• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 09:32
CEST 15:32
KST 22:32
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic7Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3BGE Stara Zagora 2025: Info & Preview27Code S RO12 Preview: GuMiho, Bunny, SHIN, ByuN3The Memories We Share - Facing the Final(?) GSL47
Community News
BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack2Weekly Cups (June 2-8): herO doubles down1[BSL20] ProLeague: Bracket Stage & Dates9GSL Ro4 and Finals moved to Sunday June 15th13Weekly Cups (May 27-June 1): ByuN goes back-to-back0
StarCraft 2
General
The SCII GOAT: A statistical Evaluation Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic DreamHack Dallas 2025 - Official Replay Pack BGE Stara Zagora 2025 - Replay Pack
Tourneys
[GSL 2025] Code S: Season 2 - Ro8 - Group B [GSL 2025] Code S: Season 2 - Ro8 - Group A RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament
Strategy
[G] Darkgrid Layout Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] PvT Cheese: 13 Gate Proxy Robo
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target Mutation # 474 Futile Resistance
Brood War
General
FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu BW General Discussion BGH auto balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ StarCraft & BroodWar Campaign Speedrun Quest Will foreigners ever be able to challenge Koreans?
Tourneys
[ASL19] Grand Finals [BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET NA Team League 6/8/2025 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues
Strategy
I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Beyond All Reason Path of Exile What do you want from future RTS games?
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
UK Politics Mega-thread US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Vape Nation Thread
Fan Clubs
Maru Fan Club Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion NHL Playoffs 2024
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 29195 users

Guide to Irony and Satire

Blogs > jdseemoreglass
Post a Reply
Normal
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 17:00:11
June 24 2011 04:46 GMT
#1
 
i·ro·ny/ˈīrənē/
Noun: The expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.

sat·ire
noun /ˈsaˌtīr/
The use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.

The essential feature of irony is the indirect presentation of a contradiction between an action or expression and the context in which it occurs. In the figure of speech, emphasis is placed on the opposition between the literal and intended meaning of a statement; one thing is said and its opposite implied, as in the comment, “Beautiful weather, isn't it?” made when it is raining or nasty.

On June 13 2011 07:12 Mikilatov wrote:
I'm not sure what concerns me more, the (actual) topic of my blog, or the fact that I think maybe a few people will read this blog and actually take it seriously.



Guide to Irony and Satire


Irony and satire are techniques for making an argument in an indirect way. It is primarily used to more effectively emphasize the absurdity of an opposing argument by exaggerating it's absurdity, compared with simply stating an argument directly. This is a guide to both creating and recognizing irony and satire.

Recognizing satire primarily relies on the reader noticing an absurd statement or idea, and having enough respect for the author to understand that the absurdity is being manufactured purposely, with the intent of criticizing an opponent. This of course is complicated if the author is writing in an environment which is saturated by absurd individuals. In order to combat this, the author must make statements which are over-the-top absurd, to distinguish himself as a satirist.

It is important for the author to not stoop to the level of stating his irony explicitly, for example in the form of a spoiler saying "just kidding!" This significantly detracts from the power of the argument and makes the satire almost pointless. When an individual creates satire, they are implicitly granting respect to their audience, by assuming that the audience will comprehend the satire. Stating the fact explicitly is an insult to the average readers intelligence, and usually means the absurdity wasn't made apparent enough.

When faced with confusion from his audience, it is common for the satirist to respond in a way that is even more blatantly absurd, to make his purpose more clear. If this second attempt fails, however, there is little hope of reaching the confused individuals, with either subtle or direct arguments, and the effect the satire was meant to induce is already lost and irretrievable once it is discussed explicitly.

The satirist often leaves subtle clues to the fact that his is speaking ironically. Often they will include a line or expression that exhibits such absurdity that makes their purpose clear if it was previously murky. It is often possible to distinguish the satirical individuals by the refined manner in which they speak or write, including vocabulary, grammar, and spelling. Typically, nutjobs and morons do not speak in a particularly articulate fashion, but there are exceptions.

Many people will read irony, or satire, and reach the conclusion that the author is simply a sarcastic smart-ass. Of course, the difference between a satirist and a smart-ass depends entirely on the perspective and attitude of the external observer. If the observer regards argument and debate as a form of sport or competition, they will likely appreciate the irony. If the individual has a vested emotional interest in their arguments and has a tendency to take personal offense from counter-arguments, then they will feel the person is just a jackass.


Explaining satire through example:


In order to recognize and decode irony and satire, you must follow these steps:

1) Recognize absurd statements and the subtle clues that the author is not honestly advocating them.
2) Take the authors arguments and realize he is criticizing those arguments.
3) Look at the context of the argument to understand the point he is trying to make.


On June 22 2011 10:39 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 22 2011 10:16 BlackJack wrote:
On June 22 2011 10:10 jdseemoreglass wrote:
One day mankind will solve death. If we just have enough of other people's money and we have scientific progress we can achieve immortality for everyone. Of course it won't happen in America, because we are backwards and get everything wrong and should learn from the other countries how to behave.

There is no reason for a person to die of cancer or any other deadly disease. Every time I hear about someone dying in the news, or taking great pains to try and survive as long as possible, I question where the system failed them. We've got a lot of ignorant capitalists here who believe in things like natural selection and think it's normal for people to die. Well it's not. We just haven't advanced politically far enough to end death, like many countries have ended poverty.

I just hope America isn't beat to solving mortality by a nation like Cuba or North Korea. That would be very embarrassing considering how many economic advantages we have.



Are you trolling or do you really believe what you write down? I hope it's the former


What makes you think I'm trolling? Maybe I didn't explain what I meant very clearly. Let me try and rephrase the argument...

There are many, many people who have died, right? I mean I hear about it all the time in the news and in history and stuff. And yet, at the same time, there are tons of people alive and living. Clearly that means that death isn't really necessary, or else we would all be dead.

So how come some people die and so many other people haven't died? Well clearly it's because there is an unequal distribution of wealth. If all of the people who died had the same exact health care as the people who are alive, then no one would be dead. So to cure mortality, all we have to do is take the health care from the richest people and apply it to the poorest people.

This is pretty much common sense. But our voters and politicians are so dumb they don't see this logic. People are really very immoral because they refuse to give up their money, essentially they want other people to die for their own greed. If it wasn't for greed we could have cured death a long time ago.

User was temp banned for this post.


1) Recognizing the absurdity: Author suggests death is not inevitable when it is one of the surest certainties of life. Author suggests death is the result of inequity and poor health care instead of a universal reality. Author suggests people who are alive now will never die. Author suggests people lack common sense for not thinking extremely uncommon thoughts and employing flawed logical reasoning.

2) Reversing the argument: The author suggests that death is not inevitable, so he must be criticizing the suggestion that death is not inevitable.

3) Context and explanation: It is a criticism of the claim that a naturally occuring illness or death is an indictment of an economic system or set of policies. The point being made is that you cannot ever end death, and a nation which tries to justify saving every life by paying for ever higher and higher medical costs and redistribution of wealth is clearly living in denial of the mortality of human beings, and the undeniable fact that medical care must be rationed in one form or another, regardless of the economic policies in place.


On June 08 2011 04:31 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Banning movies from a country now?

lol, and they call themselves the land of the free and the home....

Oh wait, never mind, this is Europe. Time to put on my rose colored glasses.

User was temp banned for this post.

1) Recognizing the absurdity: Author associates a motto of the US with the UK. Author takes one stance toward one country then a completely opposite response toward another, consecutively. Author recognizes he makes a mistake, but doesn't erase it, making his hypocrisy clear to everyone.

2) Reversing the argument: The author is being hypocritical, so he must be criticizing hypocrisy.

3) Context and explanation: Many individuals hold irrational disdain towards certain entities which cause them to recognize and voice faults towards them. These same individuals will often ignore or gloss over the same faults in other entities. This is called hypocrisy or a double-standard, and is frequently considered an error when exhibited.


Example of how to create satire


Reverse the process:

1) Recognize your target. In this case, a thread that is typically labeled a "spam thread" because it evokes many personal responses and little possible discussion. Also, the fact that the motivation for many posters in said thread is to brag about how smart they are.

2) Take the thing you want to criticize, and copy it. In this case, by bragging in the same manner as others.

3) Insert absurd statements to make it clear to external observers that your post is not meant to be taken seriously. In this case, we will illustrate absurdity by suggesting that a high school student is attending ivy league universities has a list of achievements which are essentially impossible.

On May 07 2011 12:47 jdseemoreglass wrote:
I'm taking AP Calculus 7, AP Theoretical and Applied Physics, AP Molecular Chemistry and Biology. I've have two doctorates, one from Harvard and one from Yale. I passed the bar recently, but I also want to earn a Nobel Prize at some point in the future as well.

What Nobel Prizes have you guys won so far?

User was temp banned for this post.



Difference between satire and trolling


While satire usually tries to criticize an argument or an idea, trolling goes after individuals with the express purpose of provoking an emotional response or deliberately misleading or confusing the reader. Satirists generally do not appreciate confusion or emotional responses, because the satirist attempts to make his absurdity and his argument clear to the majority of people. The satirist implicitly assumes his audience is capable of comprehending subtlety, and this assumption should be seen as a form of respect towards his audiences abilities. He does not assume that many people will not recognize the intention of the absurdity.

It is true that satire is often confused with trolling, and causes an emotional response, but it must be made clear that this is not the intention of satire, and such responses are usually the result of confusion or misunderstanding on the part of the specific audience.


Los Angeles Times article: Has it gotten so difficult to recognize satire?
 

**
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
Jumbled
Profile Joined September 2010
1543 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 04:56:38
June 24 2011 04:56 GMT
#2
The latter two examples you give look more like digs at either a particular country or poster, rather than pure humour. Since TL preaches respect for other posters, I'd suggest it was your tone that caused moderation rather than someone missing the point.

As for the first, the attempt at satire is less obvious simply because the writing is very clumsy. One of the identifying marks of irony and satire is a certain sharpness of wit in the way the absurdities are expressed, and that is rather lacking in your example.
Dalguno
Profile Blog Joined January 2011
United States2446 Posts
June 24 2011 05:09 GMT
#3
Is it irony that all the satire mentioned was authored by you, and ironic as well that you were banned in each of the posts presented?
"I'm gonna keep making drones cause I'm a baller, and ballers make drones." -Snute
TheFrankOne
Profile Joined December 2010
United States667 Posts
June 24 2011 05:10 GMT
#4
I don't think those were subtle enough to need explaining. I mean, what is the point of this?
quiong
Profile Joined January 2008
United States268 Posts
June 24 2011 05:12 GMT
#5
Perhaps you should work on making satirical posts of a higher quality, rather than a guide to understanding satire. Your entire post seems to be one massive assumption that, because you were temp-banned for those example posts above, your audience must be retarded.

It is true that satire is often confused with trolling, and causes an emotional response, but it must be made clear that this is not the intention of satire, and such responses are usually the result of confusion or misunderstanding on the part of the specific audience.


Your last paragraph again puts the blame squarely on the audience -- if the audience is confused, it must be their fault. Does it not occur to you that it may equally be the fault of the satirist if his or her work is so easily confused for trolling?
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
June 24 2011 05:14 GMT
#6
On June 24 2011 14:10 TheFrankOne wrote:
I don't think those were subtle enough to need explaining. I mean, what is the point of this?


On June 22 2011 12:51 Probulous wrote:
Show nested quote +
jdseemoreglass was just temp banned for 2 days by micronesia.

That account was created on 2010-07-23 07:33:10 and had 1235 posts.

Reason:

On June 22 2011 10:39 jdseemoreglass wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
On June 22 2011 10:16 BlackJack wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
On June 22 2011 10:10 jdseemoreglass wrote:
One day mankind will solve death. If we just have enough of other people's money and we have scientific progress we can achieve immortality for everyone. Of course it won't happen in America, because we are backwards and get everything wrong and should learn from the other countries how to behave.

There is no reason for a person to die of cancer or any other deadly disease. Every time I hear about someone dying in the news, or taking great pains to try and survive as long as possible, I question where the system failed them. We've got a lot of ignorant capitalists here who believe in things like natural selection and think it's normal for people to die. Well it's not. We just haven't advanced politically far enough to end death, like many countries have ended poverty.

I just hope America isn't beat to solving mortality by a nation like Cuba or North Korea. That would be very embarrassing considering how many economic advantages we have.

Are you trolling or do you really believe what you write down? I hope it's the former

What makes you think I'm trolling? Maybe I didn't explain what I meant very clearly. Let me try and rephrase the argument...

There are many, many people who have died, right? I mean I hear about it all the time in the news and in history and stuff. And yet, at the same time, there are tons of people alive and living. Clearly that means that death isn't really necessary, or else we would all be dead.

So how come some people die and so many other people haven't died? Well clearly it's because there is an unequal distribution of wealth. If all of the people who died had the same exact health care as the people who are alive, then no one would be dead. So to cure mortality, all we have to do is take the health care from the richest people and apply it to the poorest people.

This is pretty much common sense. But our voters and politicians are so dumb they don't see this logic. People are really very immoral because they refuse to give up their money, essentially they want other people to die for their own greed. If it wasn't for greed we could have cured death a long time ago.

Keep your ridiculous bulls*** out of discussion threads.


You have to admire that his brain is capable of such weird logic. It is so illogical that it almost makes sense. Some kind of idiot-savant thing going on here.

Death can't be necessary because people are alive? That's going to stick with me. Probably not in the way he intended but hey at least his point got across...

Or did it...

On June 22 2011 13:18 Probe1 wrote:
What the fuck..
Seldom do I use that phrase with full force.
Show nested quote +
If it wasn't for greed we could have cured death a long time ago.


What. The. Fuck.
+ Show Spoiler +
Seriously. What the fuck. My brain just stroked off trying to save me from thinking too hard about that post.

On June 22 2011 14:36 Probulous wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 22 2011 14:29 Kinetik_Inferno wrote:
On June 22 2011 12:51 Probulous wrote:
jdseemoreglass was just temp banned for 2 days by micronesia.

That account was created on 2010-07-23 07:33:10 and had 1235 posts.

Reason:

On June 22 2011 10:39 jdseemoreglass wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
On June 22 2011 10:16 BlackJack wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
On June 22 2011 10:10 jdseemoreglass wrote:
One day mankind will solve death. If we just have enough of other people's money and we have scientific progress we can achieve immortality for everyone. Of course it won't happen in America, because we are backwards and get everything wrong and should learn from the other countries how to behave.

There is no reason for a person to die of cancer or any other deadly disease. Every time I hear about someone dying in the news, or taking great pains to try and survive as long as possible, I question where the system failed them. We've got a lot of ignorant capitalists here who believe in things like natural selection and think it's normal for people to die. Well it's not. We just haven't advanced politically far enough to end death, like many countries have ended poverty.

I just hope America isn't beat to solving mortality by a nation like Cuba or North Korea. That would be very embarrassing considering how many economic advantages we have.

Are you trolling or do you really believe what you write down? I hope it's the former

What makes you think I'm trolling? Maybe I didn't explain what I meant very clearly. Let me try and rephrase the argument...

There are many, many people who have died, right? I mean I hear about it all the time in the news and in history and stuff. And yet, at the same time, there are tons of people alive and living. Clearly that means that death isn't really necessary, or else we would all be dead.

So how come some people die and so many other people haven't died? Well clearly it's because there is an unequal distribution of wealth. If all of the people who died had the same exact health care as the people who are alive, then no one would be dead. So to cure mortality, all we have to do is take the health care from the richest people and apply it to the poorest people.

This is pretty much common sense. But our voters and politicians are so dumb they don't see this logic. People are really very immoral because they refuse to give up their money, essentially they want other people to die for their own greed. If it wasn't for greed we could have cured death a long time ago.

Keep your ridiculous bulls*** out of discussion threads.


You have to admire that his brain is capable of such weird logic. It is so illogical that it almost makes sense. Some kind of idiot-savant thing going on here.

Death can't be necessary because people are alive? That's going to stick with me. Probably not in the way he intended but hey at least his point got across...

Or did it...


In some way it makes sense to me. While death may be natural, it may be the next great thing for mankind to conquer. He didn't exactly state it in a completely understandable manner, and I get the feeling that he walked away from his computer and when he came back to writing the post he lost his train of thought, but when you break it down:

Death is natural, yet it is one of the great things for man to conquer.

He lost his train of sanity thought when he started talking about how conquering death would require research, and politicians are greedy and rich people are greedy.

In some ways, I agree with the last statement. I believe that a family, be it rich or not, can comfortably live in a decent sized house, so one rich guy having his own 5 acre personal mansion is stupid, wasteful, and immoral.


You are of course, correct. Death is only natural because we haven't found a cure yet. I guess the premise isn't a problem it is the very strange logic he tried to use to support it. People living != People living forever.

On June 22 2011 13:20 Torte de Lini wrote:
Jdseemoreglass is no stranger to temp. bans. A large shame because I think he is a generally nice guy, just very misguided to say the least.

On June 22 2011 14:15 koreasilver wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 22 2011 13:20 Torte de Lini wrote:
Jdseemoreglass is no stranger to temp. bans. A large shame because I think he is a generally nice guy, just very misguided to say the least.

After reading that quote, this is really understated.
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 05:19:42
June 24 2011 05:16 GMT
#7
On June 24 2011 14:12 quiong wrote:
Perhaps you should work on making satirical posts of a higher quality, rather than a guide to understanding satire. Your entire post seems to be one massive assumption that, because you were temp-banned for those example posts above, your audience must be retarded.

Show nested quote +
It is true that satire is often confused with trolling, and causes an emotional response, but it must be made clear that this is not the intention of satire, and such responses are usually the result of confusion or misunderstanding on the part of the specific audience.


Your last paragraph again puts the blame squarely on the audience -- if the audience is confused, it must be their fault. Does it not occur to you that it may equally be the fault of the satirist if his or her work is so easily confused for trolling?


I said that usually the confused individuals are to blame for their confusion, which I think is true in most things in life. Of course, this assumes that I delivered the satire adequately, which I'm sure people can fairly debate. The poster above you seems to think they were all very obvious for example.

However, this blog isn't directed to the moderation, rather to the people who responded to me with confusion and anger. If I could delete the mod edits from my posts I would, but I think that's against the rules.
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
quiong
Profile Joined January 2008
United States268 Posts
June 24 2011 05:18 GMT
#8
On June 24 2011 14:16 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 14:12 quiong wrote:
Perhaps you should work on making satirical posts of a higher quality, rather than a guide to understanding satire. Your entire post seems to be one massive assumption that, because you were temp-banned for those example posts above, your audience must be retarded.

It is true that satire is often confused with trolling, and causes an emotional response, but it must be made clear that this is not the intention of satire, and such responses are usually the result of confusion or misunderstanding on the part of the specific audience.


Your last paragraph again puts the blame squarely on the audience -- if the audience is confused, it must be their fault. Does it not occur to you that it may equally be the fault of the satirist if his or her work is so easily confused for trolling?


I said that usually the confused individuals are to blame for their confusion, which I think is true in most things in life. Of course, this assumes that I delivered the satire adequately, which I'm sure people can fairly debate. The poster above you seems to think they were all very obvious for example.


And the mods who temp-banned you obviously disagreed. So for a specific (yet important) subset of the audience on this site, your delivery still needs work.
huameng
Profile Blog Joined April 2007
United States1133 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 05:22:14
June 24 2011 05:20 GMT
#9
On June 24 2011 14:18 quiong wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 14:16 jdseemoreglass wrote:
On June 24 2011 14:12 quiong wrote:
Perhaps you should work on making satirical posts of a higher quality, rather than a guide to understanding satire. Your entire post seems to be one massive assumption that, because you were temp-banned for those example posts above, your audience must be retarded.

It is true that satire is often confused with trolling, and causes an emotional response, but it must be made clear that this is not the intention of satire, and such responses are usually the result of confusion or misunderstanding on the part of the specific audience.


Your last paragraph again puts the blame squarely on the audience -- if the audience is confused, it must be their fault. Does it not occur to you that it may equally be the fault of the satirist if his or her work is so easily confused for trolling?


I said that usually the confused individuals are to blame for their confusion, which I think is true in most things in life. Of course, this assumes that I delivered the satire adequately, which I'm sure people can fairly debate. The poster above you seems to think they were all very obvious for example.


And the mods who temp-banned you obviously disagreed. So for a specific (yet important) subset of the audience on this site, your delivery still needs work.


It is possible to both understand a post is satire and understand a post is shit

edit: you could take the red ink out of the quotes no problem
skating
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
June 24 2011 05:21 GMT
#10
On June 24 2011 14:18 quiong wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 14:16 jdseemoreglass wrote:
On June 24 2011 14:12 quiong wrote:
Perhaps you should work on making satirical posts of a higher quality, rather than a guide to understanding satire. Your entire post seems to be one massive assumption that, because you were temp-banned for those example posts above, your audience must be retarded.

It is true that satire is often confused with trolling, and causes an emotional response, but it must be made clear that this is not the intention of satire, and such responses are usually the result of confusion or misunderstanding on the part of the specific audience.


Your last paragraph again puts the blame squarely on the audience -- if the audience is confused, it must be their fault. Does it not occur to you that it may equally be the fault of the satirist if his or her work is so easily confused for trolling?


I said that usually the confused individuals are to blame for their confusion, which I think is true in most things in life. Of course, this assumes that I delivered the satire adequately, which I'm sure people can fairly debate. The poster above you seems to think they were all very obvious for example.


And the mods who temp-banned you obviously disagreed. So for a specific (yet important) subset of the audience on this site, your delivery still needs work.


You are assuming the mods banned me out of confusion. Perhaps they simply don't want sarcastic arguments. Like I said, this was directed towards confused posters, not the mods, and I would edit the red ink but I think it's against the rules.
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
quiong
Profile Joined January 2008
United States268 Posts
June 24 2011 05:24 GMT
#11
I concede, perhaps the mods fully understood that your posts were satirical, but banned you anyway for some other reason.

The fact that you picked 3 posts where you were temp-banned in your guide made it not-so-subtly seem directed towards the mods.
Enervate
Profile Joined August 2010
United States1769 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 05:42:54
June 24 2011 05:39 GMT
#12
Lol you are in almost the exact same situation as Rogert Ebert once was in.

He made a terrible satirical post (about creationism) that no one was able to correctly recognize as satire and then had to make another blog post explaining it and defending himself whilst trying to place the fault on the reader.

Yea, I don't think that worked too well for him.

(Not to mention he only made 1 bad post and a better response.)
Probulous
Profile Blog Joined March 2011
Australia3894 Posts
June 24 2011 05:47 GMT
#13
Author writes long-winded explanation for his failed attempt at satire.

Fails to see the irony...
"Dude has some really interesting midgame switches that I wouldn't have expected. "I violated your house" into "HIHO THE DAIRY OH!" really threw me. You don't usually expect children's poetry harass as a follow up " - AmericanUmlaut
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 05:54:16
June 24 2011 05:52 GMT
#14
On June 24 2011 14:47 Probulous wrote:
Author writes long-winded explanation for his failed attempt at satire.

Fails to see the irony...


This is a guide for people who may be irony challenged. I think I explained irony and satire and how to recognize them fairly well, regardless of the actual examples used.

And what makes you think I failed to see the irony
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
Ghin
Profile Blog Joined January 2005
United States2391 Posts
June 24 2011 06:01 GMT
#15
Your posts are just bad, which is why you got temp banned.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I was taught that satire is a form of humor.

Legalize drugs and murder.
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
June 24 2011 06:02 GMT
#16
On June 24 2011 15:01 Ghin wrote:
Your posts are just bad, which is why you got temp banned.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I was taught that satire is a form of humor.


Satire can be a form of humor, but it isn't a requirement. In case you didn't notice I provided a definition for the word.
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
Kamais_Ookin
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
Canada4218 Posts
June 24 2011 06:06 GMT
#17
This blog is 1/5, give it up already before you get banned some more.
I <3 Plexa.
Gummy
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United States2180 Posts
June 24 2011 06:11 GMT
#18
I'm thinking this blog is quite Ferric.

It's not only ironic, it's 3+ ironic.

It's not only ironic, it's fucking cationic.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯ There are three kinds of people in the world: those who can count and those who can't.
Blisse
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
Canada3710 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 06:24:38
June 24 2011 06:17 GMT
#19
On June 24 2011 15:11 Gummy wrote:
I'm thinking this blog is quite Ferric.

It's not only ironic, it's 3+ ironic.

It's not only ironic, it's fucking cationic.


LOL


You were neither posting irony nor satire, and you should re-evaluate what those ideas mean because you don't quite understand them yet, nor do you know how to use them properly. Your understanding of them is not how almost anyone else understands them (or you're just failing to communicate your ideas).

Also, if you post ironic and satirical contents, you really are not contributing more than saying, "you are wrong, and also dumb," which is not a nice way to post. The only reason a lot of them are forgivable is because they are often very funny, which speaks of effort. Your posts simply garnered a grunt

Anyways, this is more of a veiled attack on the administrators that temporarily banned you than a guide, saying that their understanding of satire and irony is wrong, and yours is right.of confusion.
There is no one like you in the universe.
Laerties
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States361 Posts
June 24 2011 06:22 GMT
#20
I think the mods got the satire the first time, but the posts still didn't contribute anything which, I think warrants a ban
Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony.
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
June 24 2011 06:30 GMT
#21
On June 24 2011 15:22 Laerties wrote:
I think the mods got the satire the first time, but the posts still didn't contribute anything which, I think warrants a ban

Posts that don't contribute anything warrant a ban?

LOL. What site have you been looking at man?

