Jer? I think we have a solution for you.

[Genghis Ares]

I think Green with Italics might work.

Rabbits are cute and will not at all decapitate you.

[Cybren]

i would prefer we did the backwards italics thing as the [sarcasm]tag[/sarcasm], with the joke being that since no one has the font, they can't see it anyway. But that's a lot of work for a joke that, by design, no one can see.

[AlexanderDitto]

I think Green with Italics might work.

Rabbits are cute and will not at all decapitate you.

Then it just looks like your post has sepsis.

(Also, there's a difference between sarcasm and downright lying. I think the phrase would be better written "Oh yes, rabbits are cut and will not at ALL decapitate you. ")

I like the backward italics. I almost automatically read it as "sarcastic", for some reason, maybe because the words are pulling away from you.

I also actually like the suggestion of having a sarcasm tag that does nothing if you don't have the font installed. Meta humor!

[empath]

Yeah, I think the limitations of the backwards slant 'enhanced fonts' is the reason Mr McA's movement kinda died on the vine¹ (only submitted font was his own self-professed amateur job), and as funny as the meta joke would be, maybe using a different font would be interesting.

Just to confirm, regular text is in Arial, right? and the 'editing box' is Courier, so maybe Times New Roman...in pale green, perhaps?

Like so:


Of course, the suggestion that this is all dependent upon participation does hold the potential for failure, so if'n you don' wanna take efforts at this in light of the possibility of it coming to naught, I'd totally understand!

...and just to stick the patented Empath-Tangent™, I notice two BBCode tags on other forums absent here: strikethrough, and superscript/subscript. Neither is particularly necessary, but in the latter case, it'd allow me to annotate my posts better since ALT+codes only allow superscript #s up to three, and sometimes I need more footnotes.


Funny you should mention footnotes:
1. On the other hand, while Googling "Sarcastic font" and skimming further through the list, I was seeing a fair number of forum/blog posts regarding that site...dated this year - maybe it's just having a slow start. Heck, if the SF movement could influence Adobe & AGFA Monotype to implement it in their fonts, that'd be the ultimate victory.....

[Arius]

Actually, it might be possible to do this with png images. It would require a bit of code, but you can dynamically create png images and skew the text within.

[Highlander]

The following is sarcasm-> I love talking to you <-The preceding was sarcasm

This gets my vote

[Gordon Fearman]

As does it get mine.

[wilson_x1999]

I usually do:
<sarcasm>This isn't sarcastic at all</sarcasm>

But

The following is sarcasm-> I love talking to you <-The preceding was sarcasm

Works too

And I would totally use it.

[Vaughn]

What if we use a common smug-looking font that everyone naturally has?

[theDreamer]

Comic Sans!

Sarcasm generally irks people. Comic Sans irks people.

It is the perfect use for the most useless font ever. After Webdings.

[Gordon Fearman]

How bout we use strikethrough.

Also, can we get strikethrough?

[Vaughn]

I disprove of strikethough.

Although... We are Runners. We run things, not unlike flying monkeys. Give us a task and we will flap our little mutant runner wings to the horizon and back in search of our goal.

If we could be given a list of possible fonts the board can handle, we could look through them for hours, then vote on things?

[Gordon Fearman]

Why no strikethrough?

[Vaughn]

It's natural use is one of editing stuffs, using it for sarcasms would encroach in its territory?

[Arius]

We should at least have strikethrough for use. So we could [strike]fix[/strike] joke about stuff.

[Vaughn]

[edit]STRUCKTHROUGH![/edit]?

[Gordon Fearman]

Yeah, we should have strikethrough.

[empath]

Yeah, I agree on that respect of strikethrough because it's just wrong^h^h^h^h^h inconvenient to have to use archaic editing codes to represent 'second thought' when you could just have <strike>redact me</strike>

And also, I concur on the use of Comic Sans as the 'sarcastic font'!

[Master Gunner]

+1 to the above.

[Raine]

The following is sarcasm-> I love talking to you <-The preceding was sarcasm

Sold!

I actually have no useful suggestion.
Also, I agree with your postulation on people not using it.

I vote this as well!

[Sieg Reyu]

I would like to get strikethrough. There have been a number of times where I have wanted to use it for comedic effect, but it wasn't there.

when I'm sarcastic, I just drag out some of the words, like I do IRL.
That would work soooooo well.

[Tally]

empath, that is brilliant. I'll totally use it.

[Evil Jim]

Although I like the idea of a sarcastic font & find it amusing, I don't think it will work. If implemented there will be a couple dozen of us that love it & use it all the time, but many more who won't notice or care. It's a neat suggestion but without global implementation it's only going to have a cult following.

I suggest we all endeavor to improve our post-writing skills so that intended sarcasm can be naturally read as sarcasm without the need of extra code & tags.

[MattAn]

Brilliant! I've been on other forums that simply just won't implement any form of <sarcasm> tags, just because "everyone should be super nice and be fair to evereyoooone~! <3"

Must. Have. Sarcasm. Tags. It's ingenius! Hell, the huge bold red just sells it for me.

The following is sarcasm-> I am currently in Instanbul. <-The preceding was sarcasm

[Evil Jim]

As stated above, there is a difference between sarcasm & an outright fabrication.