That’s the thing, if you say the title is non-oniony, it implies that you agree with the logic, or at least can believe it exists.
If you then make a joke using that same logic as a basis, you can’t then be surprised that people would associate it with the previous statement and think you were saying it seriously.
Sarcasm relies on pointing out faulty logic, while your joke was predated by a statement in support of the believability of that logic. Can you see how people are easily confused?
You kinda need the /s if you’re gonna deny the onionnessof the article in the same comment.
Not trying to throwing stones here, but the headline isn’t oniony. Unfortunately it’s unsurprising gun news, it’s also not funny.
The sarcastic part was suggesting vigilante turd policing.
That’s the thing, if you say the title is non-oniony, it implies that you agree with the logic, or at least can believe it exists.
If you then make a joke using that same logic as a basis, you can’t then be surprised that people would associate it with the previous statement and think you were saying it seriously.
Sarcasm relies on pointing out faulty logic, while your joke was predated by a statement in support of the believability of that logic. Can you see how people are easily confused?