explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

2799: Frankenstein Claim Permutations

2023-07-27T16:24:07Z

172.70.162.158: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2799
| date = July 7, 2023
| title = Frankenstein Claim Permutations
| image = frankenstein_claim_permutations_2x.png
| imagesize = 596x612px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = When I began trying to form a new claim by stitching together these parts in such an unnatural way, some called me mad.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by Dr. Shelly who wrote the book about Frankenstein making the monster called Mary Shelly who then created a monster called Mary Shelly II who made an Irish movie called Count Dracula. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

''{{w|Frankenstein}}'' is an 1818 novel by Mary Shelley about a young scientist named Victor Frankenstein who creates a sapient, humanoid lifeform through an unorthodox experiment, and then rejects his creation, which eventually turns on him. The novel is a classic in both the horror and speculative fiction genres, and has been argued to represent the first major example of true science fiction in literature. The lifeform he creates is never named in the original novel, only being referred to as "the Creature".

In the two centuries since the novel's publication, the story and its characters have been adapted and reused in various forms, and the term "Frankenstein" has come to be commonly used to refer to the creature, rather than the scientist who created him. Literary didacts are often quick to point out this error, but are generally ignored, as the name has become accepted, common usage. The debate has become something of a meme. The Creature himself, at one point, refers to himself as effectively being Frankenstein's son, which could imply he wishes to carry the same name; at the same time, Doctor Frankenstein does not treat his creation with such a level of humanity and speaks as if the Creature is completely nameless. To this day the debate continues among literary analysts whether the Creature should remain nameless for these reasons. These disputes have previously been touched upon in [[1589: Frankenstein]] and [[2604: Frankenstein Captcha]]

The title text points out that he's "stitching together" various claims to create something new, and people consider him mad as a result. This refers to the notion of Frankenstein's creation having been stitched together from dead bodies, and Dr. Frankenstein himself being denounced as a madman. It should be noted that these perceptions come from later adaptations (most notably {{w|Frankenstein_(1931_film)|the 1931 film}}) rather than the original novel, but have become closely associated with the Frankenstein mythos. Following similar meta-textual logic, the title "Frankenstein Claim Permutations" is a double entendre, meaning both (1) permutations of claims regarding the novel ''Frankenstein'' and (2) permutations of claims of a Frankenstein nature (i.e. a franken-claim) in that they are formed by haphazardly joining together different parts.

This comic explores the possible [[wikipedia:Permutation|permutations]] that can be made by matching the names of Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, and '?' (for the unnamed monster) to the positions of author, creator, and monster. The positions are indicated in the drawing by a circle to the left of the book for the author, a box on the left-hand page for the creator, and a labeled picture of the monster lying under a sheet (the traditional image of the monster before being animated) for the monster. Three elements can be arranged in six different ways, as the first element can be placed in any of the three positions, the second in either of the two remaining, and the last in the only remaining space, giving 3 x 2 x 1 options. The same concept was used in [[1613: The Three Laws of Robotics]], where Randall depicted six possible permutations of the {{w|Three Laws of Robotics}}.

{| class="wikitable"
|- style = "text-align: center;"
!Claim!!Notes!!Permutation!!Explanation
|-
|"No, the monster in Mary Shelley's book is unnamed. Frankenstein is the doctor who created him."||This is the normal claim||MS-F-?||This is the claim that is generally considered correct. The POV character of the novel is, in fact, Victor Frankenstein. The monster is never given a name, although some fans name him Adam because of a line he speaks to Victor: "'I ought to be thy Adam, but I am rather the fallen angel, whom thou drivest from joy". The only error in this claim is referring to Victor as a doctor. (In the novel, Victor has not finished his schooling, returning home before finishing his education at the University of Ingolstadt.)
|-
|"No, the monster in Mary Shelley's novel is named Frankenstein."||Also common, and not worth getting mad about IMO||MS-?-F||This is a common misconception, but Randall believes it's not something to get upset about. Maybe the reason for that is that the monster can somehow be described Frankenstein's son and therefore it is only natural that it inherits his family name. Randall has previously touched upon this in comics [[1589: Frankenstein]] and [[2604: Frankenstein Captcha]]. This permutation places the '?' in the creator position, and so avoids talking about the doctor's name at all.
Alternatively, the statement could be taken as an argument that Frankenstein should be considered the "monster" because he created and then abandoned a sentient being.
|-
|"No, Frankenstein is the name of the author. The monster Mary Shelley created is unnamed."||At a glance this could pass for one of the normal claims||F-MS-?||This statement, Randal says, is so much like the first 2 that he says it could pass for one of the normal claims. He could also mean that while slightly stretching the meaning of those words, Mary Shelley did "create" the monster (as it's a character in the book she wrote) and Frankenstein is the "author" (creator) of the monster. Alternately, one can consider the story a mostly first hand account of Victor's exploits, as it is initially told to the book's opening narrator (the otherwise sidelined Captain Robert Walton), with Mary having created Monster, Victor, the Captain and all others within the novel (of the Captain's tale of Victor's tale of the apparent nature of the Monster).
This could also be a reference to a tweet[https://twitter.com/MedCrisis/status/1511644464544104452] featuring a photo of a collection of classic books[https://i.redd.it/bnab4cu39dqa1.jpg] in which "Frankenstein" is printed in the position and format of the author's name for the other books of the collection, while "Mary Shelley" is printed in the title position.
|-
|"No one knows who wrote the novel about Doctor Mary Shelley creating the monster Frankenstein."||I would read this book||?-MS-F|| This statement combines the second claim (that Frankenstein is the monster's name) with the third claim (that Mary Shelley created the monster). This time, however, it is claimed that the ''author'' is unknown, while the monster is named. Once again, this claim is almost reasonable, as it could be argued that Mary Shelley, as the author, did create Frankenstein (although she was also not a doctor).
A novel about author Mary Shelley getting a doctorate and actually creating the creature she wrote about could be an interesting twist on the story, hence Randall's comment that he would read this book.
|-
|"No, Frankenstein is the name of the doctor. The monster he created is Mary Shelley."||rowspan=2|Fully chaotic||?-F-MS|| This claim is similar to the others, in that it twists the ordering of the components (author, doctor, monster), but this time it gets the doctor's name correct whilst insinuating that Mary Shelley was the monster he created. This is described as "fully chaotic", likely because the idea of the real-life human author being created by a doctor in the story that was written by her is much less believable and much further from any solid literary footing than the others.
|-
|"No, the doctor who creates Mary Shelley in Frankenstein's novel doesn't have a name."||F-?-MS||Possible Doctor Who reference.
|}

==Transcript==
[A two-column table.]
{| class="wikitable"
|- style = "text-align: center;"
|Claim||Notes
|-
|[Open book. Left page says "F", right page shows the monster labeled "?". Arrow pointing to book says "by MS".] "No, the monster in Mary Shelley's book is unnamed. Frankenstein is the doctor who created him."||This is the normal claim
|-
|[Open book. Left page says "?", right page shows the monster labeled "F". Arrow pointing to book says "by MS".] "No, the monster in Mary Shelley's novel is named Frankenstein."||Also common, and not worth getting mad about IMO
|-
|[Open book. Left page says "MS", right page shows the monster labeled "?". Arrow pointing to book says "by F".] "No, Frankenstein is the name of the author. The monster Mary Shelley created is unnamed."||At a glance this could pass for one of the normal claims
|-
|[Open book. Left page says "MS", right page shows the monster labeled "F". Arrow pointing to book says "by ?".] "No one knows who wrote the novel about Doctor Mary Shelley creating the monster Frankenstein."||I would read this book
|-
|[Open book. Left page says "F", right page shows the monster labeled "MS". Arrow pointing to book says "by ?".] "No, Frankenstein is the name of the doctor. The monster he created is Mary Shelley."||rowspan=2|Fully chaotic
|-
|[Open book. Left page says "?", right page shows the monster labeled "MS". Arrow pointing to book says "by F".] "No, the doctor who creates Mary Shelley in Frankenstein's novel doesn't have a name."
|}
[[Category:Frankenstein]]
[[Category:Fiction]]
{{comic discussion}}

786: Exoplanets

2023-07-21T15:40:16Z

172.70.162.158: /* Trivia */

{{comic
| number = 786
| date = August 30, 2010
| title = Exoplanets
| image = exoplanets_2010.png
| titletext = I'm just worried that we'll all leave and you won't get to come along!
}}

==Explanation==
[[Beret Guy]] runs to wake up [[Cueball]], who is probably under the covers in bed, with his potentially middle of the night revelation that Humankind is discovering "{{w|exoplanet}}s" or planets that exist outside of our solar system. The indication is that these planets are habitable enough for humans, even if just for a visit.

Then Beret Guy takes it a bit further thinking that one of the countries on Earth could restart {{w|Project Orion (nuclear propulsion)|Project Orion}}. As Beret suggests, Project Orion was an early project to produce a spacecraft that would ride the shockwave from a series of nuclear bombs it dropped in order to travel very, very fast. However, the one major downside of Project Orion was the fallout that the launching of any such craft would present on Earth. One could try to boost the Orion spacecraft into orbit with conventional rockets, but Orion spacecraft are heavy — being composed of giant pusher plates and rows upon rows of nuclear bombs, they are hard to lift. On top of this, the {{w|Nuclear Test Ban Treaty}} means that the craft would be flatly illegal to build and launch on Earth, no matter what you did. However, if an asteroid mining project were to be started, the Orion drive spacecraft, the nuclear bombs, and all the infrastructure needed to man, build, and crew it could all be built safely in space, well away from the Earth's fragile biosphere, where little harm could be done. Some commercial spaceflight programs are interested in starting asteroid mining in the future, or even now: For example, see: https://www.planetaryresources.com.

In summary, Beret is very excited that we can see (with the Hubble telescope and other earth-bound telescopes) and find exoplanets. Then with some advances in space technology we can create nuclear propulsion in space to reach these planets, and it will all be happening quite possibly within a few decades. He is thus worried that Cueball will miss all of this ongoing excitement.

Cueball would just rather snooze, as he is not impressed. Beret Guy gives him only one snooze because as is apparent in the title text he is afraid that Cueball will be left behind if he snoozes too long! Giving the fact that he just stated that it may take hundreds of years this is of course silly but fits well with Beret Guy's behavior.

Exoplanets have been discovered starting in 1996, but there are still only a few confirmed {{w|List of habitable planet candidates|planet candidates}} in the habitable zone at a distant star. This did change fast after that time since new ways of finding planets are created — see [[1071: Exoplanets]], which was posted with the same title. At that point, there were exactly 786 Exoplanets confirmed — the number of this comic - probably not a coincidence when it comes to [[Randall]].

Part of the humor of this particular strip is that Beret Guy seems to have a sense of urgency and immediacy about something that is actually occurring at a snail's pace over decades, where Cueball finishing sleeping, or hitting snooze twice, couldn't possibly make one crystalline erg of difference.

[[1624: 2016]] is similar to this comic in that in each case, one character wakes up another character in order to inform that character about an event that is neither immediately relevant to that character nor short/urgent enough that that character could miss it if he slept until the morning.

==Transcript==
:[Beret Guy runs into a bedroom arms up calling to someone who is in the bed under the covers. Only part of the bed is visible. The person under the covers speaks. Later part of his face can be seen, and it could be Cueball.]
:Beret guy: Wake up! Wake up!
:Cueball (under the cover): What is it?

:[Beret Guy stands with his arms out talking to Cueball hiding under the covers of the bed now completely inside the panel.]
:Beret guy: We're alive during the time when they're first discovering other planetary systems! They're finding them as fast as they can build new instruments to look for them!

:[In this frame-less panel only Beret Guy is shown standing with one arm out and one arm up looking left away from the off-panel bed.]
:Beret Guy: And if one of Earth's cultures advances its space program enough to start enriching uranium on asteroids, we'll lose the main barrier to restarting Project Orion and building nuke-riding city-ships!

:[Beret Guy bends down, hands on his knees, to eye level with Cueball in the bed, who is finally peeking out from the covers, only showing part of his face (so it could be any character, as any hair could be hidden, and the hat could be on the bed stand).]
:Beret Guy: The only known technology capable of fast interstellar travel could be operational within just a few generations, and we're discovering all these destinations to pick from!
:Beret Guy: Come ''on!''
:Cueball: Can I hit "snooze"?
:Beret Guy: Okay, but ''just once!''

==Trivia==
*This was the first time Randall released a comic with the exact same name as a previous comic, in this case [[1071: Exoplanets]], released on June 20, 2012. Since then, he has done so [[:Category:Comics sharing name|a few times]]. When the new comic was released, it caused problems on xkcd as the title of the image file (<code>explanets.png</code>) was the same for the two comics. This was resolved by renaming this comic's image, adding the year of its release to the title: <code>explanets_2010.png</code>.

* The number of this comic ([[786: Exoplanets]]) is the same number of planets featured in the comic [[1071: Exoplanets]] (786 planets) with the same title. It isn't clear whether this is a coincidence or Randall purposefully waited for the number of discovered planets to be the same as this comic's number.

*Cueball is not completely visible in this comic, and the last image only shows a face. Given that all characters without a beard have the same face, this could have been any character, including one with a hat (which could be hidden by the sheet or, contextually, left on an unseen bedstand next to the bed) or hair (several of the uzual styles). But the comic's official transcript refers to this person as "bed man", meaning it is at least not supposed to be a female character. As it is easier to explain the comic using Cueball's name and given that he is the usual guy to draw when no particular features are added, it still makes sense to call him Cueball in this comic.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Beret Guy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Exoplanets]]
[[Category:Comics sharing name|Exoplanets01]]
[[Category:Nuclear weapons]]

Talk:2722: Etymonline

2023-05-27T10:37:31Z

172.70.162.158:

Random fact: I recently finished reading etymonline.com from beginning to end. It taught me things about the English language that I didn't know that I didn't know. [[User:Darthpoppins|Darthpoppins]] ([[User talk:Darthpoppins|talk]]) 00:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:Nice. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.167.235|172.71.167.235]] 04:16, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Dear whomever wrote the current explanation, please take an English composition course. It's clear you mean well, but it's really hard to read your work. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.158.216|172.71.158.216]] 04:44, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:Fair enough; I'll try to clean it up [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 05:33, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
::Also the complainer could take use of this being a wiki and make the changes himself ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

In the comic, french word "étymologie" is incorrectly spelled "ethimologie" which is referred to as "Old French". I wonder whether that mistake was done on purpose ?
[[Special:Contributions/141.101.68.222|141.101.68.222]] 08:12, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
: "Old French etimologie, ethimologie (14c., Modern French étymologie), from Latin etymologia, from Greek etymologia" from the Etymonline entry for "etymology"[[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.223|172.70.162.223]] 10:25, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
: Given that it's over 350 years from now, it really ought to say 'from Old English etymology', with what we currently call Old English now being known as Really Old English.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.65|172.71.178.65]] 09:09, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
::Or Ancient English. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.51.160|172.68.51.160]] 14:47, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
:With the comic revelling in the degredation of contemporary knowledge as future history passes (perhaps like [https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Recap/BabylonFiveS04E22TheDeconstructionOfFallingStars here, especially in 2762]), I don't think this relatively minor glitch is an error. Merely flavour. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.141|172.71.242.141]] 12:21, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

In what is almost certainly not a coincidence, "etymology" and "blimp" are currently trending at #2 and #5, respectively, on etymoline.com as of right now (15:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.236|172.70.110.236]] 15:14, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:Agree. Now Blimp is #1 and Etymology #3 as of now. Have made a screen shot with the date and ponder to insert it in the explanation under a trivia. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 09:56, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
::I have added the image. If someone could knows hot change the size of the image shown I would be happy. Not sure how to do that. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 10:28, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
:::I was JUST coming here to complain about that, LOL! I can easily change the image (not sure about in wikicode, I mean an actual image), but on my computer, I'm out and only have my iPad right now. On iPad Safari, the entire page zooms out in order to show all of that picture, so all the explanation is tiny. Personally, I would crop the picture to the relevant area (why do people need to see the articles listed beneath? Just show the search bar with the top terms and enough of the page to show what site). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Shouldn't it be "folk etymonline"? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.26|172.68.35.26]] 18:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
:I believe it uses "etymology" since that comment is from the perspective of some "present day" scholar, or Randall himself [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 05:32, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

What? No mention of the irony that an organization whose purpose is to preserve the history of words has accidentally done the opposite--supplanting and obscuring the word for the very thing they are trying to do?
:(Documenting and) preserving the history of words is not the same as preserving words in their current usage. Hence providing a service that becomes so ubiquitous that its name supplants the previous word used to refer to the science on which that service is based is not in opposition to the service's aim of compiling a systematic collection of etymonlinear explanations. Indeed, it is an example of the changes in language absent which the science of etymonline would simply not exist. But I agree it's a bit ironic.