And I think my post on death had far more content and meaning than the second poster of the same thread whose sole contribution was:

On June 22 2011 04:34 Carras wrote:
Only in America.
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
TylerThaCreator
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
United States906 Posts
June 24 2011 06:38 GMT
#22
the problem is that you're horribly unfunny so the satire/irony is lost on everyone. stop posting
aka SethN
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 06:40:58
June 24 2011 06:39 GMT
#23
On June 24 2011 15:38 TylerThaCreator wrote:
the problem is that you're horribly unfunny so the satire/irony is lost on everyone. stop posting


lol so much animosity...

It's ok, I still love you guys

Goodnight TL.
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
Laerties
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States361 Posts
June 24 2011 06:40 GMT
#24
On June 24 2011 15:30 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 15:22 Laerties wrote:
I think the mods got the satire the first time, but the posts still didn't contribute anything which, I think warrants a ban

Posts that don't contribute anything warrant a ban?

LOL. What site have you been looking at man?

And I think my post on death had far more content and meaning than the second poster of the same thread whose sole contribution was:

Show nested quote +
On June 22 2011 04:34 Carras wrote:
Only in America.



Yea, from reading that auto ban list it seems like most bans are for either insults or shitty no content posts... Also from reading the auto ban list its obvious that moderation is never consistant. I'm not trying to upset you but I'm hard pressed to believe that the mods just banned you because they thought you were trolling.
Happiness is when what you think, what you say, and what you do are in harmony.
Torte de Lini
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
Germany38463 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 07:00:56
June 24 2011 06:57 GMT
#25
The problem with your "humor" is that they're posting in places that aren't asking for humor. They're asking for lively discussions and viewpoints/new perspectives.

All you're doing is trying to get a laugh, but hardly proving a point.

One day mankind will solve death. If we just have enough of other people's money and we have scientific progress we can achieve immortality for everyone. Of course it won't happen in America, because we are backwards and get everything wrong and should learn from the other countries how to behave.

There is no reason for a person to die of cancer or any other deadly disease. Every time I hear about someone dying in the news, or taking great pains to try and survive as long as possible, I question where the system failed them. We've got a lot of ignorant capitalists here who believe in things like natural selection and think it's normal for people to die. Well it's not. We just haven't advanced politically far enough to end death, like many countries have ended poverty.

I just hope America isn't beat to solving mortality by a nation like Cuba or North Korea. That would be very embarrassing considering how many economic advantages we have.


This isn't satire or irony, this is just pure absurdity. You're being too subtle and not showing that this is just untrue because you talk within the realms of reality or actual rationale (despite how absurd it is).

Additionally, I've seen stupider and stranger on this site, so this falls into that category which leads one to believe you actually think so. The worst part is your follow-up, which just shows how stern you are on the subject. If you aren't serious in your claims then you are simply trolling, saying things you don't believe to cause a reaction or a disturbance, which isn't accepted much here I believe:
What makes you think I'm trolling? Maybe I didn't explain what I meant very clearly. Let me try and rephrase the argument...

There are many, many people who have died, right? I mean I hear about it all the time in the news and in history and stuff. And yet, at the same time, there are tons of people alive and living. Clearly that means that death isn't really necessary, or else we would all be dead.

So how come some people die and so many other people haven't died? Well clearly it's because there is an unequal distribution of wealth. If all of the people who died had the same exact health care as the people who are alive, then no one would be dead. So to cure mortality, all we have to do is take the health care from the richest people and apply it to the poorest people.

This is pretty much common sense. But our voters and politicians are so dumb they don't see this logic. People are really very immoral because they refuse to give up their money, essentially they want other people to die for their own greed. If it wasn't for greed we could have cured death a long time ago.


So example 1 is completely out the door.

Banning movies from a country now?

lol, and they call themselves the land of the free and the home....

Oh wait, never mind, this is Europe. Time to put on my rose colored glasses.


This is just poor taste and silly. This is sarcasm, not irony or satire.

I'm taking AP Calculus 7, AP Theoretical and Applied Physics, AP Molecular Chemistry and Biology. I've have two doctorates, one from Harvard and one from Yale. I passed the bar recently, but I also want to earn a Nobel Prize at some point in the future as well.

What Nobel Prizes have you guys won so far?


Non-contributory. You're relating a global general discussion into a personal remark piece. No one cares what your credentials are and fabricating them for laughs is not only pointless, but confuses people to see what point you're trying to make.

Neither irony nor satire.

The problem with this blog entry is that you think satire is synonymous with exaggerating. You are exaggerating, not being satirical (or remotely wittingly funny) to prove a point or case

Stick with what you know and what you think :3 Leave the jokes for the right time and place. Satire is not meant to interact with others as far as I know (because it loses its nature). It's more for essays, open statements/arguments and/or stories that want to convey a viewpoint.

Try Jonathan Swift or 1984 or Animal Farm
https://twitter.com/#!/TorteDeLini (@TorteDeLini)
Meapak_Ziphh
Profile Blog Joined June 2010
United States6785 Posts
June 24 2011 07:07 GMT
#26
I fail to see the purpose of this thread. Did you create it just to complain about your bans? If that's the case then you should read Torte's post. If you created it to discuss sarcasm and irony the you should probably format this better.
Forti et Fideli ~ TL Mafia Forum: Come play with us! ~ Go Samsung KHAN, Stork, JangBi , Shine, Grape, and TurN Fighting!~ wat
Whole
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States6046 Posts
June 24 2011 07:09 GMT
#27
On June 24 2011 16:07 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:
I fail to see the purpose of this thread. Did you create it just to complain about your bans? If that's the case then you should read Torte's post. If you created it to discuss sarcasm and irony the you should probably format this better.

it is a blog complaining about his bans but covering up that fact by trying to lead discussion elsewhere
Velr
Profile Blog Joined July 2008
Switzerland10668 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 07:12:02
June 24 2011 07:10 GMT
#28
This is a good Blog!



(am i doing this right?)
Kamais_Ookin
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
Canada4218 Posts
June 24 2011 07:14 GMT
#29
On June 24 2011 16:10 Velr wrote:
This is a good Blog!



(am i doing this right?)
Your close! I'd add a 5/5 for a strong punch.
I <3 Plexa.
Whole
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
United States6046 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 07:17:05
June 24 2011 07:16 GMT
#30
On June 24 2011 16:14 Kamais_Ookin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 16:10 Velr wrote:
This is a good Blog!



(am i doing this right?)
Your close! I'd add a 5/5 for a strong punch.

You may also want to slightly disagree with one point, but cover it up in a bunch of compliments and compliment the actual blogger saying you love every post he makes....just to make the joke seem more realistic.
Torte de Lini
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
Germany38463 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 07:19:40
June 24 2011 07:18 GMT
#31
+ Show Spoiler +
I agree with this blog. I, too, try to use literary techniques that I misunderstand to absolve myself from all blame and shove that very blame onto the very readers who misunderstand me. A double-edged sword considering the fact that those readers are the very people who banned me, so in essence, I am going against the authorities and ultimately insulting them for their lack of understanding of this refined art I call satire (also known as exaggerating to the point of faulty comedy nature!).


The above, in spoilers, is the kind of literary comedy I go for. As you can tell, it's kind of mean-spirited and ultimately rude.

I did it again awhile back, guess what happened: http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?topic_id=197994#8

Show nested quote +
Yes this is another girl blog, but it’s special, because it’s my first blog! But I think this one will be different from the other girl blogs,


Yeah, I think my blog is different too, let me tell you about it too!

So there's this girl. Her name? Her name is something the mortals refer to her to sum up her entity to a level of comprehension. The problem with this girl is unlike any other I've occurred. She is not the problem, but her beauty continues to fester and plague my thoughts. Each and every thought-process that churns within my mind somehow webs into the features of her face. Everytime I see her, I go blind with delight. Everytime I speak of her, my tongue becomes swollen with cinnamon of timidity and my babbling slowly erodes to speechlessness. Each time I think of her, I begin to dream, my eyes flutter to a slow draw and I dream, I dream for so long.

She is but an escapade of my responsibility, my worries and insecurity. When I'm with her, time dissolves to a pause; it calms itself so I can admire an art that is forever in motion, forever in touch with my emotions and eternally tugging my heart, sore at smiling and love. When the opportunity presents itself for me to actually gawk at her astonishing beauty; either of her button nose, her adorable cheeks or emerald eyes that dazzle wider than any jewel-polisher could achieve I grow more thirsty. I yearn to disrobe her, to remove these fickle pieces of clothing-ware that but only keep us apart, no matter how minimal. I am hungry to define our love on a physical par that my young adolescent self imagined with a cloth and a sturdy hand. I wish to dig my nose into her long hair, conditioned and tamed to sparkle a rich hazel of many tasty almonds. I wish to mirror her gaze into my own and peck my lips against plump ones, rich with beauty and potential taste of love.

