods, email Max and tell him to cough it up so we can use it on NSG or create something else, the people demand it!

[New Kereptica]

This is completely novel؟

(And that is far too complex to ever be used as real punctuation.)

That breaks the browser.... Try editing what you wrote now

it screws up how the editor works.

That's strange. It doesn't do anything to me.

At any rate, my point stands.

[Yootopia]

Anyway, Mods, email Max and tell him to cough it up so we can use it on NSG or create something else, the people demand it!

It's a shower of shite.

[Barringtonia]

Anyway, Mods, email Max and tell him to cough it up so we can use it on NSG or create something else, the people demand it!

It's a shower of shite.

As in the symbol itself sucks or a symbol denoting sarcasm isn't necessary?

[Yootopia]

Anyway, Mods, email Max and tell him to cough it up so we can use it on NSG or create something else, the people demand it!

It's a shower of shite.

As in the symbol itself sucks or a symbol denoting sarcasm isn't necessary?

Both.

[Barringtonia]

Anyway, Mods, email Max and tell him to cough it up so we can use it on NSG or create something else, the people demand it!

It's a shower of shite.

As in the symbol itself sucks or a symbol denoting sarcasm isn't necessary?

Both.

Well, if such a positive, non-cynical chap such as you is saying it..

[Blitzkrenia]

Meh, already been done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony_mark

"It's surprising, given the brilliance of the idea, that it has never been suggested before. Admittedly, French poet Alcanter de Brahm proposed using a backward-facing question mark to denote irony in the late 19th century. But that's in no way similar to the scribbled brilliance of the SarcMark. And the fact that US writer and satirist Josh Greenman proposed the upside-down exclamation mark as a "sarcasm point" in an article for Slate magazine in 2004 is equally immaterial.

The existence of numerous alternative solutions already in use, from emoticons such as , and to pseudo-html markers such as [/s] and </sarcasm>, is unlikely to be an obstacle to the SarcMark's overnight success.

The real breakthrough of Sarcasm, Inc is the realisation that, despite having used sarcasm and irony in the written word for hundreds of years, humans are simply too stupid to consistently recognise when someone has said the opposite of what they mean. The SarcMark solves that problem, and you can download it as a font for the reasonable price of $1.99 (£1.20). Our prayers are answered."

Also, the article is nonsense. It sounds trollish, denouncing anything that could devalue the so-called "innovation" of the SarcMark. feels more like an advertisement.
Or maybe the writer is being sarcastic. That would also make sense.

[Barringtonia]

Meh, already been done.

The article is nonsense. It also sounds trollish, denouncing anything that could devalue the so-called "innovation" of the SarcMark.

Do you not think the article is, in itself, sarcastically devaluing the purpose of a sarcmark?

I think it's making the point that the phrasing itself should denote sarcasm and that, if you need a symbol, well you're probably a bit stupid to be honest... ahem.

Having said that, there are countless examples of such stupidity every day on these boards, ahem, and so I think, in certain contexts, a sarcmark might be quite useful and online forums might be such a one.

EDIT: I see your edit, the problem with online forums is the speed of response, both in terms of not necessarily thinking before responding and then, once you have thought, someone else has responded already, often in quite condescending ways, or perceived as such...

Anyway,

[Lord-General Drache]

If someone is seriously too dense to learn sarcastic tones online and off, over time, then that's their own damned fault.

[Lackadaisical2]

Meh, already been done.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irony_mark

"It's surprising, given the brilliance of the idea, that it has never been suggested before. Admittedly, French poet Alcanter de Brahm proposed using a backward-facing question mark to denote irony in the late 19th century. But that's in no way similar to the scribbled brilliance of the SarcMark. And the fact that US writer and satirist Josh Greenman proposed the upside-down exclamation mark as a "sarcasm point" in an article for Slate magazine in 2004 is equally immaterial.

The existence of numerous alternative solutions already in use, from emoticons such as , and to pseudo-html markers such as [/s] and </sarcasm>, is unlikely to be an obstacle to the SarcMark's overnight success.

The real breakthrough of Sarcasm, Inc is the realisation that, despite having used sarcasm and irony in the written word for hundreds of years, humans are simply too stupid to consistently recognise when someone has said the opposite of what they mean. The SarcMark solves that problem, and you can download it as a font for the reasonable price of $1.99 (£1.20). Our prayers are answered."