But was the Explanation Tag writer a ''cunning'' etymonlinguist? [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 04:56, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
:I see what you did there, though the "etym" ruins it. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:02, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Regarding the "how did future people miss the 'online' in 'etymonline'?" paragraph: My thought (influenced by "etymonlinguist") was that the word had been reanalysed as being derived from ''[https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/etymon etymon]'', perhaps ''etymon'' + ''line'' (as in a line of descent). But there's no direct evidence to support this in the comic itself. Does this seem plausible to anyone else? And would it be of use in the explanation, to temper the sense of "these future lexicographers are idiots" that it currently conveys? -- [[User:Peregrine|Peregrine]] ([[User talk:Peregrine|talk]]) 17:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Isn't the topic of this one how (the internet service) "google" has replaced the (plain english) word "search"?
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.94.100|162.158.94.100]] 07:04, 27 May 2023 (UTC)
:More like it has become the ''de facto'' term for to "look up on the internet". I'm not sure you would "google for my car keys" before leaving the house in the morning, any more than "to hoover" covers any and all acts of cleaning, well beyond "to use a vacuum cleaner" (or to emulate one, like someone "hoovering up his soup, he was so famished") even when it's a Dyson/whatever rather than a Hoover-branded one.
:Of course, neologisms and altered usages is the more general case, like there apparently is no sign or record of any ''original'' term for the toilet/WC/restroom/lavatory/bathroom/latrine of which these (and many, many more) are but adopted terms brought in (often) as euphemisms for the place-that-has-no-definite-name which we yet mostly understand from context. (Most are to do with "to wash", which is either a secondary function or even (bathroom) otherwise used in a different way. The "to rest" in "restroom" can be taken in many ways, but you'd strain to put it to the more functional use it gets put to. A watercloset is the small room with the water specifically laid on (piped or carried in by bucket/etc) for un-named purposes. Etc.) But that's more the case of something being given many names (in leiu of one) rather than being prior legitimate terminology being overriden by a single neologism with far less original precision. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.158|172.70.162.158]] 10:37, 27 May 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2777: Noise Filter

2023-05-20T18:21:22Z

172.70.162.158:

Took me a moment. It is very on-point for me. Randal proposes a sound level meter in such as Google reviews. Showing the real-time racket in a restaurant or other venue. Just this week I walked out of a new TOO-LOUD restaurant. I wish this feature existed! It is not total fantasy. Any Android cellphone "could" report location and sound-level to its masters.

I'm autistic. I would have liked this feature since I was first going places on my own.
[[Special:Contributions/162.158.2.167|162.158.2.167]] 02:31, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Hear hear! (Pun intended.) There are several restaurants my family won't go back to because they're too loud. One was PAINFULLY loud - well over 80 dBA. Hmm. Maybe I should take my sound level meter with me next time we eat out, and put the readings into a review. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.214|172.70.110.214]] 12:24, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I interpreted the title as a pun on noise filters that block out ambient noise. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:13, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

How long until another of Randall's xkcd "jokes" becomes real? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.173|108.162.216.173]] 15:09, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I would like one for temperature, some places are just too damn cold. [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 18:40, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Should the explanation include recent news articles about how restaurants are louder than they were a few decades ago? Such as https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2018/11/how-restaurants-got-so-loud/576715/ and https://www.popsci.com/story/technology/restaurant-noise-levels-solutions/ [[Special:Contributions/172.69.65.46|172.69.65.46]] 20:13, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

: I think it should. Good get.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.91.35|162.158.91.35]] 22:12, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

The thing that gets me is the different radio/checkbox/range selection techniques being used. Almost like the same UI designer didn't add each subsection into this bit of the interface.
*Obvious "radio"-like choice for the opening Hours. You choose one or other presets ("Any"/no preference, "Now"/current status) or a probable pop-up dialogue ("Open at...") for date/time of more flexible choice or range.
*Rating that's also "radio"-appearing, as a way of giving the single minimum acceptible value for Rating.
*The slider which implies the single ''maximum'' acceptible value for noise level. Could have been set up similar to that with Rating (though clearly needs more than the six guide-labels as buttons, and "<=value" rather than "value+").
**The version for Party Mode would have been like the minimum for Rating, both of which could either be "top-down selected" sliders or this bottom-up one but reverse-labeled. Or "number+" buttons.
*Buttons of a multi-select/checkbox type for Price choice. Not visually different from 'radio buttons', except for that they have been multi-selected... perhaps the real thing in the appropriate interface-tk would show more rounded/square button profiles. Or give another clue as to whether selecting a second would add to/replace anything previously selected in that grouping. But it ''could'' have been a range-type choice for "up to", really.
**Or a double-slider, to accomodate minimum and maximum, allowing mid-sub-range "$$+$$$", if not "$+$$$$" for only extremes. Or a slider and separate toggle between whether the slider is bottom-up and top-down.
**But would you ever anticipate split-range choices? And also to what relative quantities do the given numbers of $s map onto, subjectively?
It shows that the design decisions involved weren't part of the same holistic design-time process. (This is not a comment against Randall's compositional choices, he's clearly parodying the actual "options"-type configuration screens that you get. Consciously or unconsciously replicating ''their'' design and implemention inconsistencies.)
 But thought it wasn't really worth a main-page explanation about, just thought it worth an extended comment in here for possible passing interest of others. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.153|172.70.86.153]] 23:45, 18 May 2023 (UTC)
The slider should go down to 30dB. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.89|172.70.114.89]] 02:48, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

I, and probably every other autistic person here, wishes this were a thing. For me at least, sound louder than about 70 dB physically hurts. [[User:Beanie|Beanie]] [[User talk:Beanie|talk]] 10:02, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

I ALWAYS carry hearing protection. I play bassoon in wind ensembles and orchestras and sometimes need to ‘stopper’ because of trumpets, etc. It comes in handy in other noisy situations and takes up almost no space in my pocket.
[[User:Joem5636|Joem5636]] ([[User talk:Joem5636|talk]]) 11:39, 19 May 2023 (UTC)
:You should make sure you have pockets big enough for a bassoon, too. Be popular at parties. (At least at first.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.100|172.70.90.100]] 18:09, 19 May 2023 (UTC)

I find the current basic explanation awkward and clunky... Instead it should generalize/skip through the unimportant parts, like "The comic shows restaurant search filters, with normal settings of Hours, Rating, and Price, each set to defaults. These controls are greyed out, showing they're not the point. In full colour and circled in red is a setting for Current Noise Level.". Seems much more straightforward than what's there right now. Also, explaining "Any" as "limitless" sounds like that author missed the meaning, this simply means the user doesn't care, this is not a filter the user wishes to use at this time, it's to disable this filter. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:53, 20 May 2023 (UTC)
:Generally agree. (Though "limitless" here means that there is no upper limit, surely. It doesn't mean that it ''must'' be infinitely loud, any more than it ''must'' be actually 85db, as it is currently set ...but if you've got a better word?) Please do feel free to edit it if you're convinced you can do it better. The worst that can happen is that someone edits it back/elsewise because they think it's not good enough. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.158|172.70.162.158]] 18:21, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

421: Making Hash Browns

2023-05-10T17:26:10Z

172.70.162.158: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 421
| date = May 9, 2008
| title = Making Hash Browns
| image = making_hash_browns.png
| titletext = There are at least fourteen ways this could go badly (seventeen if that fork is a dangerous crossbreed.)
}}

==Explanation==
[[Cueball]] is attempting to make {{w|hash browns}}. A hash brown is a way of serving a potato where the potato has been diced or shredded in some way, then pan-fried. Cueball's method for making hash browns, though, is rather unique. He is throwing potatoes into the air and striking them with a flaming tennis racket at his friend, who is holding a tray with a dangerously tilting half-filled glass balanced on top. He (the friend) is also holding a fork in the other hand.

The idea is that the tennis racket would simultaneously dice the potato, fry it, and then launch the completed product towards his friend's plate. In reality, this probably wouldn't do much. To properly {{w|Pan frying|pan-fry}} food, it must be cooked in a pan with some oil to lubricate the food, with enough time for the heat to transfer through the oil and spread properly through the food. Hitting a potato with a flaming tennis racket would not cook it, as it would strike it too quickly, and it probably wouldn't dice it either unless the wire of the racket is incredibly sharp. Cueball would probably just end up batting a not even hot, uncooked, unprepared potato at his friend, while simultaneously burning his own hand. In the case that the wires did actually cut through the potato, then the potato would not be moved forward, but actually end up behind the racket.

The title text comments on how many ways this experiment could go badly (14), and jokes that there are even more potential problems (17) if the fork Cueball's friend is holding is a cross-breed. (See [[419: Forks and Spoons]], which was published only four days earlier. By reading this comic, it should be clear what could go wrong if they were included in the equation - 3 more ways would be a low estimate....)

It's unclear what Randall may or may not have had on his mind with regards to specific ways the situation in the comic could go wrong. But here are several potential ways the activity could go wrong without including {{w|Sporks}}:
#Cueball could burn himself with the flaming tennis racket.
#The can of gasoline could leak, and then Cueball could drop the racket, causing a fire to spread.
#Cueball may fail to hit the potato, and it would get dirty from the ground.
#Cueball may fail to hit the potato and instead whack himself with the aforementioned flaming tennis racket.
#Cueball may fail to hit the potato and hurt himself as it lands on his face.
#Cueball may hit the potato and knock the plate out of his friend's hand, smashing it.
#Cueball may hit the potato and knock the glass out of his friend's hand, smashing that instead.
#Cueball might hit his friend's arms with a potato (flaming hot or not), causing the friend to drop the plate, thereby spilling glass, porcelain, a potato, and orange juice everywhere.
#Cueball might instead hit the potato at his friend's head.
#Cueball could accidentally launch the tennis racket itself (if he has exceptionally poor grip) at his friend.
#Cueball could drop the tennis racket onto the can of gasoline, causing it to explode.
#Cueball's friend may lose his balance with the plate, dropping it and/or the glass onto the ground.
#Cueball may try to get a better grip on the tennis racket by moving his hand up, and thereby burn his hand.
#Even if none of the above happened, Cueball would fail to actually ''cook'' the potato.
#Likewise, Cueball would probably not succeed in dicing the potato.
#And he could miss hitting his friend's plate.
#A {{w|velociraptor}} could appear out of nowhere and eat the potato, then proceed to devour Cueball and his friend. (A kind of possibility that likely plagues Randall's mind daily.)
#If the fork is a crossbreed it could kill Cueball's friend, and then Cueball in any number of ways

==Transcript==
:[Cueball stands holding a flaming tennis racket. He is throwing a potato in the air as if to serve like a tennis ball. Behind him is a red gas can and a sack of potatoes. Across from him is another person holding a fork in one hand and balancing a serving tray with a glass holding an orange liquid in it.]

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics with color]]

Talk:2742: Island Storage

2023-05-07T18:57:00Z

172.70.162.158:

Hey at least New Zealand made it onto this map! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.178.48|172.70.178.48]] 17:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Of course the proper storage mode involves packing the continents back to Gondwada layout and then hiding them on the far side ;-) [[User:RIIW - Ponder it|RIIW - Ponder it]] ([[User talk:RIIW - Ponder it|talk]]) 18:59, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

It seems worth noting that the scale was distorted to make some islands fit. Greenland has a longitudinal height of 2671 km, but has been shrunken considerably in order to be wedged into a 1725 km gap in the Gulf of Mexico. [[User:Altay|Altay]] ([[User talk:Altay|talk]]) 19:58, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
:I thought it was the size of Africa. ---[[User:Theunlucky|Theunlucky]] ([[User talk:Theunlucky|talk]]) 20:35, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
:Maybe he started with a cursed projection that makes Greenland smaller. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 20:35, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Seeing the ?? next to the British Isles, I think part of the islands there are the Danish islands squeezed aside to make space. (Okney Islans, Fair Isle, Shetland, Hebrides, Føroyar, etc. are probaly used to fill the gaps...) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.95.82|162.158.95.82]] 20:54, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
:Those are all pretty small. I think it's more likely Svalbard/Spitsbergen. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.181|172.70.131.181]] 02:09, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
::There's quite a lot of Nowegian islands, some of which are fairly large. --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.184|172.69.79.184]] 07:37, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Where do we mention the typo in the title text? (Should be "Scandinavian".) --[[User:Flicky|Flicky]] ([[User talk:Flicky|talk]]) 12:30, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
:I'll see what I think works. If all else fails, I could add a Trivia section (as I'm going to add an auxilliary reference), but maybe I don't need to... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.128|172.70.86.128]] 13:15, 25 February 2023 (UTC) EDIT: Edit done. But some further tweaks planned, if no-one else improves/revises it before I get there.

I think the additional island nudged into Scandinavia with Britain and Ireland might be Tierra del Fuego at the bottom tip of South America? It sure looks like it. [[User:XKCDFan|XKCDFan]] ([[User talk:XKCDFan|talk]]) 13:45, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

No, I believe Tierra del Fuego has been relocated to St. Lawrence Bay.

Isn't it Sjaelland, turned upside down to fit, since Ireland has taken its spot? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.46|172.70.162.46]] 19:48, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

As one who'll remain furious about Brexit until the second they repeal the bastard, I look at this with misty-eyed hope. It's a Yes from me. [[User:Yorkshire Pudding|Yorkshire Pudding]] ([[User talk:Yorkshire Pudding|talk]]) 00:20, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