This is a girl I cannot behold to the highest degree of understanding. She is of another universe, another hierarchy or being that hails from another existence and glorious beauty. To give her a name would not give justice and to describe her is but an iceberg that never melts. When a man feels love, they but only pursue an end that is hopefully and may potentially be with her.

This girl is the outline of my exhausted heart.

Well that was fun, off-topic and somehow not proving the point that nearly all girl topics revolve around the same problems and socialistic behavior

User was temp banned for this post.


The guy enjoyed it. JWD didn't ): Pick the times of where to be funny is all I have to say~
https://twitter.com/#!/TorteDeLini (@TorteDeLini)
ghrur
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
United States3786 Posts
June 24 2011 07:39 GMT
#32
On June 24 2011 15:57 Torte de Lini wrote:
The problem with your "humor" is that they're posting in places that aren't asking for humor. They're asking for lively discussions and viewpoints/new perspectives.

All you're doing is trying to get a laugh, but hardly proving a point.

This isn't satire or irony, this is just pure absurdity. You're being too subtle and not showing that this is just untrue because you talk within the realms of reality or actual rationale (despite how absurd it is).


I disagree! I think that satire is a great way to introduce a new viewpoint/perspective. The point of satire is to make an argument, and arguments can support/refute old ideas or introduce something new.

And the fact that it's in the realms of reality is exactly what makes it great satire! Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal is great because it makes you believe he's actually got a novel idea, and then pushes for his proposal in such a way that causes the reader to worry about his seriousness. Satire thrives off that tension, and if jdseemoreglass is making people think about that, he's doing it well.

I think the problem lies in the fact that satire is mockery. Mockery, by nature, is disrespectful and this site doesn't support that.
darkness overpowering
Mikilatov
Profile Blog Joined May 2008
United States3897 Posts
June 24 2011 07:39 GMT
#33
Some decent points here... But honestly I'm just excited that I was quoted.

But yeah, just to reaffirm the satire vs. trolling thing, my last two blogs (one of which is where you took that quote from) were in no way attempting to troll anyone. I made them so entirely ludacris that I couldn't imagine anyone would think I was being serious, or trying to convince anyone it was serious (trolling). Unfortunately there were a moderately sized chunk of people who actually thought I was attempting to troll (or even worse, that I was actually serious.)
♥ I used to lasso the shit out of your tournaments =( ♥ | Much is my hero. | zizi yO~ | Be Nice, TL.
Probulous
Profile Blog Joined March 2011
Australia3894 Posts
June 24 2011 07:43 GMT
#34
On June 24 2011 16:39 Mikilatov wrote:
Some decent points here... But honestly I'm just excited that I was quoted.

But yeah, just to reaffirm the satire vs. trolling thing, my last two blogs (one of which is where you took that quote from) were in no way attempting to troll anyone. I made them so entirely ludacris that I couldn't imagine anyone would think I was being serious, or trying to convince anyone it was serious (trolling). Unfortunately there were a moderately sized chunk of people who actually thought I was attempting to troll (or even worse, that I was actually serious.)


^^This is a guide to irony.

This guy writes supposedly satirical posts which nobody gets and then proceeds to write a blog explaining what irony is. The true irony is not that he doesn't understand irony, but rather that in his attempts to explain he clearly demonstrates his lack of understanding...
"Dude has some really interesting midgame switches that I wouldn't have expected. "I violated your house" into "HIHO THE DAIRY OH!" really threw me. You don't usually expect children's poetry harass as a follow up " - AmericanUmlaut
Torte de Lini
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
Germany38463 Posts
June 24 2011 07:44 GMT
#35
On June 24 2011 16:39 ghrur wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 15:57 Torte de Lini wrote:
The problem with your "humor" is that they're posting in places that aren't asking for humor. They're asking for lively discussions and viewpoints/new perspectives.

All you're doing is trying to get a laugh, but hardly proving a point.

This isn't satire or irony, this is just pure absurdity. You're being too subtle and not showing that this is just untrue because you talk within the realms of reality or actual rationale (despite how absurd it is).


I disagree! I think that satire is a great way to introduce a new viewpoint/perspective. The point of satire is to make an argument, and arguments can support/refute old ideas or introduce something new.

And the fact that it's in the realms of reality is exactly what makes it great satire! Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal is great because it makes you believe he's actually got a novel idea, and then pushes for his proposal in such a way that causes the reader to worry about his seriousness. Satire thrives off that tension, and if jdseemoreglass is making people think about that, he's doing it well.

I think the problem lies in the fact that satire is mockery. Mockery, by nature, is disrespectful and this site doesn't support that.


If everyone is having a round-table discussion and you're trying to be an amateur jester, it doesn't smooth over well. People come in expecting a serious discussion and with all the rampant misinformation, satire will hardly fit or even understood.

Swift's example of satire is gradual. You don't see that from jdseemoreglass and thus why it doesn't work and just becomes one-dimensionally bland or poor. On top of that, Swift's satire ranges from calling people cows to assessing a problem, neither seen from jdseemoreglass.
https://twitter.com/#!/TorteDeLini (@TorteDeLini)
Mikilatov
Profile Blog Joined May 2008
United States3897 Posts
June 24 2011 07:48 GMT
#36
On June 24 2011 16:43 Probulous wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 16:39 Mikilatov wrote:
Some decent points here... But honestly I'm just excited that I was quoted.

But yeah, just to reaffirm the satire vs. trolling thing, my last two blogs (one of which is where you took that quote from) were in no way attempting to troll anyone. I made them so entirely ludacris that I couldn't imagine anyone would think I was being serious, or trying to convince anyone it was serious (trolling). Unfortunately there were a moderately sized chunk of people who actually thought I was attempting to troll (or even worse, that I was actually serious.)


^^This is a guide to irony.

This guy writes supposedly satirical posts which nobody gets and then proceeds to write a blog explaining what irony is. The true irony is not that he doesn't understand irony, but rather that in his attempts to explain he clearly demonstrates his lack of understanding...


Wait. When you say 'this guy' you're referring to the OP, right? haha
♥ I used to lasso the shit out of your tournaments =( ♥ | Much is my hero. | zizi yO~ | Be Nice, TL.
Probulous
Profile Blog Joined March 2011
Australia3894 Posts
June 24 2011 07:53 GMT
#37
On June 24 2011 16:48 Mikilatov wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 16:43 Probulous wrote:
On June 24 2011 16:39 Mikilatov wrote:
Some decent points here... But honestly I'm just excited that I was quoted.

But yeah, just to reaffirm the satire vs. trolling thing, my last two blogs (one of which is where you took that quote from) were in no way attempting to troll anyone. I made them so entirely ludacris that I couldn't imagine anyone would think I was being serious, or trying to convince anyone it was serious (trolling). Unfortunately there were a moderately sized chunk of people who actually thought I was attempting to troll (or even worse, that I was actually serious.)


^^This is a guide to irony.

This guy writes supposedly satirical posts which nobody gets and then proceeds to write a blog explaining what irony is. The true irony is not that he doesn't understand irony, but rather that in his attempts to explain he clearly demonstrates his lack of understanding...


Wait. When you say 'this guy' you're referring to the OP, right? haha


Ok that is too much!

Yes, I meant the OP
"Dude has some really interesting midgame switches that I wouldn't have expected. "I violated your house" into "HIHO THE DAIRY OH!" really threw me. You don't usually expect children's poetry harass as a follow up " - AmericanUmlaut
ghrur
Profile Blog Joined May 2009
United States3786 Posts
June 24 2011 07:58 GMT
#38
On June 24 2011 16:44 Torte de Lini wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 16:39 ghrur wrote:
On June 24 2011 15:57 Torte de Lini wrote:
The problem with your "humor" is that they're posting in places that aren't asking for humor. They're asking for lively discussions and viewpoints/new perspectives.

All you're doing is trying to get a laugh, but hardly proving a point.

This isn't satire or irony, this is just pure absurdity. You're being too subtle and not showing that this is just untrue because you talk within the realms of reality or actual rationale (despite how absurd it is).


I disagree! I think that satire is a great way to introduce a new viewpoint/perspective. The point of satire is to make an argument, and arguments can support/refute old ideas or introduce something new.

And the fact that it's in the realms of reality is exactly what makes it great satire! Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal is great because it makes you believe he's actually got a novel idea, and then pushes for his proposal in such a way that causes the reader to worry about his seriousness. Satire thrives off that tension, and if jdseemoreglass is making people think about that, he's doing it well.

I think the problem lies in the fact that satire is mockery. Mockery, by nature, is disrespectful and this site doesn't support that.


If everyone is having a round-table discussion and you're trying to be an amateur jester, it doesn't smooth over well. People come in expecting a serious discussion and with all the rampant misinformation, satire will hardly fit or even understood.