Also, yhe article is nonsense. It sounds trollish, denouncing anything that could devalue the so-called "innovation" of the SarcMark. feels more like an advertisement.
Or maybe the writer is being sarcastic. That would also make sense.

Yeah, I think so. He keeps contradicting himself.

saying that the mark is brilliant and original, yet pointing out numerous ways people already denote sarcasm, and past ideas on the subject that haven't been put to use.

[Blitzkrenia]

Meh, already been done.

The article is nonsense. It also sounds trollish, denouncing anything that could devalue the so-called "innovation" of the SarcMark.

Do you not think the article is, in itself, sarcastically devaluing the purpose of a sarcmark?

I think it's making the point that the phrasing itself should denote sarcasm and that, if you need a symbol, well you're probably a bit stupid to be honest... ahem.

Having said that, there are countless examples of such stupidity every day on these boards, ahem, and so I think, in certain contexts, a sarcmark might be quite useful and online forums might be such a one.

EDIT: I see your edit, the problem with online forums is the speed of response, both in terms of not necessarily thinking before responding and then, once you have thought, someone else has responded already, often in quite condescending ways, or perceived as such...

Anyway,

Indeed. I need to get my Sarcasm-o-Meter fixed.

[Barringtonia]

Well then, the next question is why do we need a question mark.

I mean, I didn't use it just there and it's entirely obvious the sentence is a question, where one might argue ambivalence of phrasing is the reason, does that not apply to tone, as, for example, an exclamation mark does?

[Lackadaisical2]

Well then, the next question is why do we need a question mark.

I mean, I didn't use it just there and it's entirely obvious the sentence is a question, where one might argue ambivalence of phrasing is the reason, does that not apply to tone, as, for example, an exclamation mark does?

Cause it looks nice, and erm...
Cause its convention? I find myself not using it on occasion where there ought to be a question mark.

oooh, it cna also show uncertainty

[New Kereptica]

Well then, the next question is why do we need a question mark.

I mean, I didn't use it just there and it's entirely obvious the sentence is a question, where one might argue ambivalence of phrasing is the reason, does that not apply to tone, as, for example, an exclamation mark does?

We need a question mark?
We need a question mark.
We need a question mark!

If anything, I'd eliminate the exclamation point.

[Barringtonia]

Well then, the next question is why do we need a question mark.

I mean, I didn't use it just there and it's entirely obvious the sentence is a question, where one might argue ambivalence of phrasing is the reason, does that not apply to tone, as, for example, an exclamation mark does?

We need a question mark?
We need a question mark.
We need a question mark!

If anything, I'd eliminate the exclamation point.

Really?
Really!
Really (sarcmark)

[Blitzkrenia]

Well then, the next question is why do we need a question mark.

I mean, I didn't use it just there and it's entirely obvious the sentence is a question, where one might argue ambivalence of phrasing is the reason, does that not apply to tone, as, for example, an exclamation mark does?

Cause it looks nice, and erm...
Cause its convention? I find myself not using it on occasion where there ought to be a question mark.

oooh, it cna also show uncertainty

I think the question mark denotes the raising of tone at the end of a question when spoken to a physically tangible form. Also, doesn't it look weird if we don't.

[Eirros]

I'll stick to my "pseudo-html" tyvm.

[Lackadaisical2]

Well then, the next question is why do we need a question mark.

I mean, I didn't use it just there and it's entirely obvious the sentence is a question, where one might argue ambivalence of phrasing is the reason, does that not apply to tone, as, for example, an exclamation mark does?

Cause it looks nice, and erm...
Cause its convention? I find myself not using it on occasion where there ought to be a question mark.

oooh, it cna also show uncertainty

I think the question mark denotes the raising of tone at the end of a question when spoken to a physically tangible form. Also, doesn't it look weird if we don't.

mm, well we just speak that way to denote a question, I thought. When else would you raise your tone?
Also, look at NK's example, and mine for uncertainty, the question mark is pretty versatile, I think.

[Pope Joan]

It reminds me of the Hebrew letter Samekh, doubled for purposes of intensification (the central dot "doubles" the letter).

www.fileformat.info/.../char/fb41/index.htm


Maybe the symbol could be called Samekh-asm?