Sarcasm Wars: Proprietary SarcMark Gets Some Sarcastic Open Competition
from the open-sarcasm dept
You may recall, last month, we wrote about some jokers who came up with the idea of the SarcMark to indicate when you were being sarcastic. They forgot to use their own mark on the stunt, though, because it seems pretty ridiculous to create a proprietary punctuation mark for which they expect people to pay $1.99 to get a special app to use. Like that would work. Of course, a few things happened in response. First, a bunch of people noticed that the SarcMark looked remarkably like script version of the Hebrew letter "pey." In other words, get yourself a Hebrew font, and you're probably good to go.But, perhaps much more interesting is that the sarcasm wars have now broken out. In response to the closed and proprietary SarcMark, another group has launched the Open Sarcasm project that is, instead, pushing a version of an upside down exclamation point to indicate sarcasm -- based on the already in existence Ethiopian punctuation mark for sarcasm (which is why it's already a part of unicode) . I have no clue if they're being serious or sarcastic. Which is why the world needs more sarcasm markers.
Still, whether or not any of this is serious, it actually does show how betting on proprietary solutions can often come back to bite you, as more open, cheaper, and more flexible solutions pop up to fill in the gap. So, yeah, to SarcMark, good luck with that project.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: open, open sarcasm, proprietary, sarcasm, sarcmark
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
II. On Developers Creating New Forms of Punctuation Without Consulting Typography Experts
Yeah. They shouldn’t do that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Spanish
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Spanish
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
tongue in cheek?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pointless
If you're so dim that you can't *tell* when I'm being sarcastic, then that's *part* of the fun; I love it when people get outraged at my sarcastic comments, and try to hold me to some kind of fire over them. Usually, the comment was aimed at the very kind of dimwitted ignorance that they possess, so it just makes the game that much more entertaining for the rest of us.
Is every conversation - online or in person - now going to require a disclaimer to the effect of "that was some sarcasm/irony/bemusement/irritation/tongue-in-cheek/etc"?
God, I hope so, because that would be sooooooo fucking cool.
...wait for it...
/sarcasm
CBMHB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Pointless
With as many users as there are, they pretty much rely on /s as their sarcasm marker.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Pointless
"Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humour, it is impossible to create a parody of fundamentalism that someone won't mistake for the real thing."[4] named after Nathan Poe who formulated it on christianforums.com in 2005.[5] Although it originally referred to creationism, the scope later widened to religious fundamentalism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law_%28religious_fundamentalism%29#N.E2.80.9 3Q
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Pointless
Interesting. I bet "someone" is most often a fundamentalist.
ChimpBush's Postulate:
"The beauty of parody is in the very possibility that it will be mistaken for the real thing."
CBMHB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Universal way to enter ¡ in text.
Alt-0161 will enter the inverted question mark and subvert the running dog scheme to pry the lordly sum of $1.99 from your pocket.
MC
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Universal way to enter ¡ in text.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Universal way to enter ¡ in text.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And I thought this website defended innovation
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=%2Fs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Question
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Question
The Open Sarcasm page is actually a fun read - it points out just how deluded the SarcMark is. It took a long time to fully draft the Unicode Specification, and the whole point of it was to make sure that it could include all characters. Then this guy comes along with, apparently, no knowledge of linguistics, orthography, typography or anything and tries to invent a proprietary character as a damn plug-in. I am assuming that the "inventor" had the thought "maybe there should be a punctuation mark for sarcasm" one day (and what regular internet conversationalist hasn't had that thought before?) and for some misguided reason believed he could capitalize on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No $1.99. No playing with fonts.
No alt-whatever-doesn't-work-that-way-on-my-Mac-anyway.
Seriously, how often do you use % for anything anyway?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I'm not sure on a rate of usage, but I know I use it correctly 100% of the time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
There you go.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
ummm
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The creators live here in town
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The creators live here in town
WOW! How did they manage to create a little squiggly line in such a short amount of time???
Truly amazing. They should get the Nobel for that.
CBMHB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The creators live here in town
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
MetaFilter's hamburger
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: MetaFilter's hamburger
I challenge that mark, and suggest instead that from now on it be considered the "Oscar the Grouch" mark, to indicate when someone is being overly angry or unreasonable online.
(Because we soooooooooo need marks for this kind of shit)
...wait for it...
/sarcasm
CBMHB
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This Is Why We Need Stronger IP Laws
At this rate, we will never see another SarcMarkâ„¢. And the world will be poorer for it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This Is Why We Need Stronger IP Laws
Interesting point, Mr. Big Content. Would it be?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
... and I was only being sarcastic too *BFG* º¿º
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Absolutely love it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Absolutely love it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
My proposal
ῧ
[ link to this | view in chronology ]