Swift's example of satire is gradual. You don't see that from jdseemoreglass and thus why it doesn't work and just becomes one-dimensionally bland or poor. On top of that, Swift's satire ranges from calling people cows to assessing a problem, neither seen from jdseemoreglass.


People misunderstand because they haven't read this blog post. :p Nah. But satire is serious. It's humorous, but the underlying message is still serious. If people take it seriously, then they're ... nvm!

Well, Swift's is obviously much better written. He also had the luxury of pages instead of a few short paragraphs. You can't exactly be gradual when you have like 500 words. Just gotta go.
darkness overpowering
SirJolt
Profile Blog Joined October 2009
the Dagon Knight4002 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 09:16:23
June 24 2011 09:04 GMT
#39
In fairness, Swift was also talking about murdering babies to solve a food shortage. His satire was so extreme that it would be difficult to mistake.

Those quoted are extreme, but they're not viewpoints incomprehensible to the average person (like killing babies).
Moderator@SirJolt
zeru
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
8156 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 10:25:37
June 24 2011 10:23 GMT
#40
--- Nuked ---
deathly rat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United Kingdom911 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 10:55:44
June 24 2011 10:40 GMT
#41
I know this thread is all about you being sanctioned, but I really have to object to your definition of irony. If you are saying one thing but meaning another you are being sarcastic. Sarcasm is never irony. eg) G.bush is clearly the most clever and articulate man to have ever existed.

In the infamous A.Morrisette song, she claims that it is ironic that you have 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife. A common distiction of Irony is that this is only ironic if your father works in a knife factory and you collect knives from history. You are someone who is never usually without a knife, so having an abundance of similar but useless utensil is ironic.

Anyway, the intricacies of irony are almost beyond definition, however what is clear is that sarcasm never constitutes irony because sarcasm is saying one thing and meaning another, whilst irony must encompass some other outside circumstance which relates to the current situation/statement.

You could argue that there has been a recent change in the meaning of irony to include sarcasm, but you can always argue this when discussing the actual meanings of words, and its almost always a reductive dead end of an argument (hear that destiny <3 )
No logo (logo)
Keldrath
Profile Joined July 2010
United States449 Posts
June 24 2011 10:53 GMT
#42
On June 24 2011 14:18 quiong wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 14:16 jdseemoreglass wrote:
On June 24 2011 14:12 quiong wrote:
Perhaps you should work on making satirical posts of a higher quality, rather than a guide to understanding satire. Your entire post seems to be one massive assumption that, because you were temp-banned for those example posts above, your audience must be retarded.

It is true that satire is often confused with trolling, and causes an emotional response, but it must be made clear that this is not the intention of satire, and such responses are usually the result of confusion or misunderstanding on the part of the specific audience.


Your last paragraph again puts the blame squarely on the audience -- if the audience is confused, it must be their fault. Does it not occur to you that it may equally be the fault of the satirist if his or her work is so easily confused for trolling?


I said that usually the confused individuals are to blame for their confusion, which I think is true in most things in life. Of course, this assumes that I delivered the satire adequately, which I'm sure people can fairly debate. The poster above you seems to think they were all very obvious for example.


And the mods who temp-banned you obviously disagreed. So for a specific (yet important) subset of the audience on this site, your delivery still needs work.



its not that the mods disagreed, im sure they were laughing as they banned him as well, they were all very very obvious. its just that post like that arent welcome on TL, they want serious discussions, not funny guys making jokes.
If you want peace... prepare for war.
Ghin
Profile Blog Joined January 2005
United States2391 Posts
June 24 2011 11:12 GMT
#43
On June 24 2011 19:53 Keldrath wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 14:18 quiong wrote:
On June 24 2011 14:16 jdseemoreglass wrote:
On June 24 2011 14:12 quiong wrote:
Perhaps you should work on making satirical posts of a higher quality, rather than a guide to understanding satire. Your entire post seems to be one massive assumption that, because you were temp-banned for those example posts above, your audience must be retarded.

It is true that satire is often confused with trolling, and causes an emotional response, but it must be made clear that this is not the intention of satire, and such responses are usually the result of confusion or misunderstanding on the part of the specific audience.


Your last paragraph again puts the blame squarely on the audience -- if the audience is confused, it must be their fault. Does it not occur to you that it may equally be the fault of the satirist if his or her work is so easily confused for trolling?


I said that usually the confused individuals are to blame for their confusion, which I think is true in most things in life. Of course, this assumes that I delivered the satire adequately, which I'm sure people can fairly debate. The poster above you seems to think they were all very obvious for example.


And the mods who temp-banned you obviously disagreed. So for a specific (yet important) subset of the audience on this site, your delivery still needs work.



its not that the mods disagreed, im sure they were laughing as they banned him as well, they were all very very obvious. its just that post like that arent welcome on TL, they want serious discussions, not funny guys making jokes.


No, its because he was being an asshole. It has nothing to do with being funny, because none of the posts he was banned for were funny.
Legalize drugs and murder.
SirJolt
Profile Blog Joined October 2009
the Dagon Knight4002 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 11:54:09
June 24 2011 11:49 GMT
#44
On June 24 2011 19:53 Keldrath wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 14:18 quiong wrote:
On June 24 2011 14:16 jdseemoreglass wrote:
On June 24 2011 14:12 quiong wrote:
Perhaps you should work on making satirical posts of a higher quality, rather than a guide to understanding satire. Your entire post seems to be one massive assumption that, because you were temp-banned for those example posts above, your audience must be retarded.

It is true that satire is often confused with trolling, and causes an emotional response, but it must be made clear that this is not the intention of satire, and such responses are usually the result of confusion or misunderstanding on the part of the specific audience.


Your last paragraph again puts the blame squarely on the audience -- if the audience is confused, it must be their fault. Does it not occur to you that it may equally be the fault of the satirist if his or her work is so easily confused for trolling?


I said that usually the confused individuals are to blame for their confusion, which I think is true in most things in life. Of course, this assumes that I delivered the satire adequately, which I'm sure people can fairly debate. The poster above you seems to think they were all very obvious for example.


And the mods who temp-banned you obviously disagreed. So for a specific (yet important) subset of the audience on this site, your delivery still needs work.


its not that the mods disagreed, im sure they were laughing as they banned him as well, they were all very very obvious. its just that post like that arent welcome on TL, they want serious discussions, not funny guys making jokes.


It occurs to me that they may have temp banned him ironically...

Would that make this blog post a satire of other people who write blogs whining about being banned, but trying to dress it up as something else?


I haven't seen satire like this since The Bore!

+ Show Spoiler +
Do you see what I've done here, with that reference to The Bore? You see, this spoiler is me explaining the joke. I imagine people here are aware that this takes the sting out of a punchline, but I am doing my best to fit in.

This is the thread where we explain the joke, assuming that people didn't find it funny because they failed to understand it.

Moderator@SirJolt
tnkted
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
United States1359 Posts
June 24 2011 12:28 GMT
#45
Perhaps I'm missing the logic here, but if a post about satire is itself satirical, doesn't that make it serious?
'I think "tnkted" may have justified this entire thread.' - Mjolnir
ComaDose
Profile Blog Joined December 2009
Canada10357 Posts
June 24 2011 12:46 GMT
#46
Yeah this guy is so dumb.
Using "literary devices".
Who does that?
No one ever uses satire they are all just trolls.
Luckily I didn't have to try hard not to laugh at his first two examples since i am at work.
If people wanted humor in their general discussions they wouldn't visit serious news sites.
BW pros training sc2 is like kiss making a dub step album.
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 17:21:30
June 24 2011 17:18 GMT
#47
On June 24 2011 21:46 ComaDose wrote:
Yeah this guy is so dumb.
Using "literary devices".
Who does that?
No one ever uses satire they are all just trolls.
Luckily I didn't have to try hard not to laugh at his first two examples since i am at work.
If people wanted humor in their general discussions they wouldn't visit serious news sites.


1) Recognizing the absurdity: Author suggests no one ever uses satire. Author suggests the TL general forum is a serious news site. Author suggests the OP is dumb.

Well done, sir.


On June 24 2011 16:39 ghrur wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 15:57 Torte de Lini wrote:
The problem with your "humor" is that they're posting in places that aren't asking for humor. They're asking for lively discussions and viewpoints/new perspectives.

All you're doing is trying to get a laugh, but hardly proving a point.

This isn't satire or irony, this is just pure absurdity. You're being too subtle and not showing that this is just untrue because you talk within the realms of reality or actual rationale (despite how absurd it is).


I disagree! I think that satire is a great way to introduce a new viewpoint/perspective. The point of satire is to make an argument, and arguments can support/refute old ideas or introduce something new.

