How do you INTERPRET the :mad: and :grr: smilies?

[TXlib]

Poll question: How do you INTERPRET the :mad: and :grr: smilies?

Do you feel that the :mad: and :grr: smilies deflate the seriousness of an intended angry post?

[bhunt70]

1. I think of it as a deflation of angry intent.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

2. I know i only use them when i'm seriously pissed

[SOteric]

3. Probably it does to some extent take the impact

out of a post to see any sort of smilies. I know when I'm at my most scathing, (intended or otherwise) it's usually because I've been very formal in my language and avoided smilies altogether.

[TXlib]

5. That's how i feel.

I don't use emoticons at all when I'm really angry.

When people use the angry emoticons in a post, I can't tell often if they're honestly angry, or mock-angry.

Maybe I'm just dense.

[TahitiNut]

4. None of the above.

Without emoticons, evident anger or frustration often appears immature -- and the post appears to have been made in anger or frustration without (in effect) saying "I'm angry." When the emoticons are included, it portrays self-awareness and tends to invite support from the audience rather than a reactivity by provocation. In a sense, it's sometimes mildly self-deprecating to include the emoticon -- and usually more considerate of the audience.

[TXlib]

6. That's a really good point.