What's Brexit ?? [[User:I27.O.O.I|127.0.0.1]] ([[User talk:I27.O.O.I|talk]]) 02:59, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
:A few years ago BRitain voted to EXIT (hence "Brexit") the European union, to remain/return to being politically etc separate after the countries of Europe united - such as adopting the Euro as a shared currency. Brexit seems a largely unpopular concept, widely considered a bad idea with mostly downsides, even before the decision was made, so not sure how the hell it passed (I'm Canadian, an outsider to this living across the ocean, so I only know these broad strokes). [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
::<People who did not like the EU>: We don't like the EU! We demand to leave!
::<Prime Minister> I shall try to change things so we all like the EU...
::<EU> Yeah, maybe some of that, but definitely not the other stuff.
::<People...> Boo, hiss! We'll start our own political party! With blackjack and hookers!
::<Various other people who tried this before> Yeah, we'll join that. Down with the establishment! (Which some of us are part of.) We demand a vote on the issue.
::<PM> That's a worrying amount of people who should be supporting me, and may split my vote. Ok, we'll have a vote, to settle the issue (less risky than the Opposition getting in).
::<People... + Various...> Great. So, anyway, we promise; an XBox in every home; chocolate cake will stay just as delicious but not be fattening; and those people you don't like..? They're about to camp out in your roof-space, ''unless'' you vote to Leave. [...paraphrased/analogous, the real arguments being many and varied]
::<Others> That's... just wrong. And what about the good reasons to stay? If we leave then...
::<People... interupting> You're scaremongering. We will create a perfect idyll. But if we don't leave, everyone will end up being forced to all the time speak French or German or Italian or Spanish... or Arabic!
::<Others> But..?
::<People...> Stop trying to scare us! Beware the scary EU instead!
::[...much more of this... 'Leave' promises/threatens, 'Remain' warns and tries to explain how the status quo is Ok. Most traditional political parties have some people wanting to Leave, some wishing to Remain, and some people don't care about Brexit but don't like the Remain-leaning PM]
::[Vote happens]
::[Around a third of voters vote Remain, marginally more vote Leave, the rest don't vote]
::[Or, roughly a quarter each are Remain, Leave, Didn't vote and Couldn't vote.]
::<People...> An overwhelming landslide! Right, lets Brexit. How do we do that again?
::[Arguments range amongst Brexiteers between total international isolation and just trying to get marginally better deal. Those who disliked the Prime Minister are already happy, because he quit and left the next couple of PMs try to herd the Brexit cats, etc, over the next half dozen years... and continuing still with 'minor' issues such as how to circle the square which is Ireland (seeing as it involves Eire, Northern Ireland and the rest of Britain)...]
::...opinions about whether this is the true tone of the timeline will vary, but I contend that it is at least not ''wrong''. Maybe someone can update us on attitudes and recollections upon these matters in another decade? <s>Or when it finally gets completely and sorted in a mutually satisfactory manner, if that happens earlier.</s> ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.46|172.70.162.46]] 19:56, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
:::Well your opinion on BRExit is clear. In reality, the referendum about BRExit happened because there was no referendum for Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon, which changed what the EU is about a lot and were only ratified in parliament. And majority of people viewed it as good idea ... until the terms of withdrawal became known. EU worked hard on using BRExit as an example preventing other countries from following, so the terms were quite hard. Also, lot of people were disappointed when some changes, like regarding immigration, which they hoped would be prevented by leaving EU happened anyway. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 18:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
::::Is not a Representative Democracy ''supposed'' to leave direct control of things to our duly appointed representatives? Whether at local, national or international levels? You might well say Mission Creep, as I'm sure you are, but that happens with all legislation (democratic or no). As does the changing attitudes of society towards any given subject (often more quickly appreciated by the Lords than the Commons, ironically, when a particular party has been somehow kept elected for too long) or indeed the changing nature of the world (three decades since the Web was born, and more than that since the Internet itself, and we're ''only now'' looking at various online issues?) and I indeed think that pissing into the tent from the outside isn't going to endear us to our former tent-buddies. When would it ever?
::::And the 'market' for small-boats "immigration" opened up almost entirely due to Brexit consequences. Worst of all worlds. A highly attractive destination (if misguidedly so), with greatly increased risks to those attempting the journey. And also making foreign criminals far more ill-gotten gains than when the worst they could do was accidentally asphyxiate the odd truckload of hopefuls. Plus the current 'bonus' of possibly making Rwanda the final destination for some. You couldn't make it up!
::::To apply a classic quote from Sir Humphrey, "If you're going to do this damn silly thing, don't do it in this damn silly way." The 'majority' of people (not really, it was a narrow squeak of those who felt strongly enough either way, in what was advertised as a clear-cut decision that should have had no fence to sit upon, or third parties to mess up the two-horse race; it would not have been anywhere near a valid vote under current rules required of Trades Unions, whose members are 'only' striking, those that haven't already voted with their feet and quit their workplaces entirely) might have voted to Leave, but some were the Faragist "scared about the Turks", some believed that the NHS would be 'saved' (how's that going? ...even accounting for Covid), others (I know many) voted for that funny guy off of Have I Got News For You to bloody the nose of Cameron (but didn't actually intend to break it). A vote for Leave was often demonstrably not a vote for how we ''did'' leave (or are leaving, because there's still other things to sort out even if the NI Protocol gets resolved this week/year/decade) but some personal ideal that means so many different things to so many different people.
::::A vote for Remain may ''also'' have differed, in detail and understanding, but it's hard to have such diverse opinions about the status quo. I doubt there were too many hankering after the Euro, perhaps just a few wanted to shift the clocks to Paris time... And then there are all those who didn't vote Leave but didn't know that things were so knife-edge that they should also vote Remain (in hindsight, it's not a surprise that the external influences, that tried to muddy these things, were car more successful in riling up one side of the argument than they were the other). Or all the young people who would lose access to things like Erasmus but had as yet no say actually in the matter (but ''would'' now be able to, if anyone gave them a chance).
::::...anyway, things turned out the way they did. It changed the landscape. The EU doesn't have to bend over backwards with the UK, as much as they did before. The rest of the world can weigh us up on our own (limited) merits, rather than as a handy doorway into a bigger and more diverse trading bloc. If ever Stormont gets sorted then there's likely to be pressures towards conducting an Ireland-wide vote. Even with Sturgeon going, and hypocritical denials of giving people a meaningful vote, it still presses the door somewhat more ajar to Scotland doing something interesting whereby they wholesale (or at least by a 'majority') emotionally reject being part-governed by a group of people in another place who "they never voted for". Oh yes, I think there's significant Leavers' Remorse in so many different ways, whether or not anyone realises.
::::I also quite definitely think that there's no way to reverse the situation, ever since we charged down the route of severing the ties. Perhaps Cameron should have used gone back to the EU and said "How about ''this'' tiny little further compromise?", given he only needed to get around 1% to change their vote to avoid all this. But he gave up and then quit, and the troublemakers (at home and abroad) actively prevented any captain of 'their' ship from taking any action to avoid icebergs. Probably the reverse. But no surprise there.
::::This wasn't intended as a hustings speech of any kind. The first explanation was there to explain how we stumbled into Brexit, for the benefit of those who weren't originally privvy to how it all unfolded (and, believe me, I tempered my true opinions quite a lot, in the spirit of neutrality). Here I just wanted to say how we're doomed to continue to stumble through it for quite some time (or at least until the world twists on its axis in some far more overwhelming way, to make the matter moot), given that you must already know the basics. This really isn't the forum for arguing it out, and I am sure I won't change anyone's views who had any in the first place, so I shall leave these as my final screed. Point out where I'm factually wrong, if you will, to balance my wild 'Remoaner' ramblings (not that I'm even technically a Remoaner, I would assert... Perhaps the clearly agrieved Yorkshire is?), knowing that I shall not even try to counter whatever you come back with. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.8|172.70.85.8]] 00:15, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Anyone else left thinking that this would severely mess up the ecology of a number of islands, particularly where species have evolved in the absence of predators found on the mainland? No? Probably just me, then.... [[User:Zoid42|Zoid42]] ([[User talk:Zoid42|talk]]) 15:21, 26 February 2023 (UTC)

Why, surely it would. Provided that, after moving Greenland into the tropics and filling in the Mediterranean, so much as a semblance of the original ecology would still remain to be messed up.

The 'island kitchen' part of the explanation seems a bit of a big old stretch, given that there's no references to kitchens in the comic, and you can't 'put away' the islands in most kitchens - they're fixed installations.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.101|172.70.90.101]] 10:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

== Where is Hawaii? ==

I don't see it mentioned in the list of where things were moved to. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.34.73|172.70.34.73]] 03:25, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
:Agreed, I added it to the Incomplete tag (don't want to assume). Tiny at this scale, I suspect Gulf Of Mexico? [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:01, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
:Whoever put things away took it home with them. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.152|172.70.91.152]] 09:59, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
::I'm pretty sure the original map didn't include Hawaii. There are other islands missing as well, in particular Fiji, Bermuda, etc. Perhaps the Mediterranean and its small islands is just the place for "everyone else". After all, if most of Indonesia fits there, might as well throw in all of the other islands as well. [[User:XKCDFan|XKCDFan]] ([[User talk:XKCDFan|talk]]) 19:00, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

== Forget Hawaii Where is Antarctica? ==

Did someone put it away on mars?

:No. Antarctica is not shown on some maps, which is a rarity becoming less and less common. [[User:No Idea If There's A Character Limit LMAO|By me.]] ([[User talk:No Idea If There's A Character Limit LMAO|talk]]) 23:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

:Antarctica would (like the other continents, give or take the Scandiwegian peninsula's island-gripping distortion) not be considered 'movable' or storable elsewhere, otherwise we might restore South America to snugly fit against Africa (or vice-versa), or other neo-Gondwanaland movements. (You could, of course, have tried to fit actual non-arctic islands into the Weddel/Ross/etc openings in its edge, at least once you work out whether the seasonal/'permanent' ice should be respected or ignored for such purposes.) It is also bigger than Australia (its only true fellow 'island-continent') and even bigger than Europe (assuming you believe in Europe, as a mass, rather than prefering to deal Eurasia (or even Afro-Eurasia) as an effectively contiguous whole). We also rarely see Antarctica as anything other than a long strip, on equatorially-centred world maps, so finding a handy right-sized spot for something that looks somewhat more like the polar-centric map version, and at the right scale, would be an interesting but not necessarily aesthetically pleasing exercise. Would one rotation of other nicely nestle it in the bite of Africa, assuming S.America's bulge isn't now taking over that spot? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.207|172.71.178.207]] 00:49, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

:I presume that he was making a point of saying that all the ice would have melted, so little land at the south pole. Does anyone know of a land map of Antarctica? [[User:SDSpivey|SDSpivey]] ([[User talk:SDSpivey|talk]]) 18:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
::Do you mean the land (and sea) beneath the ice, or the way the land would be if the ice was to all be gone?
::Either way, perhaps look at something like: https://polarjournal.ch/en/2022/07/13/what-greenland-and-antarctica-look-like-without-ice/
::...there are other places with similar maps (maybe differently calculated), still showing plenty of land-area. If not more due to the proposed isostatic rebound outpa ing any change in sea-level. And most maps of Antarctica differentiate between the ice-sheets (sitting on bedrock) and ice-shelves (floating on water), though may not show where this is just where the sub-sealevel 'floor' is too shallow for there to be any undersheet seawater. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.57|172.70.85.57]] 21:27, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Someone (rightly) changed the title-text (the comic having been changed) regarding the name of the Britirish Archepelego (( <= my term of the moment, that - if not pleasing everyone, annoying everyone equally! )), but of course this is a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Terminology_of_the_British_Isles/Archive_9 most complex and debated]] issue. Not sure who whspered into Randall's ear (or when), and not even sure it helps... But worth an extra note, definitely, if not any arguments that might yet spawn from it. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.158|172.70.162.158]] 18:57, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

2771: College Knowledge

2023-05-05T14:26:29Z

172.70.162.158: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 2771
| date = May 3, 2023
| title = College Knowledge
| image = college_knowledge_2x.png
| imagesize = 649x266px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = 'Your chitin armor is no match for our iron-tipped stingers! Better go hide in your jars!' --common playground taunt
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT GOING TO IO TO GET MORE DIODES - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
A common playground rhyme which children will often recite when divided by gender is that "girls go to college to get more knowledge; boys go to {{w|Jupiter}} to get more stupider," with the genders being interchangeable depending on the rhyme's singer.

Starting out with this cadence, three characters (or child versions) {{w|Skipping rope|jump rope}} and explore parts of the solar system and beyond by taking it in turns to provide the rhythm's tempo. First [[Science Girl]] (who is turning the left end of the rope), then a [[Cueball]] (at the right), followed by a [[Ponytail]] (doing the jumping), before returning to Science Girl. As they concentrate on various stellar bodies that are harder and harder to rhyme, their chants become increasingly hesitant and obscure, ruining the rhythm and resulting in ever more contrived "rhymes", to the point where they eventually seem compelled to abandon the whole game.

The title text refers back to some of the rhymes the characters mention, making sure to stay consistent with whichever gender acquires which object. Speaking from the perspective of the college-bound gender, who had acquired {{w|ferrous}} iron from {{w|Eris}} (or perhaps {{w|ferrous|become more like it}}, by bodily transformation), the girls playfully threaten the boys with iron-tipped {{w|stingers}}, for which the boys' acquired armour of {{w|chitin}} (a material commonly found on the exoskeletons of various insects, including in any stings these might normally have) is purportedly no match. The girls then also refer to the jars which the boys had acquired from {{w|Mars}}, telling the boys that they'd better hide in them if they wanted any sort of protection from the iron-tipped stingers. To top it all off, the title text finally claims that this is supposedly a "common playground taunt" among children, which implies that those children commonly use the deeply unlikely rhymes which the characters in the comic had made.

In [[1202: Girls and Boys]], boys and girls both go to college ''and'' to Jupiter, both to get more knowledge.

==Note==
Going to Mars to get more jars may be a reference to a 1955 {{w|Burma-Shave}} campaign promising a free trip to Mars for whoever sent in 900 empty jars. The joking offer was accepted by a Wisconsin shopkeeper named Arliss French. The company enjoyed the publicity, and sent him and his wife to {{w|Moers}}.

{{w|Ceres (dwarf planet)}} "is a dwarf planet in the asteroid belt between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter."

{{w|Chitin}} is a polysaccharide found in the bodies of insects and fungi.

{{w|Tim Berners-Lee}} is the inventor of the World Wide Web.

{{w|Pamplemousse}} is the French word for grapefruit or pomelo, depending on dialect.

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[Science Girl, Ponytail and Cueball are jumping rope while singing a common playground song. Science Girl and Cueball are swinging the ends of the rope, Ponytail is jumping in the middle.]
:Science Girl: Girls go to college to get more knowledge
:Science Girl: Boys go to Jupiter to get more stupider

:Cueball: Girls go to Ceres to get more theories
:Cueball: Boys go to Mars to get more jars

:Ponytail: Girls go to Eris to get more ferrous
:Ponytail: Boys go to Triton to get more chitin

:[The three have stopped playing.]
:Science Girl: Girls go to...Mercury...to...meet Tim Berners-Lee
:Science Girl: Boys go to... ...Betelgeuse...to get more... ...pamplemousse
:Cueball: I think we're done.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Science Girl]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Cobson]]
[[Category:Games]]
[[Category:Astronomy]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]]
[[Category:Food]]

1541: Voice

2023-05-03T10:23:37Z

172.70.162.158: /* Explanation */ Correcting mis-link (was template, meant to be internal link) and rephrasing, to improve flow, but could be done better

{{comic
| number = 1541
| date = June 22, 2015
| title = Voice
| image = voice.png
| titletext = Anyway, we should totally go watch a video story or put some food in our normal mouths!
}}

==Explanation==
During a casual talk with [[Megan]], [[Ponytail]] suddenly interrupts her normal speech stating that she is for some reason only capable of controlling her own voice once every six years. Apparently only for a very brief time since she immediately returns to the casual talk, continuing her previous sentence mid-word before being able to tell Megan how she could help her. Upon Megan's confused request, she denies knowledge of the occurrence, although in a somewhat suspicious way, using possibly fake laughter.

It could be this was just a prank by Ponytail, to tease Megan, but given her fake laughter reply to Megan's inquiry and the continuing comment in the title text it seems most likely that Ponytail is indeed possessed by some sort of entity that prevents her from expressing her own thoughts, except for a very short time every six years. Of course this may just be her way of continuing with the prank; see a previous case of such a prank [[#Voice hijacking|below]].

In case it is not a prank it would thus appear that Ponytail's usual "self" is indeed this possessing entity. Whether this entity is actually aware that the "real" Ponytail did speak, or if it actually does not know that it was interrupted (since it continued mid-word) is not clear from the last response to Megan.

The title text suggests that Ponytail {{tvtropes|BodySnatcher|is possessed by some sort of inhuman entity}} (most likely an alien or {{w|AI}}, or possibly a [[1530: Keyboard Mash|small but intelligent creature]] living in her head) unfamiliar with movies and eating. See below for [[#Related comics|related comics]].

===Related comics===
====Non-human entity trying to behave like a human====
The comic, [[1530: Keyboard Mash]], also revolves around the same theme of a non-human entity trying to convince other humans that it is in fact a human. This is most clearly referenced in the title text of this comic. In Keyboard Mash, it is a spider that tries to chat like it was a human, making statements that are true if you are human, but which humans would never utter in a conversation like here - ''put some food in our normal mouths!'' However, the pretended 'human' being (the spider) is not seen by the other person in this comic. As opposed to this one where Megan speaks directly with Ponytail.

====Voice hijacking====
It has already been established recently, in [[1528: Vodka]], that Ponytail's voice can be hijacked by non-human entities. That time it was the vodka she was drinking that took over. It is possible that this is continuing or caused by the same openness to possession as shown here. It is also possible that she simply thinks possession jokes are funny and once again jokes with Megan.

====Six years ago====
Six years ago today, which according to this comic was the last time Ponytail had control of her own voice, this comic [[600: Android Boyfriend]] was posted. Ponytail acquired an android boyfriend. It seems unlikely that this older comic has any relation with this particular episode - except that this comic mentions a six-year period and Ponytail is also in that comic.

====Note on Ponytail====
''Ponytail is mainly a filler character, showing up when two females are needed or when a large group of people are present.''

It is important to note that [[Ponytail]], like most xkcd [[stick figure|stick figures]], usually does not represent the same character in each comic. This Ponytail is likely unrelated to other instances of Ponytail.

==Transcript==
:[Megan and Ponytail are walking.]
:Megan: Are you doing anything later?
:Ponytail: I was th- ''I can only control my voice once every six years. Please, you have to'' -inking of going out, but no real plans.
:Megan: ...What was that?
:Ponytail: Haha, what?