And the fact that it's in the realms of reality is exactly what makes it great satire! Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal is great because it makes you believe he's actually got a novel idea, and then pushes for his proposal in such a way that causes the reader to worry about his seriousness. Satire thrives off that tension, and if jdseemoreglass is making people think about that, he's doing it well.

I think the problem lies in the fact that satire is mockery. Mockery, by nature, is disrespectful and this site doesn't support that.

On June 24 2011 16:58 ghrur wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 16:44 Torte de Lini wrote:
On June 24 2011 16:39 ghrur wrote:
On June 24 2011 15:57 Torte de Lini wrote:
The problem with your "humor" is that they're posting in places that aren't asking for humor. They're asking for lively discussions and viewpoints/new perspectives.

All you're doing is trying to get a laugh, but hardly proving a point.

This isn't satire or irony, this is just pure absurdity. You're being too subtle and not showing that this is just untrue because you talk within the realms of reality or actual rationale (despite how absurd it is).


I disagree! I think that satire is a great way to introduce a new viewpoint/perspective. The point of satire is to make an argument, and arguments can support/refute old ideas or introduce something new.

And the fact that it's in the realms of reality is exactly what makes it great satire! Jonathan Swift's A Modest Proposal is great because it makes you believe he's actually got a novel idea, and then pushes for his proposal in such a way that causes the reader to worry about his seriousness. Satire thrives off that tension, and if jdseemoreglass is making people think about that, he's doing it well.

I think the problem lies in the fact that satire is mockery. Mockery, by nature, is disrespectful and this site doesn't support that.


If everyone is having a round-table discussion and you're trying to be an amateur jester, it doesn't smooth over well. People come in expecting a serious discussion and with all the rampant misinformation, satire will hardly fit or even understood.

Swift's example of satire is gradual. You don't see that from jdseemoreglass and thus why it doesn't work and just becomes one-dimensionally bland or poor. On top of that, Swift's satire ranges from calling people cows to assessing a problem, neither seen from jdseemoreglass.


People misunderstand because they haven't read this blog post. :p Nah. But satire is serious. It's humorous, but the underlying message is still serious. If people take it seriously, then they're ... nvm!

Well, Swift's is obviously much better written. He also had the luxury of pages instead of a few short paragraphs. You can't exactly be gradual when you have like 500 words. Just gotta go.

These are very good points. People are clearly confused on what satire and it's purpose actually are, and at least one person is confirming my analysis of it.

Yes, Swift's is much better written than mine are, and of course I'm not going to gradually introduce absurdity and write a whole essay to get my point across.

I would also like to highlight this poster for being the only one who didn't attack me. How do I add that blue background?

And for all the people claiming I am unfunny, take a look at THESE blogs and then get back to me.

http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=226263
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=215434

That's what I thought. Case closed.
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
Torte de Lini
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
Germany38463 Posts
June 24 2011 20:09 GMT
#48
You're not unfunny, what you are saying isn't funny (in your OP).
See bans and the readers saying it isn't funny.

P.S: Case still opened because you have some misconstrued ideas .__.
https://twitter.com/#!/TorteDeLini (@TorteDeLini)
Dance.
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States389 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 20:17:04
June 24 2011 20:16 GMT
#49
I think the irony is that none of your examples (by you) are funny...

+ Show Spoiler +
....unless that is the whole point of the blog. In that case, GGWP
It is what it is...
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
June 24 2011 21:04 GMT
#50
Hmmm.... I've read my own OP 3 times now, and I can't find where I said my purpose was to be funny... I stated that I was debating and making arguments and critiquing ideas, but I don't see where I wrote "and this is why it's funny" or "here's the punch-line."

And when people already said "these weren't funny at all" I responded by saying that it wasn't my intention to be funny, and that isn't what the definition of either irony or satire is.

So now that more people are telling me my examples aren't funny, I'm kind of clueless what else I am supposed to say. I guess I can just agree.

You are right. They aren't funny.
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
shinosai
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States1577 Posts
June 24 2011 21:06 GMT
#51
On June 24 2011 16:43 Probulous wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 16:39 Mikilatov wrote:
Some decent points here... But honestly I'm just excited that I was quoted.

But yeah, just to reaffirm the satire vs. trolling thing, my last two blogs (one of which is where you took that quote from) were in no way attempting to troll anyone. I made them so entirely ludacris that I couldn't imagine anyone would think I was being serious, or trying to convince anyone it was serious (trolling). Unfortunately there were a moderately sized chunk of people who actually thought I was attempting to troll (or even worse, that I was actually serious.)


^^This is a guide to irony.

This guy writes supposedly satirical posts which nobody gets and then proceeds to write a blog explaining what irony is. The true irony is not that he doesn't understand irony, but rather that in his attempts to explain he clearly demonstrates his lack of understanding...


I wouldn't say that "nobody" gets them. I certainly didn't have a problem recognizing the true intentions of his posts, and found them rather amusing. It has been said that recognizing irony is the highest form of intellect, though, so perhaps it shouldn't be surprising that so many people fail to recognize it.
Be versatile, know when to retreat, and carry a big gun.
shinosai
Profile Blog Joined April 2010
United States1577 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 21:18:48
June 24 2011 21:12 GMT
#52
On June 24 2011 19:40 deathly rat wrote:
I know this thread is all about you being sanctioned, but I really have to object to your definition of irony. If you are saying one thing but meaning another you are being sarcastic. Sarcasm is never irony. eg) G.bush is clearly the most clever and articulate man to have ever existed.

In the infamous A.Morrisette song, she claims that it is ironic that you have 10,000 spoons when all you need is a knife. A common distiction of Irony is that this is only ironic if your father works in a knife factory and you collect knives from history. You are someone who is never usually without a knife, so having an abundance of similar but useless utensil is ironic.

Anyway, the intricacies of irony are almost beyond definition, however what is clear is that sarcasm never constitutes irony because sarcasm is saying one thing and meaning another, whilst irony must encompass some other outside circumstance which relates to the current situation/statement.

You could argue that there has been a recent change in the meaning of irony to include sarcasm, but you can always argue this when discussing the actual meanings of words, and its almost always a reductive dead end of an argument (hear that destiny <3 )


Sarcasm is a form of irony. While sarcasm is not always ironic, it is incorrect to say that sarcasm is never irony.

From the OED in reference to verbal irony:

"A figure of speech in which the intended meaning is the opposite of that expressed by the words used; usually taking the form of sarcasm or ridicule in which laudatory expressions are used to imply condemnation or contempt."

The requirements you have given for irony - that one must have some sort of outside circumstance which relates to the current situation - only applies to situational or dramatic irony. Not verbal.
Be versatile, know when to retreat, and carry a big gun.
jdseemoreglass
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
United States3773 Posts
June 24 2011 21:24 GMT
#53
On June 25 2011 06:06 shinosai wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 24 2011 16:43 Probulous wrote:
On June 24 2011 16:39 Mikilatov wrote:
Some decent points here... But honestly I'm just excited that I was quoted.

But yeah, just to reaffirm the satire vs. trolling thing, my last two blogs (one of which is where you took that quote from) were in no way attempting to troll anyone. I made them so entirely ludacris that I couldn't imagine anyone would think I was being serious, or trying to convince anyone it was serious (trolling). Unfortunately there were a moderately sized chunk of people who actually thought I was attempting to troll (or even worse, that I was actually serious.)


^^This is a guide to irony.

This guy writes supposedly satirical posts which nobody gets and then proceeds to write a blog explaining what irony is. The true irony is not that he doesn't understand irony, but rather that in his attempts to explain he clearly demonstrates his lack of understanding...


I wouldn't say that "nobody" gets them. I certainly didn't have a problem recognizing the true intentions of his posts, and found them rather amusing. It has been said that recognizing irony is the highest form of intellect, though, so perhaps it shouldn't be surprising that so many people fail to recognize it.

So then the question I have for you is... Who should you write for in a widely mixed audience?

Obviously there is a huge range of readers from people who enjoy complicated arguments and discussions to people who need "see spot run" kind of statements. Usually I like to debate with people who have the strongest arguments and ignore posters that seem kind of clueless, and the pleasure I find in writing would be kind of lost if I appealed to the lowest common denominator.

People would say the middle-ground and try to reach the majority, but I honestly thought that I was speaking to the majority. I guess the problem is the people who are confused are more likely to respond, so it's difficult to gauge how many people understand and how many don't.
"If you want this forum to be full of half-baked philosophy discussions between pompous faggots like yourself forever, stay the course captain vanilla" - FakeSteve[TPR], 2006
Torte de Lini
Profile Blog Joined September 2010
Germany38463 Posts
June 24 2011 21:24 GMT
#54
On June 25 2011 06:04 jdseemoreglass wrote:
Hmmm.... I've read my own OP 3 times now, and I can't find where I said my purpose was to be funny... I stated that I was debating and making arguments and critiquing ideas, but I don't see where I wrote "and this is why it's funny" or "here's the punch-line."

