Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site stcvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!hao!stcvax!crp
From: crp@stcvax.UUCP (Charlie Price)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Usenet Etiquette -- Please Read
Message-ID: <215@stcvax.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 29-Dec-83 18:23:57 EST
Article-I.D.: stcvax.215
Posted: Thu Dec 29 18:23:57 1983
Date-Received: Sat, 31-Dec-83 00:45:10 EST
References: <642@eagle.UUCP>, <6452@unc.UUCP>
Organization: Storage Technology Corp.  Louisville, CO
Lines: 74

A few comments on Tim Maroney's comments seem in order.

>       In the hands of a skilled writer,
>       sarcasm is a potent tool for communication, particularly in subjective
>       discussion.

Perhaps; probably. Sarcasm and facetiousness are significant elements
of my own communication style.

>       Any intelligent and well-read person can identify sarcasm without
>       significant effort.

I strongly disagree that this is the general case ON THE NET.

Many net articles have the informal flavor of face-to-face
communications.  This seems to mostly work out even though the net is
missing some of the communication paths of a normal face-to-face
discussion.  For subtle modes of communication this can be a problem.
Sarcasm, in particular, depends on more than the words -- because part
of the communication of sarcasm is knowing that what someone says is not
what they mean.

There are at least three things missing in net communications that I
think are important to subtle personal communication.  In a face-to-face
encounter, body language and tone of voice communicate in addition to
the words themselves.  These are crucial for my own use of sarcasm and
facetiousness.  The emphasis I CAN provide in an article is far too
limited to replace the emphasis I can provide with my voice and body.
For sarcasm to be sarcasm (as opposed to a failed communication) the
listener (reader) has to know that you mean something in a sarcastic
way.  It has to be evident, somehow, that what you mean is not what you
say.  Knowledge of the speaker (writer) and the subject are important
here.  In my own case, my more subtle sarcasm often escapes people who
either don't know me well or perhaps don't know as much as I do about
the topic I am being sarcastic about.  If I want to be understood by a
more general audience then I have to be intentionally less subtle and
give people more clues (e.g. with tone of voice) that say there is
something more to what I mean than the words I say.  I think this is
generally true and published works, for instance, are crafted so that
they may be understood by a wide audience.  An "intelligent and well-
read person" will understand that something is sarcasm IF the
communication is carefully written so that an intelligent and well-read
person will understand it to be so.  Some net articles containing
sarcasm are written as if they were face to face communication with
people who knew you and at least as much about the topic as you do.  In
this article, lacking the clues needed for a wider audience, the readers
who don't know the poster or as much as he does about the topic of the
article may find it difficult to distinguish the sarcasm.  What you have
at this point is no longer a "potent tool for communication" but just
another way to be misunderstood.

The single rule of network communications seems clear:

        Post articles that communicate what you
        mean to the the people who read them.

If you don't want to be understood, why bother to post anything?  Net
etiquette "rules" seem to me to be no more than specific suggestions to
help make net articles communicate effectively.  If the spelling,
grammer, and punctuation need to be right so that readers aren't
distracted, then get them right.  If you don't want readers to ignore
what you say rather than how you say it, then don't offend them past
that point.

In light of this, a more accurate netiquette "rule" about sarcasm and
facetiousness would be that if you use them at all, use them in such a
way that the most readers will understand what you mean.  If people can
figure out how to do this, then sarcasm, facetiousness, and other
indirect communication modes can make their articles potent
communications.
-- 
	Charlie Price - Storage Technology (disk division) - Louisville, CO
		{ allegra, amd70, ucbvax }!nbires!stcvax!crp
		{ seismo, brl-bmd, menlo70 }!hao!stcvax!crp