==Trivia==
*{{w|Demonic possession|Possession}} stories are common in films and books. Some recent examples that could have inspired this comic could be one of these (beware of '''spoilers'''):
**In the film {{w|The Host (2013 film)|The Host}} the human race has been taken over by small parasitic aliens called "Souls" that inserts themselves individually into a host body where they are then able to access the host's memories. In the story the main character is the host that controls a body, and then the personality of that body, which is then no longer able to control her body, but can speak to the host. And in a few situations can take over her body for a short period. Very similar to what happens in this comic.
**The Yeerks from the ''Animorphs'' {{w|Animorphs|books}} and {{w|Animorphs (TV series)|TV series}} take humans as a host by entering and merging with their brain through the ear canal. The host can fight to temporarily take back control, but this is very painful. However how many times human can fight back is not as specific as in this comic. Animorphs is referenced in a [[:Category:Animorphs|a few other comics]].
**In the movie {{w|Being John Malkovich}} the main character possesses Malkovich, but Malkovich is occasionally able to communicate through the possession.
**In {{w|Warlord (Star Trek: Voyager)|an episode}} of {{w|Star Trek: Voyager}}, Kes is taken over by a warlord who has discovered a means of immortality by using technology to transfer his consciousness to another body. The warlord enters a mental struggle with Kes's latent mind, and as he begins to lose the battle, Kes's personality resurfaces on several occasions.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Megan]]
[[Category:Comics featuring Ponytail]]

Talk:2764: Cosmological Nostalgia Content

2023-04-20T17:19:50Z

172.70.162.158:

When I added the transcript it broke the "Created by a BOT" tag on explanation, even though I didn't touch explanation [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.98|172.71.151.98]] 05:30, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:No, it was broken before your edit. Someone else changed "BOT" to "Z=90s KID". The equal sign causes problems for mediawiki, but it's been fixed now. --[[User:Orion205|Orion205]] ([[User talk:Orion205|talk]]) 06:03, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
::For anyone who would benefit from a deeper explanation: 
::In the syntax for templates, equals signs come after parameter names (see [[mw:Help:Templates#Parameters|Help:Templates § Parameters]]). So, <code>Created by a Z</code> was parsed as the name of a nonexistent template parameter, and <code>90s KID - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.</code> was passed in as that parameter's value. 
::That still wouldn't necessarily be a problem. It just also left the first parameter empty. This specific template is programmed to show an error message when that happens. [[User talk:AgentMuffin|~AgentMuffin]] 06:13, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Two times the red tint around Megan has been mentioned, in explanation and transcript... I cannot see that, no matter how much I zoon in. Is it actually there (can it be measured on the image file?) or is it just someone who wished it was like that? If it can be measrued it should be explained and if not then the mention should be deleted --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 07:13, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:What I meant was that Megan's line art in this comic appeared more brownish/reddish to me than the line art of the other characters. Specifically, the colour hex #472425 using an online colour hex checker. --[[User:Multiuniverse|Multiuniverse]] ([[User talk:Multiuniverse|talk]]) 07:22, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

:It's definitely there, but I didn't notice it until I saw it mentioned. It's subtle enough that I imagine certain displays or differences in individual color perception could make it harder to see, but trust me, it's certainly there. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.5|162.158.222.5]] 07:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

::Why is everyone so unsure? it's definitely there. [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 09:00, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

:::Not all monitors have the same quality, I can imagine that on some cheapish laptop screens it can be a lot harder to see -- [[Special:Contributions/172.71.131.134|172.71.131.134]] 12:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:::: On this laptop (Dell Latitude 600 - good for its time, a rather archaic thing now) it shows ''just''. Took the explanation mentioning it for me to notice. (And, yes, I'm using pretty archaic kit, at this moment. Though not my oldest, because I tend not to throw away 'perfectly working' things. That said, when it comes to remembering how the universe is, I'm not ''quite'' in the "I remember when all this was fields" category...) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.203|172.71.242.203]] 19:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

:::For me: {{w|Congenital_red–green_color_blindness|red green color blindness}} [[User:Josot|Josot]] ([[User talk:Josot|talk]]) 12:27, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

For anybody wondering: the current (accurately measured) {{w|Redshift#Highest_redshifts|Highest redshifts}} is z = 11.1 [[User:Josot|Josot]] ([[User talk:Josot|talk]]) 12:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)

Isn't it a bit ironic that Randall now clearly identifies "Want to feel old" content as clickbait, while I remember that he himself did a number of comics around that topic some years ago? I imagine that he changed his opinion BECAUSE that became such a popular clickbait topic. Could you link to some of these older comics?
("Want to feel old? Randall Munroe did "want to feel old" comics closer to the inception of xkcd than to today.")--[[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.38|172.71.160.38]] 07:47, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

Light's velocity is limited only by the speed of causality. As such, I'd recommend modifying the language about light having a "finite" velocity. Technically speaking, the speed of a photon, from the photon's perspective, is non-existent, and what the photon sees, traveling at the speed of causality, is everything happening all at once across it's path. In other words, from the perspective of the photon, there is no passage of time. However, simultaneity varies based on the perspective of the observer.

;InB4
Before anyone embarrasses themself by asking, "multimanteau" is obviously a portmanteau of "multiple" and "portmanteau". Sheesh, get with the neurolinguistic program. "Phrasemanteau" would also be an acceptable neologism. - [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 11:48, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:I'm not fond of a explanation needing an explanation :/
The first relevant use of "multimanteau" found by Google is this page
[[User:Victor|Victor]] ([[User talk:Victor|talk]]) 09:01, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
::Presumably that makes everything else a unimanteau?[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.67|172.70.85.67]] 14:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
:::That word and the first sentence needs to be deleted from the explanation! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:43, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

;Inconstant "Constant"
I find it weird that so much professional study still refers to an assumed "cosmological constant", when it is observably ''not'' constant. Feels like we should be calling it "the cosmological value", since expansion has not been occurring uniformly & considerable localized variation in "vacuum energy" seems relatively certain. Parts of the observable universe are considerably older than the "big bang" that so much theory is hung upon; what part of "these laws are localized effects, not unchanging constants" has ''not'' been obvious, for >30 years?
[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 14:31, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:This may be related to the fact that there are so many actual problems around the cosmological "constant" that noone wants to bother renaming it before getting better idea what it actually is. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 21:01, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
:: I'm in agreement with you,[[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]], with a slight change. In most of the sciences we call something that's not constant a "variable". Thus we'd have the "cosmologicial variable". Which admittedly does not roll off the tongue as easily. Maybe "cosmic variable" instead? Which seems too alike a "Cepheid variable" star now. Hmm. Maybe I agree with [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] afterall. 😂 [[User:Iggynelix|Iggynelix]] ([[User talk:Iggynelix|talk]]) 13:40, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

;Missing comic
It's mid-morning (ET) on Thursday and there's still no new Wednesday comic. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 13:47, 20 April 2023 (UTC)
:Very late (definitely Thursday, I think in all time-zones if it isn't even Friday already), but now exists. The interactivity of it might have had to absorb more time to set up in a working manner... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.158|172.70.162.158]] 17:19, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

Talk:2003: Presidential Succession

2023-04-04T18:46:43Z

172.70.162.158: Part restoration. Last editor accidentally cut a bit not intended?

Aw, but what about Morgan Freeman? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 04:43, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:And Kiefer -designated survivor- Sutherland?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.83|141.101.104.83]] 08:24, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:Morgan Freeman> "I do solemnly swear / that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States..." [[User:Linker|Linker]] ([[User talk:Linker|talk]]) 12:39, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Academy awards have been won by actors playing kings / queens - of England, the United Kingdom and Siam - Princes - of Denmark - and Prime Ministers of Great Britain and even the President of the Uniter States / Member of the house of Representatives, but I do not believe it has been won by an actor playing a state govenor. Mind you it is not clear if an actor playing a prison govenor, would count. [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 11:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
: Broderick Crawford, actually. I've added him. To the best of my ability to determine, the opposite group (Governors Award recipients who have played characters named Oscar) appears to be an empty set. I'll note that I don't have a really comprehensive filmography for {{w|Jean-Claude Carrière}}, but I consider it fairly unlikely that he ever played a character by that name. [[User:Squeamish Ossifrage|Squeamish Ossifrage]] ([[User talk:Squeamish Ossifrage|talk]]) 16:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Bill Pullman's eldest daughter Maesa is a film composer with an IMDB page in her own right. [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 11:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Top 5 US astronauts? I only count three. Who are the other two? [[Special:Contributions/172.68.150.76|172.68.150.76]] 12:15, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

As of September 3, 2017, the 5 US astronauts with the most total time in space are Peggy Whitson (665 days), Jeff Williams (534), Scott Kelly (520), Mike Fincke (382), and Mike Foale (374), according to https://www.nasa.gov/feature/nasa-station-astronaut-record-holders. Michael Lopez-Alegria has the second-most time in space for a single spaceflight (215 days, compared to Scott Kelly, 340). [[User:The Dining Logician|The Dining Logician]] ([[User talk:The Dining Logician|talk]]) 12:59, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Mike Foale was born in Louth - so ineligible. Michael Lopez-Alegria was born in Spain ditto [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 15:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:Foale was born to an American mother and should hence be a natural-born American. --[[User:Ycthiognass|Ycthiognass]] ([[User talk:Ycthiognass|talk]]) 09:40, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
::There is actually legal question about whether someone born on foreign soil to US citizens count as "natural-born" (or whether courts would just say it's a political question and pass the buck to Congress), though I will add Foale back to the list. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.207|162.158.62.207]] 14:04, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

The non-US-citizen-being-in-line-for-the-Presidency thing has already been cleared up IRL - several Presidential cabinets have had non-natural-born-US citizens on them (current Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao was born in Taiwan; in the past Madeline Albright was born in the then-Czechoslovakia). All the serious succession lists I've ever seen just list them and skip over them. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.51|162.158.62.51]] 13:19, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

How do we decide who gets a bye in the jousting tournament? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.147|162.158.74.147]] 13:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
:Random draw, probably. There's no jousting rankings AFAIK to enable any kind of seeding like in tennis. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.51|162.158.62.51]] 15:16, 6 June 2018 (UTC) There is a USA chapter of the International Jousting Association. I didn't spend enough time to track down a rankings list, but there are 3 levels of competition, which would be a start in seeding. To further seed I'd suggest using the Europa Tiebreaker.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.15|162.158.62.15]] 18:14, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Anyone with a jousting ranking would not need a bye. [[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 15:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Anyone else think it's interesting that Kate gets a "if available" but Tom Hanks doesn't? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.62.184|172.69.62.184]] 16:23, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
: Also, why doesn't Tom Hanks kids get to be in line, like Bill Pulman's? Colin Hanks is old enough. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.122.210|162.158.122.210]] 03:59, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I assume, but am too lazy to do all the maths, that the person born closest to Europa would be the one closest in time to the point Sun Earth and Jupiter are in line.
I found a table of opposition distances here: http://www.ianridpath.com/jupiter.htm
[[User:Arachrah|Arachrah]] ([[User talk:Arachrah|talk]]) 18:26, 6 June 2018 (UTC)That would seem to be the overwhelmingly dominant factor, the only other factors would be which side of the Earth someone is born on (up to 7915miles difference, or about 7 minutes of the Earth's orbit), and Elevation/Altitude,since as of yet no one has been born in space(citation required), this factor is trivial, equivalent to less than 1 second of Earth's orbit.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.15|162.158.62.15]] 18:14, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

All of this talk about ''where'' people were born is very misleading. The general opinion is that you have to have been a citizen from birth, not born in the U.S. (or a U.S. territory or whatever). Ted Cruz was born in Canada, but he would have been eligible had he won the nomination and the election. See http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/mar/26/ted-cruz-born-canada-eligible-run-president-update/ for discussion. —[[User:TobyBartels|TobyBartels]] ([[User talk:TobyBartels|talk]]) 20:56, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
*Yes, Kate Brown (governor of Oregon) should be restored to Randall's line of succession, because she was born in Spain while her father was serving in the U.S. Air Force. Presumably she's a U.S. citizen by birth and thus eligible for the presidency. --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.150.52|172.68.150.52]] 22:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
** Added her. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign-born_United_States_politicians#Governors This page says she's a natural-born citizen]. --[[User:Ycthiognass|Ycthiognass]] ([[User talk:Ycthiognass|talk]]) 08:49, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

I read #7 being that we would have 5 people as co-president. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.122.210|162.158.122.210]] 03:59, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
:Would that also hold for other entries where multiple people are listed (e.g., multiple league MVPs meet the criteria)? Also, there is the "ties broken by born closest to Europa" title text. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.207|162.158.62.207]] 13:31, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

For the 'List of Specific Individuals', should it be maintained by who currently holds those positions, or left as who held them when the comic was posted? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.70.71|172.69.70.71]] 12:14, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
:If you want to come back and update the line as things change in the weeks, months, and years ahead, you're welcome to do so. If you do, I would recommend that both lists (the one accurate as of comic publishing and the one "updated") be maintained, perhaps as one table for fun comparison (adding blank spots as necessary if a current spot falls out of eligibility or a new one becomes eligible for whatever reason. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.207|162.158.62.207]] 13:29, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Tom Hanks is probably a reference to the June 4 Last Week Tonight episode, see http://time.com/5298479/john-oliver-last-week-tonight-guardianship/ {{unsigned ip|162.158.123.85}}

Oh! Question regarding Serena Williams - does it count if her latest match was in a ''doubles'' tournament? She pretty much always teams up with sister Venus in doubles. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.207|162.158.62.207]] 14:52, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

Anyone else curious about the apostrophe in "Governor's award"? The current notes imply that it is simply a mistake in "Governors Awards" (the Academy Awards similar to the Oscars), but Governor's awards (i.e., an award by a state Governor) for other areas are quite common (e.g. Clemson University Governor's Award for Excellence in Science and Pennsylvania's Governor's Award for the Arts). Rearranging Oscar and governor from the preceding criterion certainly makes sense, but wild speculation is always more fun... {{unsigned ip|172.68.211.28}}

1933: Santa Facts mentioned Santa being 9th in the presidential line of succession. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.111.7|162.158.111.7]] 08:56, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

To me, #17 (Pullman '''and''' his descendants) seems to imply that we'd abolish the 4-year term and be presided by the Pullman clan for as long as there are eligible successors. #18 might imply that too. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.21|162.158.74.21]] 20:14, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
:Presidential elections are mandated in the Constitution every four years - Bill or any of his descendants, or any qualifying member of the UK royal line of succession, would only serve until the current term ends. (Whether a crisis that knocked so many people ahead of them out of the line would allow a reputable and accepted election is another story.) [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.139|173.245.52.139]] 15:37, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

I note that if Donald Trump wasn't already holding the office of President, he could only qualify from positions 7 and 20 on Randall's list. And not at all from the actual list. [[User:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For]] ([[User talk:These Are Not The Comments You Are Looking For|talk]]) 01:09, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
:He wouldn't have been the only one - Obama's and JFK's previous job title before becoming President was US Senator, and Eisenhower was President of Columbia University. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.139|173.245.52.139]] 15:37, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

There are two problems with this explanation:
The line of succession applies only when the office of president becomes vacant. If the president is incapacitated, the vice president acts as president. If that office is vacant, or the vice precident is also incapacitated, the US will have to do without a president.

The constitution places no restrictions on who can act as president. The current law of succession stipulates that only those elegible to become president can act as president, the constitution does not.
--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.154|162.158.134.154]] 08:30, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
:Point 1, the office of President may be vacant but the powers of the Acting President execute the same by whomever the line falls to, and in times of crisis people will nearly certainly just consider them the new President (conflicting claims aside). Point 2 is just false - Article 2 of the Constitution stipulates natural-born citizen at 35 years old and having lived in the US for the last 14 years. Unless you're arguing that "President" and "Acting President" aren't the same? That sure as hell didn't stop John Tyler from refusing to acknowledge anyone who didn't acknowledge him as the new President after William Henry Harrison died a month into his term. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.52.139|173.245.52.139]] 15:17, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
::Point2: That is exactly what I am saying. Only the vice president can succeed to the presidency. The others would execute the powers of the president. What would most likely happen is that the acting president would appoint a vice president, who would succeed immediately when approved by congress.--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.134.34|162.158.134.34]] 07:50, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
::Point 1: There would be no acting president. Only the vice president can become acting president when the president is incapacitated. This and the office of president being vacant are covered in entirely separate parts of the constitution. The line of succession applies only in the latter case.
::Point 2: That was established in congressional legislation. Only the Vice President can become President when the President is incapcaitated, the rest act using the powers of the president but are not themselves the president.

;The Queen
Shouldn't the Queen come before Charles of Windsor? She is 0th in the British succession line. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.27.246|172.68.27.246]] 20:48, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
::It would violate Royal Oath. [[User:Erkinalp|Erkinalp]] ([[User talk:Erkinalp|talk]]) 13:53, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Since jousting can be a lethal sport (especially if you don't know what you're doing, or like, not wearing armor), I'm left to wonder if part of the whole single-elimination aspect of the competition, where EVERY American is participating, is basically a strategy to literally eliminate everyone there is to be subject to the government's rule (literally eliminate every citizen so the last one left alive is left to be in charge sort of thing) - [[User:Brettpeirce|Brettpeirce]] ([[User talk:Brettpeirce|talk]]) 18:10, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

[[Special:Contributions/172.69.135.184|172.69.135.184]] 07:43, 27 February 2019 (UTC) Foresee a problem with the Billboard Year End chart-toppers: What if a band has anonymous or pseudonymous members and/or deliberately avoids letting one of them assume leadership?
What about the MVPs, should the awards not be given prior to the line of succession reaching them?

;Updates to List of Individuals

Note that this list is supposed to be '''as of the date of the comic''' and should not be updated with changes due to events after that date. [[User:Ianrbibtitlht|Ianrbibtitlht]] ([[User talk:Ianrbibtitlht|talk]]) 17:31, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

I challenge the idea that a version of a legend can be "incorrect". [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 15:22, 4 April 2023 (UTC)

2754: Relative Terms

2023-04-03T13:21:29Z

172.70.162.158: /* Explanation */ Retweaks

{{comic
| number = 2754
| date = March 24, 2023
| title = Relative Terms
| image = relative_terms_2x.png
| imagesize = 425x442px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Small sewing machines are sewing machines that are smaller than a sewing machine. A sewing machine is larger than a small sewing machine, but quieter than a loud sewing machine.
}}

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT THAT IS LARGER THAN A BOT - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
The terms "small" and "big" are used to refer to size; the terms "loud" and "quiet" are used to refer to (audial) volume. While these terms are relative, they are often used even when there is nothing obvious being compared against (e.g. "A windmill is a big thing" or "An ant is a small thing").

This comic humorously suggests that the item defined to be in the middle of all four terms ("neither small nor big; neither quiet nor loud") is a sewing machine, as a sewing machine seems (at least in comparison to the other items on the graph) to be neither particularly big nor particularly small; neither particularly quiet nor particularly loud. A standard sewing machine is roughly 60dB in volume and approximately 42” X 21”, although this is for industrial machines, and those in the home would be both smaller and quieter.

As the reference point, the sewing machine is placed in the center of the chart, while a selection of other example objects are located in the four quadrants around it, based on whether they are considered to be small or big, and loud or quiet. Many of the items might appear to have been placed in the wrong quadrant for their actual attributes; locations may reflect more how Randall generally thinks of these things, as opposed to others' subjective ideas of their real-life relationship to a sewing machine.

Other references that could be placed in the center, from everyday life, could be the average adult human (the perspective from which people might measure other things), a bread-bin/box (a popular comparison {{w|breadbox#As a saying|in certain situations}}) or even something like "the size of a large/small/medium-sized dog" (which highly depends upon a shared reference of which breeds are commonly encountered), all things that are often encountered. A sewing machine may once have been found in many homes, but some of the comic's comedic value may arise from the relative rarity in modern times.

The title text is humorously tautological because it compares the standard against those things that are themselves defined against the standard.

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Small and quiet (upper left)
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Ant || Randall has used ants as a small comparator in [[2733:_Size_Comparisons|a previous comic]] on the topic of comparisons.
|-
| Balloon || A party balloon is quite loud when it pops, or if someone 'squeaks' it by rubbing; a hot-air balloon is big enough to carry a few humans, and the burner can be surprisingly loud.
|-
| Book || Books are typically sized to be handheld, and thus smaller than a sewing machine, though some very large books do exist.[https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/longest-book-in-the-world-impossible-to-read-180980814/#:~:text=At%2021%2C450%20Pages%2C%20the%20Longest,World%20Is%20Impossible%20to%20Read&text=Artist%20Ilan%20Manouach%20bound%20together,the%20commodification%20of%20comic%20books.] Similarly, books are associated with quiet activity, making no more sound than a quiet turning of a page in typical use, but could make a very loud bang if slammed shut on thrown forcefully on to a hard surface.
|-
| Bun (rabbit or pastry) || "Bun" is an informal term for a rabbit and a loaf of bread; a comparison between the two was made in [[1871: Bun Alert]]. While {{w|Flemish_Giant_rabbit|some rabbits}} may reach the size of a small dog or a child, and specially baked items for promotional activity or record attempts may exceed the size of a sewing machine, both would typically be smaller. However, while bread, even when being eaten, is usually very quiet, rabbits can make a large amount of noise that is at odds with their common image.
|-
| Butterfly || Butterflies are used as an exemplar of something small, unnoticeable and seemingly insignificant in the metaphor of the Butterfly Effect.
|-
| Hat ||
|-
| Mouse || A mouse is a very small, quiet animal. This might also be a reference to the expression "quiet as a mouse", meaning very quietly.
|-
| Newt ||
|-
| Pin drop || The expression "hear a pin drop" is used to indicate that an area is exceptionally quiet; the idea is that the space is so silent that even something as insubstantial and tiny as a pin can be heard hitting the ground.
|-
| Snow globe || A {{w|snow globe}} is much smaller than a sewing machine. Some snow globes have a small music box that can be wound up to play a melody. Snow globes without a music box are silent.
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Small and loud (upper right)
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Baby || Babies are usually considered small, and can be quite loud when they cry.
|-
| Blender || Blenders make a lot of noise when in use. Most household blenders are smaller than a sewing machine.
|-
| Cricket || Given that it is in the small/loud quadrant, this would refer to the insect, which is pretty small and can be quite loud; the sport of cricket or a cricket game would be much larger (though potentially much louder).
|-
| Fire alarm || The primary purpose of a fire alarm is to notify people of fire, so fire alarms are usually very loud, but ideally take up little space.
|-
| Firecracker || A {{w|Firecracker}} is a small explosive firework that makes a very loud bang when lit.
|-
| Flute || An example of a small musical instrument that can nevertheless be audibly quite dominant.
|-
| Harmonica || See Flute.
|-
| Popcorn || A snack that is known for being annoyingly loud in a cinema setting. However, this is largely due to the otherwise low volume environment, and arguably a sewing machine might be equally or more annoying. Also, some helpings of popcorn in some cinemas may actually be larger than a sewing machine.
|-
| Songbird ||
|-
| Whistle || This is of course a device known as a whistle, as these are small. The human act of whistling, or a whistle produced by, for example, a kettle, has no size (other than that of the whistler or whistling object). A whistle is used as an alert or signal, or could be another musical instrument (see Flute). The loudest human whistle ever recorded was 8372 Hz and roughly 110 DB, which is a C9 in the standard musical scale and is roughly as loud as a jackhammer[https://www.vnews.com/West-Lebanon-man-sets-a-world-record-for-whistling-24480844#:~:text=Guinness'%20website%20says%20Stanford%20reached,in%20the%20standard%20musical%20notation.]. Since a whistle should be able to beat this it must be seen as loud.
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Big and quiet (lower left)
|-
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Anaconda ||
|-
| Giraffe || Giraffes can be quite loud, but they usually vocalise using frequencies well below the range of human hearing. So, to a human, giraffes are quiet.
|-
| Northern lights || "In 2016, a Finnish study confirmed that the Aurora Borealis does produce a sound that can be heard" [https://www.techexplorist.com/listen-sound-aurora-borealis/47421/]
|-
| Shark || When people think of sharks, they typically envisage something large and dangerous, yet eerily silent as they swim (up until entering a feeding frenzy), like a {{w|Great_white_shark|great white}}. However, sharks come in a large variety of sizes, often {{w|Dwarf_lanternshark|considerably smaller}} than a sewing machine.
|-
| Statue || A stereotypical statue is a large piece of public art, intended to be viewed from afar, which would be larger than a sewing machine – even discounting the plinth or {{w|Statue of Abraham Lincoln (Lincoln Memorial)|other}} {{w|Nelson's Column|bases}}; however, there is no easily agreed lower size limit for when a statue becomes a statuette, figurine, bust or merely a carved/cast ornament, as any smaller examples of figurative art could be considered statues in a given situation. Famous and major examples do tend to be life-sized (or larger-than-life-sized) depictions of people, sometimes even depicted atop horses, making them significantly larger; even fractional-scale depictions could be easily of greater size than this comic's reference item.
Most statues are silent, but some may be plumbed in as fountains. Or occasionally equipped with other devices that make sound. There is also "musical statues" being a {{w|party game}}, that can be intermittently loud and quite large.
|-
| The Moon || The Moon is very, very big{{fact}}, but it is also completely silent{{fact}} from the perspective of most humans, since sound cannot travel through the vacuum of space.
|-
| Tree ||
|-
| Windmill || Windmills need to have significant height in order to catch enough air movement to drive them. They are thought of as quiet, relative to other forms of power generation; in reality, though, the passage of the blades through the air can cause considerable noise, as can [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzwqBgWKalI the machinery that they drive].
|}

{| class="wikitable"
|+ Big and loud (lower right)
|-
! Item !! Description
|-
| Airplane ||
|-
| Cannon ||
|-
| Riding mower ||
|-
| [[wikipedia:Calliope_(music)|Steam calliope]] || A large musical device which functions by sending steam (or more recently compressed air) through attached whistles.
|-
| Train ||
|-
| Tuba ||
|-
| Volcano || Lower right corner. Volcanic eruptions can be extremely loud. The {{w|1883 eruption of Krakatoa}} made a pressure wave of 180 dB, the loudest sound ever recorded.
|-
| Waterfall ||
|-
| Whale ||
|}

==Transcript==
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}

:[A chart, with "Quiet" to "Loud" on the X-axis, and "Small" to "Big" on the Y-axis. It is split into four quarters, with "Sewing machine" in the center.]

:[Upper left quadrant (Small & Quiet items):] Butterfly, Pin drop, Mouse, Ant, Bun (rabbit or pastry), Snow globe, Newt, Balloon, Book, Hat

:[Upper right quadrant (Small & Loud items):] Popcorn, Cricket, Songbird, Whistle, Baby, Harmonica, Flute, Fire alarm, Blender, Firecracker

:[Lower left quadrant (Big & Quiet items):] Shark, Tree, Anaconda, Giraffe, Statue, Windmill, Northern lights, The Moon

:[Lower right quadrant (Big & Loud items):] Tuba, Riding mower, Cannon, Airplane, Train, Waterfall, Steam calliope, Whale, Volcano

:[Caption below the panel:]
:''Big'', ''Small'', ''Loud'', and ''Quiet'' are relative terms. The thing they're relative to is a sewing machine.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Aviation]]
[[Category:Animals]]
[[Category:Buns]]
[[Category:Sharks]]
[[Category:Music]]
[[Category:Volcanoes]]
[[Category:Food]]

Talk:2753: Air Handler

2023-03-29T02:07:00Z

172.70.162.158:

I called the device an Air Handler in the transcript, but should we change that? [[User:E'); DROP TABLE users;--|E'); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:E'); DROP TABLE users;--|talk]]) 5:11, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

"It is not particularly usual to directly monitor the number of bees in an air-stream" - understatement of the week :o) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.41|172.68.210.41]] 05:46, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
:And statements like these are the reason why explainxkcd is so great :D [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 11:06, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

I think the transcript is complete, will be deleting unless someone proves otherwise in four hours. [[User:E'); DROP TABLE users;--|E'); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:E'); DROP TABLE users;--|talk]]) 11:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Some of these parameters have an ideal range (temperature, humidity, pressure), but others should be minimized (dust, smoke, odors, number of bees). Well, not into the negative range, but I think you'll understand me! ~ [[user:megan|Megan]] she/her [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 23:44, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

:Well, if there are config files, you can just set the range to be from 0 to 0. Then again, this is Black Hat... [[Special:Contributions/198.41.238.10|198.41.238.10]] 03:15, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
::connect it to a computer with a (maybe USB-C or some other) cable and go and add "minBees = 0;
maxBees = 0;" to /scripts/ControlAir/config.conf [[Special:Contributions/172.68.183.13|172.68.183.13]] 13:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
:::I think it'll need a USB-EE connector, actually... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.158|172.70.162.158]] 02:07, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
::I think that he made it so that "number of bees" had to be nonzero. Also, I think that the negative range could be available, and would be... weird. --[[User:Purah126|Purah126]] ([[User talk:Purah126|talk]]) 12:38, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
:::I personally would like to see a device that generates negative bees... I'm deathly phobic. [[User:RandalSchwartz|RandalSchwartz]] ([[User talk:RandalSchwartz|talk]]) 18:24, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
::::I hope doesn't generate anti-bees. That would be slightly problematic since anti-bees react exothermically with most common materials, including air, water, and (to scare off some chemists) glass. ~ [[user:megan|Megan]] she/her [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 18:47, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
:::MinBees = 0.5;
:::MaxBees = 1.5;[[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.191|172.71.242.191]] 08:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

This immediately got me wondering how it would deal with excess bees. It's not like you can filter them out as they pass through the device. It'd have to launch some kind of tiny flying robot to attack them or something. And then if there's too few bees, well… Let's just say I was pretty confident that the title text would use the word "drones" at least twice. -- [[User:Angel|Angel]] ([[User talk:Angel|talk]]) 09:15, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

I could see a VR rig adding a (controlled) pulse of H2S when you enter a sewer. With hardware limits to prevent any dangerous concentrations of course. {{unsigned ip|172.71.158.7}}

"Amount of bees" doesn't seem to make sense unless the air handler can view the contents of the entire room. "Concentation of bees" makes more sense. ~ Megan she/her [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 18:52, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
:A standard air-conditioner can only work with the air in its own air-channel (and maybe detect the state of the air that touches it, if it has external sensors) so I'd say that it's perfectly valid to do a count of bees that [[571: Can't Sleep|get spotted moving through/by it]].
:But then this is a Black Hat, doing this. Who knows quite what he's implmented... ;) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.113|141.101.99.113]] 19:22, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

explain xkcd:Community portal/Miscellaneous

2023-03-24T01:12:59Z

172.70.162.158: /* Email Trial */

<noinclude>{{Community links}}

{|-
|valign="top" width="100%"|[[File:Internet-group-chat.svg|left|120px]] <big><big>Miscellaneous</big></big>

This is a place for general chit-chat about virtually anything that doesn't fit anywhere else. {{AddNewSection|Page=Explain XKCD:Community portal/Miscellaneous|Text=(+post)}}
|}

= Discussion Area =
</noinclude>

== The Community Portal's design ==

{{tl|Community portal}} looks too Wikipedia-ish (because that's where I got it). Someone who can design things should probably fix that. It isn't protected for the time being, though it probably will be in the future (high-visibility template). --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 00:54, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

== Common mistake ==

This affects all pages that ever say "alt text" in reference to the TITLE text on xkcd images. "Alt text" is incorrect; Alt text refers to the text that is shown as an alternative when images are not displayed. Title text is what xkcd uses and is shown as a tool tip-like bubble when images are hovered over.

I would correct this myself but I saw no way to edit the main page. --[[User:Jillysky|Jillysky]] ([[User talk:Jillysky|talk]]) 14:21, 6 August 2012‎ (UTC)

:You actually don't need to edit the main page to fix it, as what's there is just a mirror (transclusion) of the actual content from the comic page, at [[Curiosity]], which is open for editing by anyone. Then again, the "alt-text" in that case is generated by a template, {{tl|comic}}, so that's where we should fix this. The template's code, however, is currently a terrible mess (sorry!), so I went ahead and took care of it. Thanks for catching that! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:24, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:Ah? So it's wrong, for instance, on http://m.xkcd.com? because of that I took it for granted that we could call it the alt-text... - [[User:Cos|Cos]] ([[User talk:Cos|talk]]) 17:38, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:: Yes. If you look at the page's html source, you'll see:
<nowiki><img
id="comic"
src="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/curiosity.png"
title="As of this writing the NASA/JPL websites are still overloaded. Trying CURIOSITY-REAR-CAM_[256px_x_256px].torrent.SwEsUb.DVDRip.XviD-aXXo.jpg instead."
alt="Curiosity"></nowiki>
::(line breaks added for clarity) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 23:54, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:::That was my error in the template. I knew "image text" that has been commonly used by Jeff was not techically correct, but I didn't actually go back and confirm it was alt text before I included that tag in the template. That's to Waldir (I believe?) for correcting the template. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 14:14, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

== When the "official" transcript is wrong? ==
I did [[903: Extended Mind]]. Interestingly, the transcript on xkcd.com is missing the bottom line "When Wikipedia has a server outage, my apparent IQ drops by 30 points." I assume we want a complete transcript, rather than whatever xkcd.com says it is...? [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 04:10, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

:We're focusing on the actual transcript of the comic, not the xkcd.com transcript. The official transcript is usually right, but even Randall makes mistakes sometimes. [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 04:24, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

== Milestone: half the comics explained!! ==

Hi all! I'm pleased to announce that we have just broke the 50% mark for xkcd explanations! The page that balanced the count (568 explained, 568 to go, at the time) was [[877: Beauty]], created 01:31 UTC, 21 November 2012 by [[User:Davidy22]]. Congratulations!! :D --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 03:10, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

:The caterer's been called! The punch will be arriving soon! Go [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]! [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 06:53, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

::[[File:freedom.png]] Punch is served! [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]][[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>(talk)</tt>]] 07:11, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

But the Main page says 407 explanations, 731 to go! What's up with that? --[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 21:00, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

== Reverse? ==

Why in the Archive why are all the thing up until "Heatmap" in Reverse? Can someone please answer? [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
:Archive? Can you provide a link or screenshot? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:43, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

http://xkcd.com/archive/ [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

::Ah, that's because the comic right after that, rtl, has a right-to-left character in it that flips all the proceeding text. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:13, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

Ah, ok, i see that now. When I 1st saw that RTL I just thought that it was random letters, thankyou for explaining it for me. [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

It also depends on what browser you are on because on Google Chrome it was normal. [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 09:08, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

== Do you think this question was asked by one of the xkcd people? ==

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090301060752AAtYugc [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 08:38, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

== Matthew Reilly ==

I would just like to tell everyone that I asked Matthew Reilly (the author) if he is ever scared that a velociraptor is going to attack him, and he said NO! He clearly needs to start worrying about them! [[User:Tmack3|Tmack3]] ([[User talk:Tmack3|talk]]) 10:45, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

== What can we learn section ==
First of all I love your work. I believe deeper understanding of each XKCD can make a world a better place and I thank you sincerely for starting this webpage. I wanted to ask what you think about "What can we learn?" section I've been adding to some of the pages. Thank you - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:This site is actually the work of multiple editors working slowly and steadily to fill in explanations for all the old comics. Some of the xkcd comics are incredibly deep - comic [[956]] is such a poignant comic that digs into the DRM issue on so many levels. Your reflections on many of the comics are very much warranted and you're helping us create talk pages with high-quality opening posts, which is great for future discussion on this wiki. It'd be nice if you could refrain from putting headers in talk pages, technical limitations of the wiki make long explanation pages choke when headings are in the discussion page. Other than that, keep up the good work! '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:42, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::I've put in my 2 cents to comic [[956]], and thank you for teaching me how to comment and link to other comics - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::: FYI, you can always make pseudo-headings using a horizontal rule and a bold "header", but honestly I think a simple standard opening sentence would suffice. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 12:14, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

:Oh, and the guy who draws xkcd is called {{w|Randall Munroe}}. So many glowing things to be said about him. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:44, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

::Yes, I can't thank him enough for simplifying complex issues to funny stories, I think it's exactly what our generation needs - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:58, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:I'm in favor of a Mr. Rogers style of 'what lesson can be learned' on the talk page, but make sure your comments don't come across as sanctimonious and holier-than-thou as that can be really off-putting. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 19:06, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

:: You are absolutely correct, I have not thought of that, please trust me I did not do it on purpose. Thank you Mr. Lcarsos - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 19:55, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Thank you David, and I apologize that I've not made it clear that by your work, I do mean your collective work (the wiki is only as good as all the people behind it). I was trying to put the headers to allow others to find the section easier in case they start looking for it, perhaps I could make a suggestion to make it a standalone section so that others would be encouraged to contribute their own understanding of lessons they have noticed from each comic. I know the lessons I've seen, but I would love to learn from others as much as I hope they can learn from me and Mr. XKCD, thank you. - [[User:E-inspired|E-inspired]] ([[User talk:E-inspired|talk]]) 13:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

== DING DONG THE WITCH IS DEAD ==

Hello fellow editors. Do you remember the last time we were hit by a surge of automated spam? Neither do I. ConfirmEdit has really done a number on the volume of spam that we're eating - one spam account has been created since we finished configuring confirmEdit, and zero anon edits have been spam. Zero. Can you say happiness? Can you say party? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:Hehe, I'm glad! Thanks for being so relentless on the spam-fighting all this time! Maybe we should make up a new reason to make Jeff remove the /wiki/ in the URL? ;) –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 18:11, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

:: Awesome news! Finally the patrolling feature will be usable: [{{fullurl:Special:RecentChanges|hideanons=1&hidepatrolled=1&from=20121204025000&days=365&limit=1000}} Unpatrolled changes by registered users] / [{{fullurl:Special:RecentChanges|hideliu=1&hidepatrolled=1&from=20121204025000&days=365&limit=1000}} Unpatrolled changes by anonymous users] :) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 12:27, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

== 1000th comic explanation!! ==

Hi all! It apparently went unnoticed that '''we have recently surpassed the mark of 1000 comic explanations!''' Some calculations based on [[:Category:Comics]] and [[Special:NewPages]] led me to the conclusion that the 1000th explanation was [[681: Gravity Wells]], created by [[User:AlexRNL]] just yesterday! Yay! This calls for a celebration, no? Congrats to [[Special:ContributionScores|everyone]] who made this happen! I'll edit [[Mediawiki:Sitenotice]] with a congratulatory message. Way to go, guys! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:04, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
:ps - I also took the opportunity to flesh out our [[explain xkcd|about/history page]]. Please take a look and fix/add any details I might have missed. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:06, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

== Style guide ==
Is there a style guide for this wiki? --[[User:PeterMortensen|PeterMortensen]] ([[User talk:PeterMortensen|talk]]) 20:14, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
:Oh, sorry, I did forget to answer here. A guide on this is not easy, many individual comics do need special layouts because they have content never can match to a style guide. But I will give a try [[Help:Style Guide]].--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:18, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

== Adblock ==

I've whitelisted the site in adblock, but the ads are still blocked.
Anyone know what' going on here and how I can fix it?--[[User:ParadoX|ParadoX]] ([[User talk:ParadoX|talk]]) 04:34, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
:Huh. I was wondering why our impression counts weren't rising. I thought it was just because this site had high turnover. I've changed the webpage that the word whitelisting links to, try the instructions there instead. Project wonderful is our ad provider, and they've been pretty good to us so far. Also, thanks for helping to support the site! '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
::Great! I don't really mid ads as long as they aren't intrusive. Works now, Hope everyone else does it as well.--[[User:ParadoX|ParadoX]] ([[User talk:ParadoX|talk]]) 05:16, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
::I saw you wrote "the webpage that the word whitelisting links to" so I went to the search box and typed whitelisting. My search didn't yield anything useful: [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?search=whitelisting&go=Go&title=Special%3ASearch]. I don't know how to create the missing page but there oughta be a link for someone like me who searches for whitelist or whitelisting, to take them to the instructions you refer to. [[User:SaxTeacher|SaxTeacher]] ([[User talk:SaxTeacher|talk]]) 10:59, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
:::We already have this linked somewhere, but [https://www.projectwonderful.com/adblock.php this] is the link you want. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

I normally access this site through the android app "xkcd browser". That app only links to the content part of the site and doesn't show the side bar, so the adds aren't shown either. Might be worth discussing it with the author. [[Special:Contributions/109.158.126.139|109.158.126.139]] 08:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

:We support those avenues completely, you don't need to feel bad if you use an app to browse this site. We're only really concerned when we put up ads and our impressions are less than half our page hits, because that essentially means more than half our readers aren't contributing to server costs. That's really hard to deal with. We have enough daily page hits to qualify as web publishers at very big ad agencies, but we've had to settle for relatively low rates at the smaller Project Wonderful because 60% of our users were using adblock, so the agencies rejected us because our valuable "paying" audience was too low for them to consider us. That's been the difference between us using dedicated servers to host the site and hiring a contractor to set it up, and the (admittedly somewhat decent) shared hosting plan that we have to settle for now. We can only afford the shared hosting, because the small-scale advertisers at Project Wonderful don't even pay for full days of advertising; most of the time, we make less per day than the posted $3.90 price. That said, we're grateful that Project Wonderful would take us as a publisher when no one else would, but it really feels like the difference between being accepted to community college and being accepted to an ivy league school. For a similar reason, the Google ads route was not sufficient to satisfy our needs; not a large enough proportion of our users were looking at ads, so we either needed to spam them and degrade the site, or we needed to make them refresh, which makes pages slow and causes needlessly high traffic for a lot of users. We didn't want our ads to make the site worse, because that would drive away users and defeat the purpose of us being a public resource for xkcd readers. We actually decided to go the agency route pretty early, because adsense takes a massive cut of revenues and gives us little control over what ads or advertisers actually showed, which was not okay with us. Whoah, I wrote a lot. I hope it was coherent. Maybe someday I'll collect my thoughts and write a proper summary on how and why we advertise. Also, if you have any questions about anything ad-related, you can always ask us at [[explain xkcd talk:Advertise Here]]. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 11:15, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

== Feynman? ==

Feynman (both in [[182: Nash|living]] and [[397: Unscientific|zombie]] form) probably deserves an entry in the [[Template:Navbox characters|character navbox]] template doesn't he? [[Special:Contributions/128.250.152.198|128.250.152.198]] 02:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
:That's two comics out of 1200+. Three if you count the song. Not quite enough yet. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:27, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
:: If that's the criterion, then we need to get rid of [[Brown Hat]]. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 19:30, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
:::Potentially, we could create a very minor character category with these two, and other characters with less than 10 appearances. [[User:tplaza64]]

== Job Interview (Atomic Soup) ==

The soup is clearly being poured out of an atomic socket. This "atomic soup" is probably not a reference to the alcoholic brew favoured by Scottish tramps, but more likely to the virtual nature of the company. {{unsigned|Sulis}}
:Hey, go here [[Talk:1293: Job Interview‎]] for discussions. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

== Is there a similar, transcripted service for The Oatmeal? ==

Hi everyone - this site is a real gem, I've sent it to a friend of mine who can't read XKCD because she's blind. The transcripts on this site are a real boon!

Does anyone know if there is a similar service for The Oatmeal? I've searched and searched, but found nothing so far.

Thanks :)

Jeff

:As far as I know we are kind of unique in the web comics world. I think we get away with it because Randall publishes all his comics as Creative Commons Attribution, Non-Commercial. We liberally link back to xkcd, and we don't make a penny (The ads are just to cover server expenses, because wikis and the databases that support them get big when you're covering a body of work like xkcd). I haven't looked into the copyright Matt uses for the Oatmeal, but he seems like a cool enough guy to not kill a community transcripting effort of his comics. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 20:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

== what if 103: Vanishing Water - comics ==

Please explain the 2nd and the 4th comics from http://what-if.xkcd.com/103/

"Just tried to sail my boat over land, because I didn't learn from that kid in the Zephyr." (who's the kid from Zephyr?)

"A third time?" (maybe whales were dropped twice before in other what-ifs?) [[User:Daniel Carrero|Daniel Carrero]] ([[User talk:Daniel Carrero|talk]]) 21:57, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

:"A third time?" is a reference to a whale falling twice in "Hitchiker's guide to the Galaxy". Been a while, so I don't remember the details of how this fit in, but the second time it happened to the whale, he thought "Not again" or something along those lines. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 18:49, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

::Actually, it was the bowl of petunias that thought to itself "Oh, no, not again." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.73|108.162.216.73]] 00:48, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Raises the question of if we should explain jokes imbedded in What If comics. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 18:49, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

== Discussion usage ==

Am I being a killjoy in feeling that the discussion section should be mainly limited to discussion on improving the explanation, gathering consensus and that type of thing.
Specifically, the discussion for [[1418: Horse]] is quickly turning into every man and his dog posting a sentence in the style of the comic, which doesn't really add anything to the page other than clutter.

Personally, I'd just delete most of them, but I think I might be turning into a grumpy old bugger... --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 20:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
:The discussion is also there for just talking about the comic. Those guys aren't wildly off-topic, there's no need to clamp down on what they get to talk about. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 17:44, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

::Yep, I must just be grumpy and draconian! Lesson learned --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 20:32, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

== 2014 Christmas header ==

Since the header for the site current contains a [http://imgs.xkcd.com/store/store_default.png graphic link to the store] that promises that Randall probably won't ship you a [[:Category:Bobcats|bobcat]], it seems to me that probably ought to be preserved and explained somewhere. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.56.189|173.245.56.189]] 17:45, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

== XKCD at LanguageLog ==

Arnold Zwicky (of the well-known linguistics blog Language Log) has put together a list of linguistics-related XKCD strips, here: http://arnoldzwicky.org/the-language-of-comics/comics-lists/xkcd-cartoons/ I thought it might be appropriate for a copy of the list (maybe a category) to be created from it. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.133.79|199.27.133.79]] 03:48, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
:[[:Category:Language]] '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

== Bookmarklet ==

Hello there, I've created a little bookmarklet (https://ginkobox.fr/shaarli/?a77vQw) and I thought it might be useful for someone out there.

When launched, it adds the 'explain' before xkcd.com and the browser loads the explainxkcd page. I've tested it only on Firefox.

(Contact @ https://ginkobox.fr/wiki/doku.php?id=about) {{unsigned ip|‎108.162.229.100}}

:Thanks 108.162.229.100! I've started collecting these helpful tools on a [[Browser helpers|new page]], to hopefully make them easier for others to find. – [[User:Yfmcpxpj|Yfmcpxpj]] ([[User talk:Yfmcpxpj|talk]]) 01:36, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

== Is there a RSS feed for What If? ==

Is there a RSS feed for What If?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 11:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
:No, because we cover the comics. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:57, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

== My User Page ==

Can someone help me with [[user:17jiangz1|my user page]]? I can't seem to remove the large spaaaaaace on top.--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 07:43, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
: The only solution I've found is to remove the contribution scores (data6=...). Not sure what exactly is triggering this bug. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 21:02, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I am receiving "Expression error: Unrecognised punctuation character ""." for <code><pre>{{#expr: {{formatnum:{{#cscore:17jiangz1|pages}}|R}}/{{formatnum:{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}|R}}*100 round 5 }}</pre></code>--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 05:46, 10 April 2015 (UTC)
:Bump?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 06:48, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

== What-If ==

In What-If 150, "Tatoonie Rainbow", http://what-if.xkcd.com/150/ the first image title-text says: "Vowing not to reference that video any further anywhere in this article, on principle.". What video is he talking about? [[User:5mi11er|slmiller]] ([[User talk:5mi11er|talk]]) 14:29, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

It hasn't updated for 2 weeks. why?--[[User:17jiangz1|17jiangz1]] ([[User talk:17jiangz1|talk]]) 06:50, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
:Looks like they're on hold for a few months (Until July 14th). Too bad, I enjoyed them. ([http://what-if.xkcd.com/ Look at the top of the What-If page]) --[[User:Zman9600|Zman9600]] ([[User talk:Zman9600|talk]]) 20:24, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
:What is so special about the date and time? Seems very specific: ''July 14th, 2015 at 7:49:59 AM EDT.'' --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.99|141.101.98.99]] 12:48, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
Looks like it's set for the 40th anniversary of the Apollo-Soyuz mission launch. {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.158}}

What If updates will resume on July 14th, 2015 at 7:49:59 AM EDT. By that time {{w|New Horizons}} will have it's closest approach to {{w|Pluto}}. See here: http://pluto.jhuapl.edu/ --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:34, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

== thanks for having a working website ==

the search function on xkcd.com was taken off, and now the random function seems to be having issues, but it's nice that here both work [[Special:Contributions/188.114.97.114|188.114.97.114]] 19:09, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
:We do our best. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 22:27, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

== Ada Munroe ==

The latest [[what if?]] number 139 has a question by "Ada Munroe". Is she related to [[Randall]] in any way? --{{User:17jiangz1/signature|06:57, 09 August 2015}}

== Out of curiosity ==

I notice that whenever someone links to tvtropes.org in an explanation, someone changes the link to the matching page on allthetropes.org. I'm curious as to why that is. Is there some kind of terms of use conflict at play here that an editor should be keeping in mind? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.128.156|199.27.128.156]] 06:33, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
:TVtropes does not restrict links to their site, and if this has been happening there are some time-outs that I need to be handing out. Can you point me to some of the edits where this is happening? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:24, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
::The specific example I had was, um, [[1468: Worrying]]. On Jan 3rd the links went to tvtropes.org, and on March 18th they were all changed over to allthetropes.orain.org. I just found it curious, I wasn't sure what the reason for it was [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.47|162.158.255.47]] 10:32, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
:::Reverted. Typically, the reason people change perfectly good links to specific, obscure links in wikis is usually self-advertising. I'll be watching that guy's edits in the future. Thanks for the heads up. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:00, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

== Sightless readers offended by the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline. ==

I'll admit, every now and again the comic is over my head. ...because I'm dumb in that particular field. However, blind users who enjoy xkcd must do so through explainxkcd. They are NOT dumb. They are *blind*. Without explainxkcd, they would have no idea what is in the comics panels.

