undefined | Better HN

0 pointsmattacular13y ago0 comments

Are you trying to say that it is ironic because my post is also snarky? If so, I think you need to a) go do some research on the concept of irony and then b) point out where I claimed to not be snarky...?

0 comments

jlgreco13y ago

> (informal, sometimes proscribed^)[1][2] Contradiction between circumstances and expectations; condition contrary to what might be expected. [from the 1640s]

> ^ Some authorities proscribe the last sense, "contradiction of circumstances and expectations, condition contrary to what might be expected"[2], but it has been common since the 1600s.[3]

Close enough for government work.

Definitional pedantism aside, I think my point is clear.

mattacularOP13y ago

To be really pedantic, your assumption that there was some expectation that my post would not be snarky is fallacious. Why do you hold that expectation? See, I wasn't the one calling out the snark, I was just pointing out what from the OP could be considered snarky, and I did it in a snarky way. That isn't irony just because you held the (incorrect) belief that for some reason (again, what reason?) my response post could/should not be snarky. That is all besides the fact that you had to dig up a proscribed definition of irony from god knows where to support your faulty premise.

Nice try though.

jlgreco13y ago

I suppose my error was giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming that you did not actually intend to be snarky.

Also, read that definition again. It is not archaic, it is modern "it has been common since the 1600s". This definition was pulled from wiktionary.

So to review, I dared use the word "irony" in an informal fashion, and you are a snarky pedant.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

jlgreco13y ago

> (informal, sometimes proscribed^)[1][2] Contradiction between circumstances and expectations; condition contrary to what might be expected. [from the 1640s]

> ^ Some authorities proscribe the last sense, "contradiction of circumstances and expectations, condition contrary to what might be expected"[2], but it has been common since the 1600s.[3]

Close enough for government work.

Definitional pedantism aside, I think my point is clear.

mattacularOP13y ago

Nice try though.

jlgreco13y ago

I suppose my error was giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming that you did not actually intend to be snarky.

Also, read that definition again. It is not archaic, it is modern "it has been common since the 1600s". This definition was pulled from wiktionary.

So to review, I dared use the word "irony" in an informal fashion, and you are a snarky pedant.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse