I think that this question has chosen somewhat inflammatory wording.

Since the FBI is openly seeking to legalize the backdoors it must have (please let me know if we are still giving the creators of COINTELPRO the, ahem, benefit of the doubt ) , and outside of the middle east ,governments have suddenly gotten a lot more interested in who is who, we should take some time to think about the language we use to talk about these issues. For the author, and any public figure, loss of anonymity is a choice. Anonymous speech is quite important to our discovery mechanisms for information. Wikileaks, which was not surprising in the least, confirmed that we might want to keep a channel open for anonymous data. The way they treated that guy, and their actions made me switch to appreciating the Anon.

Anyway, a study was done that showed most people could not detect irony, sarcasm or humor reliably in text messages such as email. Some people might just be poor at expressing themselves.

Speaking as the only black teen in a southwestern ontario county in the 80’s I can assure you that if you don’t lose teeth, what they say can be dealt with. As a sometimes participant in the Vi /Emacs flamewars

(I participated because I could not ignore the soulless evil of the emacs user. )

Anyway, there is no other point besides the wording of the question, and the difficulty of determining sarcasm, humour, or emotion in an email/post etc. Just one guy’s opinion.