Explainxkcd is a great site. There is no question it provides a service to the internet community.

Please see this thread (last paragraph) on Userfriendly.org. Keep in mind, the end user is sightless and explainxkcd is "viewed" through a screen reader. http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/read.cgi?id=20160207&tid=3930989 (Anonymous)

: The guy on that other site is complaining about that XKCD does not work well in a screen reader -- that is not our problem, but a problem for Randall to solve on his own site. We cannot be the catch all for everything on the internet that Randall broke [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:37, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:: Agreed --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Honestly, I never even noticed the tagline in question. Humorous to sighted folks, sure. ...but obviously offensive to those who have no choice but to access xkcd through explainxkcd.

I'll leave it to the administrators or the community to figure something out, if anything at all. Maybe no one cares? I didn't come here to make any suggestions, only to point out how offensive those 4 words are to some users of the website. {{unsigned ip|108.162.238.88}}

:Alright, put a link here in the site notice. What does everyone else think? I'm open to changing it, it's something people complain about fairly periodically and our identity isn't completely tied to the tagline, I feel. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 09:16, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

::Well, we definitely shouldn't change anything because that particular guy is upset. It's one thing to be offended, but he's also attacking both this site and Randal Monroe. I don't think that sort of behavior should be rewarded. I actually have a rule online where, if someone acts like a jerk to me, I will be kind, but I won't give them what they want. I think a lot of the problems with people being jerks to others is that they still get what they want, so what reason do they have to stop? If he wants us to change it, he should address us like an adult and ask us himself.

::But you claim this is a common complaint. Then I would say we need more info. My instinct would be that people don't understand that it's a joke. But then my solution would be to do what the site is designed to do and explain the joke, rather than take it down. If there's actually something about it that's offensive to an entire class of people, that's different. I am unaware of a stereotype that blind people are stupid, but I'm open to the idea that I don't know.

::I'm not particularly married to the tag line. I actually didn't even notice it was there. But I'm loathe to take it down over a misunderstanding. I can't think of a similarly humorous replacement that would not be offensive, but I can at least suggest "Because nobody knows everything." --[[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 09:42, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:::I've gotten these before. There's a [[Talk:Main_Page#Header_message|slowly growing]] section in the main page discussion page and a complaint buried somewhere in my talk page and they're usually quite unhappy. I pegged it up this time round because there's special needs involved, and a good part of our intended appeal is the transcripts for the blind. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 10:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:::I like your reasoning, what if "It's 'cause you're dumb" was follow by "[citation needed]" and make the whole thing a link to a page explaining the header. It would be in character of the page, and xkcd. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.34|108.162.221.34]] 00:28, 13 February 2016 (UTC) Sam
::::Great idea, Sam! That's the funniest suggestion ever [citation needed]. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.141.4|172.68.141.4]] 19:29, 29 August 2018 (UTC)

::Is he one of those people who are so self-centered and 'entitled' that just because they have a disability they assume that everyone is constantly trying to offend them, even in the most unlikeliest of cases? Does he actually believe that the tag line was written with the intention of offending blind people? This is ridiculous. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.71|141.101.106.71]] 11:04, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

"Just in case you feel dumb"? "Some comics may be funnier than they appear"?[[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.198|199.27.130.198]] 09:55, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

How about simply removing it? At least until we find something that isn't offensive to anyone - which might be very hard to obtain. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 10:34, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Because you're crippled... That's worse I guess. 
But before considering the "you're dumb" tagline, one must think about the name of this wiki. It is called '''Explain''' xkcd, not read xkcd, and explaining is for dumb people, not blind people. 
Maybe one thing we can do is add a "(unless you are just here for the transcript)" subtext, with a link to the transcript section, which has the advantage of both taming offended blind readers (maybe) and provide a direct, "spoilerless" link. --[[User:GuB|GuB]] ([[User talk:GuB|talk]]) 10:40, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I need explainxkcd for two reasons: being visually impaired, although I can see most of the comics I often miss crucial details that I find only in the transcript; and as a non-American, I lack many cultural references (books, movies, songs, sayings...) that are given in the explanations.
I don't think either of these reasons makes me "dumb". However, I never found the tagline offensive. It was immediately obvious to me that it was meant as humor. Who could seriously think that someone is dumb just because they haven't read the specific book that Randall is parodying in a given comic? Or because they're not familiar with a specific programming language or Unix command? IMHO the tagline *is* funny precisely because very few people can actually "get" all the comics without an explanation. Suggesting that anyone who isn't part of the 0.1% of the population who share all of Randall's abilities and references, is dumb, can't be anything but a joke. Adding to the lot those who can't get the comics because they're blind doesn't make the joke more offensive. It's a sad world where political correctness kills all forms of humor.

On the other hand, the tagline is not an essential part of the site and if a significant number want it removed, so be it.
Zetfr 10:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:Well not everybody's mind works the same way, and some people legitimately cannot grasp humor very easily. They may come to read the explanations precisely because they can't recognize what about a given comic is supposed to be humorous, and they likewise may not be able to tell that the tagline is just a joke. Besides, the tagline is equating a lack of knowledge with a lack of intelligence, which also makes it inaccurate and kind of kills the humor for those who stop and think about it.

:I personally agree with the above "Because nobody knows everything." approach. I would suggest something along the lines of "Because you won't always get the joke." --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.242.134|108.162.242.134]] 11:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:: This sounds like a bunch of dumb people coming together and suggesting that the rest of people should be more like them (joke intended) [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:33, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

: +1 on this. '''Keep'''. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 20:15, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''removal''' [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 11:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Mostly agree with Zetfr, it is a rather obvious joke, and this is a website about a webcomic which is mostly about fun, it would be different if this was some serious news portal, but it isn't, and in my humble opinion people who can't take a joke shouldn't even be here. There will always be ranters and people who get offended, we should not let them make decisions for us. I sincerely believe vast majority of people, blind or otherwise, understand it. [[User:Jaalenja|Jaalenja]] ([[User talk:Jaalenja|talk]])

:I agree with Zetfr. If a user doesn't understand that it is a joke, then he won't understand XKCD's jokes, either, no matter how much explaination he can get.
:--[[User:Lou Crazy|Lou Crazy]] ([[User talk:Lou Crazy|talk]]) 12:12, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
::I also agree with the above, and like the part of Zetfr about because you need a reader to use the page you do not need to be offended by an obvious joke --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

if i had a vote i'd say change the "because you're dumb" from text to a picture with alt text of something slightly less rude. "because you're using a screenreader," perhaps. although that would show up on mouseover. meh. whatever. --13:01, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:and someone isn't "entitled" because they get annoyed about something that doesn't annoy you. as a sighted person i don't even look at the headers on the page. i would imagine that since the text in question is at the top of the page he has to listen to it every single time the page is refreshed. which is annoying enough if it's not insulting. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.161|141.101.106.161]] 13:06, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
:It is bad to have the alt-text saying something differently, but since the current tagline is not offensive to non-blind people then why would it be offensive to a blind person. [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''' -- Blind people do not have to come to this site, they can just use xkcd.com directly and if that is not working for blind people then that is Randall's problem not ours. The tag line has been there for years while I have noticed it before and used the site and I have never been offended, if a blind person is offended maybe they should stop using the internet. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.109|162.158.255.109]] 15:18, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
: I second that -- the tag line does not appear to offend non-blind people, it should not offend blind people either [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Voting '''KEEP''' -- the tag line is a joke, and who is to say that blind people cannot be dumb [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 15:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''' as well. I don't see any reason to change it; it's not a jab at disabled people, blind or otherwise. The site is called '''explain'''xkcd, and everything here centers around explaining the comic, not being a transcription service. (If that's not the case, then maybe other things need changing too.) I always thought the tagline fit nicely with the "sarcasm" part of xkcd's own tagline. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.26|108.162.216.26]] 15:26, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''KEEP and satisfy both sides'''. If you examine the HTML, or use [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/fangs-screen-reader-emulator/ Fangs] (free screen reader), you may notice there is a jump-to-nav div element that lets people with screen readers jump to various parts of the page. The jump-to-nav div is only a few HTML lines below the tagline. I'd recommend:
# Moving the jump-to-nav div to '''before''' the tagline
# Adding a "Jump to Transcript" link in the jump-to-nav div.
# Test it with [https://addons.mozilla.org/en-us/firefox/addon/fangs-screen-reader-emulator/ Fangs] in Firefox to simulate a screen reader.
This way, screen-reader users can jump to the transcript and don't have to hear the tagline every time they visit an explainxkcd.com page.
-- [[User:Hat|Hat]] ([[User talk:Hat|talk]]) 15:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Consider "Do you get it now?" [[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.11|198.41.235.11]] 16:09, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''': it's reasonable and no change is warranted

I like the suggestion of '''keeping''' the current tagline, but changing it to an '''image with alttext''' saying something like "because you're using a screenreader". I also vote to move the link to the transcript to above the tagline. [[User:Rileysci|Rileysci]] ([[User talk:Rileysci|talk]]) 17:32, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

: Great idea, but here's an even better one: '''Keep''' the tagline for visual browsers, but '''add code''' such as [http://stackoverflow.com/questions/672156/is-there-a-way-to-write-content-that-screen-readers-will-ignore <code> CSS { speak: none; } and aria-hidden="true"</code>] that prevents it from being spoken by screen readers. -- [[User:Frankie|Frankie]] ([[User talk:Frankie|talk]]) 15:31, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I get the joke and I'm not offended by it, but it seems to me that it really sticks out on this site and it doesn't seem consistent with Randall's sense of humor. Everyone on this site is very inclusive and eager to share all perspectives and points of view. I come here both to see the humor that I have the knowledge to understand and to learn more about the world the way Randall sees it. In short, I come here to be one of the lucky 10,000. In fact, I would suggest that as the tag line, "Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!". Inside joke that can link to the comic (http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1053:_Ten_Thousand) and it is welcoming. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.170|108.162.245.170]] 18:44, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
: +1 on this. '''Change''' [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 03:45, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep'''. In case it is not kept then it should be changed to something completely different. Te idea of making a title text to an image I really dislike, although I even more dislike adding anything to the existing one to either refer to people coming for the transcript or making excuses for the obvious joke. This has been a part of the page forever, I have seen it almost every time I come here. To begin with I did feel dumb sometimes, but I was never offended by it, just amused. But of course an explain page is for those who did not get the joke. And there are other pages that explains the comic. I do not know if they have a transcript? But I'm happy to know that some people must really enjoy the detailed transcripts that I usually try to provide. I had just not though about the blind perspective. I more use the transcript to make sure every one agrees on what is seen in the images of the comic. Having said all this, I must admit that the best suggestion for a change so far is the one posted above my post (about the lucky 10,000). :-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 19:28, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote keep, for exactly the reasons explained by Zeftr above. Changing it to an image with alt text would be OK also. [[User:Miamiclay|Miamiclay]] ([[User talk:Miamiclay|talk]]) 20:45, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:I vote '''Change''' it because it is too easily mistaken as an insult instead of a joke. At least change it to ''Because you are stupid''.... Ah, maybe instead ''Because xkcd is far beyond common knowledge'' or ''Because hardly anyone gets everything'' or ''Because it is usually nerdly esoteric even for geeks''. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.46|108.162.221.46]] 21:39, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

:I vote '''Change'''. I have never been a big fan of the tagline. I don't know everything, but I am certainly not dumb. Also, I echo the reference to (http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/1053:_Ten_Thousand). This comic has always been about expanding knowledge, not making you feel guilty for not knowing something.

:'''Change''': I realize the "It's because you're dumb" tagline follows the sarcastic nature of Randall's humor, but there are enough people who don't get or appreciate that sort of humor and are likely to be more offended by it, special needs or no. Here's my suggestion: "For those of us who don't get it." [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 21:59, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

At what point is "enough" people offended? I've only seen evidence of several (https://xkcd.com/1070/) visually impaired users actually offended by the site, along with a couple people who didn't specify their visual ability. I don't know the traffic on this site, but I would expect it to be on the order of 10^4 or higher. So is this discussion about changing something that a handful of people find offensive? Or is there an actual problem of something inappropriate on the site. If this is all about a couple people finding something offensive, I imagine a few christians might take issue with (https://xkcd.com/709/). Should we start another discussion about accommodating them? Or add a disclaimer that the views expressed by Randall Munroe are his own and do not reflect those of this site? [[User:Beardmcbeardson|Beardmcbeardson]] ([[User talk:Beardmcbeardson|talk]]) 01:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
: So you vote to '''keep''' -- right? [[User:Spongebog|Spongebog]] ([[User talk:Spongebog|talk]]) 04:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Slightly Change'''-- make it more obviously tongue in cheek. "It's cause we're dumb" or "For those of us who need it" I agree with the point about not complying with people on the internet who can't behave like adults, however I've never found the line particularly funny. Also change the jump-to-nav, as that would just get annoying to hear it every time you open up the site. I am not recommending changing it based on the imagined offenses of others. I just think it could be funnier.[[User:NotLock|NotLock]] ([[User talk:NotLock|talk]]) 06:29, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I like changing to "For those of us who need it"

'''Keep''' Trying to satisfy everyone is like trying to understand every comic. It probably won't happen. As an example, using the 'one of 10 000' example provided above can insult a bunch of people that are not from the States simply because the comic (and the reference to the comic for that matter) will make them feel left out. My other reasons for voting keep have all been mentioned already. People get insulted so easily, let's try not to encourage this behavior by rewarding it. [[User:Bon|Bon]] ([[User talk:Bon|talk]]) 07:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Change''' because I find it slightly offensive myself. If we change it, we should replace it with something that everybody would interpret as humorous, e.g. "Because we can't all be rocket scientists". [[User:Condor70|Condor70]] ([[User talk:Condor70|talk]]) 08:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. Next thing we know, liberal arts majors will complain about xkcd science being offensive. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.91.229|141.101.91.229]] 10:12, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change''' or '''remove'''. Regarding the former, while I know it's supposed to be a joke, I never found it humorous myself and, unlike others that wrote before me, I don't think it relates to the humor or sarcasm used by Randall. It being offensive is not part of my motivation for my vote. I agree with some of the suggestions written up to now. Regarding the latter, I don't really think it's existence is necessary. Regardless, changing the div things is a must. [[User:GuiRitter|GuiRitter]] ([[User talk:GuiRitter|talk]]) 16:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change'''. You could keep much of the humour by changing it to something like "because ignorance '''can''' be cured". [[User:Farnz|Farnz]] ([[User talk:Farnz|talk]])

If I may vote (as a happy international user of this site, but not yet a contributor), one more vote for '''Keep''' - at least as "don't change now, because of this specific request, because of perceived offensiveness". For several reasons, which have been mentioned already:

a) I think it's funny. It also fits perfectly with the overall XKCD humor. And the same line of thinking as the book "You are now less dumb" from "YouAreNotSoSmart.com".

b) It's so obviously generic (directed at everyone reading it) I fail to understand how it can be interpreted as insult instead of irony. Even worse: I fail to understand why it should be _especially_ insulting to blind people. Having a transcript for them to use is nice, but it's merely one of the aspects this site provides (and it's not even at the top nor are there pages "transcript only", so blind are no primary audience)

c) If this site decides to actually help blind people more, how about: putting the tagline in the image (so it's not "read every time"), put the transcript at the top / provide pages with only transcripts, so that the original XKCD can be consumed prior to the explanations here (just as non-blind users would see it)

d) this request follows the current Outragism trend, so I do suspect that it's not actually blind people feeling offended, but privileged SJWs thinking about who might possibly feel offended, bringing change to the world where it's not beneficial even for those they claim to support. Comparable to PETA.