And when people already said "these weren't funny at all" I responded by saying that it wasn't my intention to be funny, and that isn't what the definition of either irony or satire is.

So now that more people are telling me my examples aren't funny, I'm kind of clueless what else I am supposed to say. I guess I can just agree.

You are right. They aren't funny.


And for all the people claiming I am unfunny, take a look at THESE blogs and then get back to me.

http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=226263
http://www.teamliquid.net/blogs/viewblog.php?id=215434

That's what I thought. Case closed.
https://twitter.com/#!/TorteDeLini (@TorteDeLini)
drewcifer
Profile Joined June 2010
United States192 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 22:10:13
June 24 2011 22:05 GMT
#55
you sure showed him



btw op ....in case you missed it the first 54 times, you're satire is not funny.basically what I'm saying is i really dislike you and feel offended by you. I've never seen anyone as unfunny as you actually .,.....................,,,teaching me about irony and satire when you were banned for unfunny irony and satire?????...because of this i just had to spend the last 35 minutes cleaning up my own vomit on the floor/my lap that was uncontrollably spewed from my mouth while reading this blog.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Blisse
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
Canada3710 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 22:13:48
June 24 2011 22:06 GMT
#56
On June 25 2011 02:18 jdseemoreglass wrote:
I would also like to highlight this poster for being the only one who didn't attack me. How do I add that blue background?


This is the reason I will never take any of your ideas seriously, and thus never respect anything you write on paper.

You have some misguided belief that anything people say against you is a personal attack.

And no one can argue against you (at least in your eyes) because you make absurd circular and vague statements that revolve around the idea that if the reader doesn't get it then it's the reader's fault.

And then you try to back up your examples by saying this is what I actually meant when it's clear it was not.

And then you also support your idea with the claims of the few individuals who do say they sort of understand your argument, while you call all those who don't understand your argument dumb.


It is my opinion that if you want to debate your bans, then do so in a private message with the moderator that banned you, not in a thinly veiled blog post that's attacking the moderator and the people of this site, because this is a clear attempt at hiding that reality.
There is no one like you in the universe.
drewcifer
Profile Joined June 2010
United States192 Posts
June 24 2011 22:11 GMT
#57
On June 25 2011 07:06 Blisse wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2011 02:18 jdseemoreglass wrote:
I would also like to highlight this poster for being the only one who didn't attack me. How do I add that blue background?


This is the reason I will never take any of your ideas seriously, and thus never respect anything you write on paper.

You have some misguided belief that anything people say against you is a personal attack.




how did you manage to write these 2 sentences after one another in a blog about irony
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Blisse
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
Canada3710 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 22:19:26
June 24 2011 22:17 GMT
#58
On June 25 2011 07:11 drewcifer wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2011 07:06 Blisse wrote:
On June 25 2011 02:18 jdseemoreglass wrote:
I would also like to highlight this poster for being the only one who didn't attack me. How do I add that blue background?


This is the reason I will never take any of your ideas seriously, and thus never respect anything you write on paper.

You have some misguided belief that anything people say against you is a personal attack.




how did you manage to write these 2 sentences after one another in a blog about irony


Because the first sentence is more of an extension of a previous thread a long while ago in which all he did was disregard my arguments on the basis that everyone who disagreed with him was a troll.

Also, to clarify, I meant ideas as in what he continues to claim as satire.

And he speaks in these half truths, where some of his statements are the truth and some of his statements are attempted trolls.

Still, pointing out a misunderstanding in my post does not invalidate the rest.
There is no one like you in the universe.
drewcifer
Profile Joined June 2010
United States192 Posts
June 24 2011 22:24 GMT
#59
On June 25 2011 07:17 Blisse wrote:
Show nested quote +
On June 25 2011 07:11 drewcifer wrote:
On June 25 2011 07:06 Blisse wrote:
On June 25 2011 02:18 jdseemoreglass wrote:
I would also like to highlight this poster for being the only one who didn't attack me. How do I add that blue background?


This is the reason I will never take any of your ideas seriously, and thus never respect anything you write on paper.

You have some misguided belief that anything people say against you is a personal attack.




how did you manage to write these 2 sentences after one another in a blog about irony




Still, pointing out a misunderstanding in my post does not invalidate the rest.


Well to me it kind of does, and I'm assuming maybe at least one other person thinks so too. I also assumed that you had some kind of grudge with the op based off how ridiculous you sounded, but I disregarded it because I wasn't aware that this was the place to bash people you don't like. But it kind of can be it seems, so please forgive my mistake.

I just want to say I am a total hypocrite before anyone else does. I don't like it.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Gnial
Profile Blog Joined July 2010
Canada907 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-06-24 23:58:57
June 24 2011 23:51 GMT
#60
Just because it is satire, doesn't mean it isn't also a troll.

Now, I am assuming you have a moderate level of understanding of internet discussions which occur in a public forum such as TeamLiquid. It doesn't take a genius to realize that posting a long, drawn out satirical comment as poorly made as your first one will get some confused responses, probably derailing the thread somewhat. By posting it, you are almost guaranteeing that the conversation gets sidetracked either by confused people, or by people who don't like the condescending nature of a satirical post in a debate thread. You are either completely aloof, or you were trolling to derail the thread.

Your second comment doesn't contribute anything at all to the discussion, but I remember reading that in the thread and not really getting why there was a ban.

Your third comment is just bad in a lot of ways. I can think of several reasons why it would lead to moderator intervention.

I personally had no problem recognizing the irony when you posted those - but you'd have to be in your own little world to not realize that you're going to get banned when you make posts like the 1st and the 3rd - even now that you've made your little educational spiel. (Speaking of which, the way you've presented this it is really hard to not interpret it as a jab against the moderators given the examples you have chosen to use. If you didn't have a hidden agenda, why wouldn't you have taken your examples from, oh I don't know, anywhere else?)
1, eh? 2, eh? 3, eh?
Normal
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 7h 28m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Reynor 380
Harstem 284
Hui .219
ProTech87
MindelVK 32
trigger 21
Vindicta 13
StarCraft: Brood War
Calm 14443
Hyuk 8357
Sea 3644
Snow 413
Stork 339
Light 284
Last 263
Soulkey 171
Zeus 166
PianO 151
[ Show more ]
Mini 142
TY 77
hero 57
ToSsGirL 56
Sea.KH 50
sas.Sziky 49
sorry 46
Rush 43
scan(afreeca) 25
Nal_rA 25
Yoon 23
Noble 19
Barracks 17
Icarus 16
IntoTheRainbow 11
SilentControl 9
zelot 6
HiyA 5
Terrorterran 4
ivOry 4
Dota 2
Gorgc2552
qojqva2204
XcaliburYe447
Fuzer 232
syndereN191
Counter-Strike
byalli236
edward78
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor188
Other Games
singsing2744
B2W.Neo858
C9.Mang0618
crisheroes434
DeMusliM402
Lowko302
Mew2King145
XaKoH 139
ArmadaUGS93
Organizations
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Secondary Stream12668
StarCraft 2
WardiTV6
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 14 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• intothetv
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 2054
• WagamamaTV298
League of Legends
• Nemesis8037
• Jankos2266
Upcoming Events
OSC
7h 28m
ArT vs ReBellioN
HonMonO vs Ziomek
Shameless vs LunaSea
MilkiCow vs GgMaChine
Moja vs HiGhDrA
Jumy vs TBD
Demi vs NightPhoenix
Solar vs Cham
Replay Cast
10h 28m
OSC
10h 28m
WardiTV Invitational
21h 28m
OSC
23h 28m
Korean StarCraft League
1d 13h
SOOP
1d 19h
sOs vs Percival
CranKy Ducklings
1d 20h
WardiTV Invitational
1d 21h
Cheesadelphia
2 days
[ Show More ]
CSO Cup
2 days
GSL Code S
2 days
Rogue vs herO
Classic vs GuMiho
Sparkling Tuna Cup
2 days
Replay Cast
3 days
Wardi Open
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Replay Cast
4 days
RSL Revival
4 days
Cure vs Percival
ByuN vs Spirit
RSL Revival
5 days
herO vs sOs
Zoun vs Clem
Replay Cast
6 days
The PondCast
6 days
RSL Revival
6 days
Serral vs SHIN
Solar vs Cham
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Season 17: Qualifier 2
BGE Stara Zagora 2025
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
2025 GSL S2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025
BLAST Open Spring 2025

Upcoming

Copa Latinoamericana 4
CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.