:) like you mean it

The problem was that if someone made a sarcastic remark, a few readers would fail to get the joke, and each of them would post a lengthy diatribe in response. That would stir up more people with more responses, and soon the original thread of the discussion was buried. In at least one case, a humorous remark was interpreted by someone as a serious safety warning.

This problem caused some of us to suggest (only half seriously) that maybe it would be a good idea to explicitly mark posts that were not to be taken seriously. After all, when using text-based online communication, we lack the body language or tone-of-voice cues that convey this information when we talk in person or on the phone.
--Smiley: 25 Years Old and Never Looked Happier

The argument is valid. The smiley had its place. :) and :( are harmless.

But what's happened since then? At what point did someone decide T_T and :* and B-) bore any resemblance to crying, kissing, and a dude with sunglasses? Researchers are also still trying to determine what language translates "confused" into :S.

When you type a smiley into a gmail chat box, it automatically rights itself. AIM and MSN go as far as to turn them into the familiar yellow faces we all know, and so do many of the forums I've been on. It's come to the point when you don't even need a smiley to get an image. Just type (6) into MSN and you'll get a picture of a red-suited devil with horns. I don't know why you'd want one in your conversation (or a teacup, or a mobile phone, or a sheep), but that's beside the point. 

Okay, I'm guilty. I use XD to indicate laughter (because LOL is so seventh grade). I also use ^_^ and -_- , which are pretty much my substitutes for :) and :( now that I think about it. Maybe I'm just being a nonconformist to show off.

Jeremy Bornstein, a research scientist at Apple Computer's Advanced Technology Group, thinks that a silent minority of people on usenet (the distributed news system on the Internet) belong to the anti-smiley camp, but that "experienced users realize that it's futile to rail against popular custom." Thus, members of the anti-smiley underground constitute something of a secret subculture; they can find each other only through lengthy exchanges of smiley-free messages, growing more certain with each unadorned sentence that they have found a fellow traveler.
--Smiley's People

This except is a little bit extreme. I actually don't use smilies that much (at least, not compared to those I've observed). I don't spend a lot of time talking to strangers online, so I can trust my friends to sense my meaning most of the time, and they can expect the same of me. I wouldn't go as far as to call ourselves an "underground". We just don't need smilies. If there's ever confusion in a conversations, I can type back a quick reply.

I can see where the case would be different on a forum, where fifty people can call you every name under the sun before you have time to get back in and explain yourself. But that goes back to what I said about flaming in one of my other entries.

I just feel like some of the more superfluous emoticons can take away from what you're trying to say--or just make you look like an imbicile. For example:

i went 2 da mall!!!111 :D and i saw Tom ^_^ and he was like :( and I was like :( and then he was like jklol and I was like >.< but then we were like :* and I was like :)!!!!!111oneoneone

I feel stupider just for typing that, by the way.

Smilies are useful, yes, and they weren't a bad idea. I just wish people didn't make such a big deal out of them..

K( <-- Look, emo bangs!

Sorry to any emos I just offended.

:)

kthxbai