While I'm at it - THANK YOU for this site. Most XKCD I mostly understand. But due to being an international reader, some aspects of American Culture I need explainXKCD to grasp, and other aspects it's just nice to see more details, cross-references with other comics, and hidden gems.
[[User:Zefiro|Zefiro]] ([[User talk:Zefiro|talk]]) 18:46, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
:I'm an "international user", too, and I suppose a lot of users of this site are international users who need to be explained some xkcd jokes that would be obvious to any native English speaker living in the US. I don't have an opinion about changing the tagline or keeping it, but I would like to notice that "Because you are dumb" is the kind of joke that would need an explanation - it would be hard for me to tell if it's a joke or an insult. Therefore, an easier joke could have some advantage.--[[User:Pere prlpz|Pere prlpz]] ([[User talk:Pere prlpz|talk]]) 22:16, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote for '''change.''' I know it's a joke, but it's not particularly funny, and can easily be mistaken for an insult. [[User:Ekedolphin|Ekedolphin]] ([[User talk:Ekedolphin|talk]]) 20:13, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

I agree with Trlkly (and Isaac(https://xkcd.com/1448/)), more information is needed. The purpose of this site is to explain xkcd (obviously, from the name) so people come here primarily to seek knowledge or a better understanding about xkcd. As long as the explanations or the explainers don't act like white hat (https://xkcd.com/1386/), there should be no reason to take the tagline seriously.--[[User:Beardmcbeardson|Beardmcbeardson]] ([[User talk:Beardmcbeardson|talk]]) 01:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote KEEP, but I do support the idea of moving the jump-to to above the tagline. I believe that the tagline is obviously a joke, and that pleaing everyone is nigh impossible. I also strongly oppose the proposal to change it to an image with an alt-text of "because you're using a screen reader." Finally, I do not believe we should change the tagline. We should, if anything, remove it altogether. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.20|173.245.54.20]] 03:33, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Slightly Change''' - I like 199.27.130.198's idea, "Just in case you feel dumb." [[User:Mateussf|Mateussf]] ([[User talk:Mateussf|talk]]) 04:44, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Change''', preferably to something like "The ''Anti'' Thing Explainer; Simple Stuff in Complicated Words!" Only, you know, more complicated to improve the joke. [[User:KitsunePhoenix|Amaroq (KitsunePhoenix)]] ([[User talk:KitsunePhoenix|talk]]) 05:01, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

What about: it's cause you need more context. I also don't like the current tagline, because dumbness would be more the inability to understand than a lack of knowledge.

'''Change''' - First thing first, as suggested, move the jump-to-nav div to before the tagline and add a "Jump to Transcript" link in the jump-to-nav div.

Then also change the tagline: it's not that good, and not that in line with the xkcd humor - it's actually ''directly opposed'' to the spirit of [[1053]]. Some better ones have already been suggested:
*"Some comics may be funnier than they appear"
*"Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!"
*"because sometimes we all need a little help"
''Or'' we could even have a bunch of good ones like that out of which one is selected at random when the page is loaded --[[User:Jules.LT|Jules.LT]] ([[User talk:Jules.LT|talk]]) 09:17, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I like the joke in the tag line (some of us come here because they are to stupid or to lazy to lookup all the information xkcd is joking about)
but I also find it to direct to the user. I want to add some suggestions to Jules.LT [[User:SirKitKat|sirKitKat]] ([[User talk:SirKitKat|talk]]) 10:01, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
* "Error loading tagline, click here to retry."
* "Because it is Monday morning."
* "Because you like explaining jokes."

I think people coming here and complaining because "dumb" appears to be aimed at insulting the blind are hilarious, because another meaning for "dumb" is "unable to speak." If people who were "dumb" in this way were complaining because we are using the other meaning of "dumb" it would be awkward, but degree of visual acuity is not open for the same misinterpretation. [[User:Swordsmith|Swordsmith]] ([[User talk:Swordsmith|talk]])

'''KEEP''' for the same reasons as [[User:Zefiro|Zefiro]]. If change is necessary, fix it so the screen reader doesnt say it aloud. (This ensures the change is propagated to those who have no other recourse for sightless XKCD enjoyment, and is not a ploy by SJWs who can't take sarcastic humor (why are they reading XKCD in the first place?) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.40|108.162.221.40]] 14:06, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

It is super obviously not intended seriously, because xkcd is a technical comic that nobody will understand entirely on the first pass. If it's true, then everybody is dumb. Boo hoo.

The guy in question is under the mistaken impression that Randall runs this site and maliciously hides his transcripts under the tagline. He's also very angry about a lot of things. Sighted people have to look at the tagline every time it loads too, it's at the top of the page.

I vote '''Keep''' because I hate negotiating with terrorists. If it has the effect of filtering out people who enjoy being outraged, then it's doing a service. Image search "stephen fry offensive".

I'd be fine with moving the jump-to-nav div. I'm absolutely against making it an image with a different tagline, because then we would be depriving blind people of the joke. I'm absolutely against changing it to something less offensive. I would settle for removing it entirely, or changing it to something more offensive, such as "It's 'cause you're dumb, and get offended over dumb shit."

Or, you know, make a transcribexkcd.com site. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.217.203|108.162.217.203]] 16:39, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change''' to one of the cool new suggestions I've seen. I've always been sad about this tagline, and while I love XKCD humor, I just don't think the tagline is funny. It makes me hesitate and sometimes decide not to share this site with others who I think would love the humor, but not the tagline. The issue keeps coming up, and this is just one more way that it irritates people and causes hassle. It's obvious to me that we should find a new tagline, or just drop it for the time being. [[User:Nealmcb|Nealmcb]] ([[User talk:Nealmcb|talk]]) 17:39, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change''' The word "dumb" used as slang for "unintelligent" or "uneducated" is offensive and many better suggestions have been proposed, which retain the wry humor without the offense. Hiding behind "it's just a joke" is beneath the standards of this site. {{unsigned ip|108.162.245.134}}
:It's not hiding behind "just a joke", it IS the joke. It's tongue-in-cheek. It's so obviously false that you have to intentionally ignore the joke and manufacture offense about something benign. I'll give you that it's not that funny. It's also not that offensive. Why are we talking about something so petty. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 21:11, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. I feel like a blind person being insulted by the implication that being sightless somehow makes them unintelligent is a pretty far leap of logic. Not being able to see has no bearing whatsoever on your actual mental acuity. How many actual complaints have there been? One, a few, lots? I don't know, but if it was a significant number I might change my mind. As it stands, though, I think it's pretty clear in the site description that this site is meant for people who don't understand the comic due to its focus on obscure topics and use of technical jargon, being written by a former NASA robot technician with a bent for Linux. Using disabilities as an insult is something I don't condone, but in this case I think it's a case of certain individuals being overly sensitive. Thinking a word as mild as "dumb" is offensive is a bit much, especially since it's often used in contexts other than "uneducated" or "stupid" - I use it to describe myself all the time when I can't word proper-like. I think of it more as "scatter-brained". --[[User:KingStarscream|KingStarscream]] ([[User talk:KingStarscream|talk]]) 18:55, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change''' I feel like the "Because we can't all be rocket scientists" tagline suggested above is great; I always found the tagline to be a bit annoying because I often know all of a comic except a small part, and I come here for that. It's just unnecessarily confrontational and Randall himself has expressed in https://xkcd.com/1386/ and https://xkcd.com/1053/ that he doesn't agree with insulting ignorance. {{unsigned ip|198.41.235.179}}

'''Change AND Keep''' I get the original joke, but I love some of the new ones too. Randomly rotating tag line appear is my vote, BUT let's make the tag line clickable so that we can explain the tag line .... for those of us who don't get the joke! {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.10}}

'''Keep''', but change the jump-to-nav, and maybe make the tagline clickable. I like the tagline. Someone already said this, but this is explainxkcd, not readxkcd. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.63|108.162.216.63]] 19:37, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep''', because it's been there for so long! I remember coming here years ago and looking for the references I didn't get, and the tagline was already there. It's a legacy thing, the one thing remaining from the old website in the new fancy wiki format. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.226.204|198.41.226.204]] 20:47, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

For all you people being offended and claiming that the tagline is contrary to the spirit of xkcd, I give you [https://xkcd.com/386/ xkcd.com/386]. This entire argument is offensive to me, can we remove it? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.11|108.162.221.11]] 21:20, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' The referenced posting is obviously a troll. And xkcd has transcripts so the story of the self proclaimed blind person with diabetes does not make sense. --23:43, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

Rather than "cuz you're dumb" which both asserts a trait and uses what might not be the best word choice, why not something like "Because you might be ignorant"? Dumb, after all, isn't remediable, though ignorance is. (Also, a consideration, "dumb" can mean "mute," so if there's something with screenreading for blindness, that could be read as assuming more than one disability? ("blind and dumb" akin to "deaf and dumb"?) // Possibly do something akin to the warning on the comic's site itself: "Because you might be a liberal arts major." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.61|108.162.221.61]] 00:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' because risk of accidental offence is never a good reason to rewrite comedy. If community wants to change suggest "Explaining Xtremely Klever Comedic Drawings"; if only to troll those who insist that the letters XKCD must stand for something (which it doesn't) [[User:Kev|Kev]] ([[User talk:Kev|talk]]) 00:37, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

−
The issue seems to boil down to:

−
Is it funny?

−
Is it overly offensive?

−
And therefore:

−
Is it worth it?

−
Throwing in my opinion, however small:
+

It's amusing to me.
The joke is clear, and universal. Offence may be taken equally by anyone reading.
It fits well.
Possibly have a hidden link for those offended. A rotating tag line could include more jokes, but...
By all means move the navigation.

An explain explainxkcd page that is linked to might work, in the spirit of metahumour.

However, it may not be as serious an issue, as the tag line is easy to ignore. Just moving HTML a bit seems like a logical, cheap and easy solution, and then we can test it. Please note that this has no technical knowledge behind it, just a reading of the above.

So, my vote goes to '''keep''', and shuffle HTML or, in order, link, replace with rotating, modify, remove.
Harmless fun. Possibly have a cookie-based option to permanently hide the tag line.
[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.160|108.162.250.160]] 00:56, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Apologies, I have broken formatting in the last few edits, trying to fix it...[[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.160|108.162.250.160]] 00:57, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

: My vote is '''change''', and it's not because of blind people. Let me run you through a very common scenario for new users:
:* You have a person who generally thinks of themselves as quite smart.
:* They read the comics and find most of them extremely funny.
:* They come across a comic they just can't understand.
:* They stare at it for minutes, wondering why they just can't get the joke.
:* Pride already bruised, they eventually give up and turn to Google.
:* "Explain xkcd! That's exactly what I'm looking for!"
:* Click the link.
:* "Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb"
:* Gee, what a lovely welcome. Not.

: Insulting your users the first time you meet them is '''''terrible''''' practice. You're pointing at them and laughing that they didn't understand the joke. You're kicking somebody when they're already down. OK, that is exaggeration, but when you look at the line as a new user, it's not friendly and welcoming; it doesn't encourage you to return. It's just bad UX.

: Now, we could overlook the directed insult if it was indeed funny, but it really isn't. There's nothing witty about it, nothing punny about it, no double-entendres or sly references. It's just an insult.

: Legacy is no reason to keep something that doesn't work. Just because something wasn't picked up as bad practice 5 years ago doesn't mean that it isn't bad practice. Can you imagine if Microsoft kept Clippy around for "legacy reasons"?

: It would be one thing if it were kept because there were no other options, but ''so many'' fantastic alternatives have been suggested:
:* '''It's 'cause we're dumb''' -- Changes it from an insult directed at one person to a statement with an inclusive sense of community. It saying that, hey, you may not understand all the comics, but neither do we! Let's learn together!
:* '''Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!''' -- Direct reference to comic which celebrates filling gaps in one's knowledge. Also, as a comic reference, most people won't get it the first time, so make it a link and use it to draw people further in to this wiki!
:* '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear''' -- Actually humorous, containing reference to a very common message we're all familiar with (objects in the mirror may be closer than they appear). Also alludes to the hidden depths to many of the comics, where additional levels of meaning are revealed the more about the subject one knows, which is what this wiki is trying to reveal.
:* '''Error loading tagline, click here to retry.''' -- Looks like the kind of joke you'd actually find in the comments. Clicking the tagline should then do something completely unrelated to reloading the tagline (I dunno, set off some cool JS magic).
:* '''Because it is Monday morning.''' -- Should only be shown on Mondays. Can easily be implemented with parser functions.
:* '''Because sometimes we all need a little help''' -- Gives an understanding tone that's comforting to new users.

: '''TL;DR''': The current tagline is unnecessarily confrontational and projects a bad welcome to new users, and there is nothing particularly clever/funny/important about the current tag line to recommend keeping it, especially with ''so many'' better suggestions on offer. Put it this way, if you were seeing "It's 'cause you're dumb" tag as a suggestion to add to this wiki today, would you choose it over the other options? No? Then make like an old meme and "Let It Go!" [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.157|108.162.249.157]] 05:49, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

: I think the above comment is a perfect example of different mindsets. I discovered this wiki in exactly the way you described. But I was not offended in anyway when seeing the tagline, which I did almost immediately. Rather, it got a little chuckle out of me along with a thought along the lines of "Haha, yeah, maybe I am dumb." If you get offended by such a tagline, it suggests to me that you are not all that certain about your own intelligence in the first place. It's a static bit of text. It was not aimed at the person reading it, it was aimed at EVERYONE reading it. EDIT-I realize this post could be seen as offensive or a personal attack, which it's not, please read the "you" not as the poster of the above mentioned comment, but as a generic for any person reading the comment. [[User:Bon|Bon]] ([[User talk:Bon|talk]]) 07:11, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

: If I remember correctly I've heard it origonally was a pic of Blackhat saying it. Would it be possible to use that on this site. It seems like a decent solution? (I haven't read all of this so I don't know if this has been suggested sorry if it has). Like people have said no one gets all of xkcd, as a nonAmerican there is also a lot of references I don't get. Getting offenend over this does seems pretty pathetic to me. I also use this site for non explanation reasons, that is it often links together comics which is handy, and people often post cool links. But as others have pointed out this site isn't transcriptxkcd or linkxkcd it's explainxkcd, so that's what it should be meant for. Claiming i's offensive o the visually impaired seems pretty silly. All in all, maybe it could do with tweaking to make it more obvious but IMO it's a solid '''keep''' [[User:Halfhat|Halfhat]] ([[User talk:Halfhat|talk]]) 11:22, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

::I vote '''change''', for the reasons the Halfhat above listed. I also never thought "It's 'cause you're dumb." really fit with this wiki. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.104.33|141.101.104.33]] 12:57, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
:::I can't believe we've become such a limp-wristed baby society that we can't even have a joke like "It's 'cause you're dumb" as the tagline. Nobody would reasonably get offended at it. '''Keep.''' [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.33|108.162.221.33]] 13:35, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep'''. Blind people have to realize they're not the only ones reading this site. This site was created to explain the comic, not purely to provide a transcript of the comic - that's just icing. [[User:Jarod997|Jarod997]] ([[User talk:Jarod997|talk]]) 14:27, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

If there ever really was a single person who took the tag line seriously, then it was just telling them the truth. I vote '''keep'''. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.90|162.158.255.90]] 19:15, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep, or otherwise, Change'''. My opinion: It is not offensive, and I find it humourous. As I am very interested in the maths and the sciences, and I am very nerdy, I do often understand the jokes in each comic. However, sometimes I don't quite get it. This wiki is very good for that, because it collates many people's views and expertise on the comic. If the vote is overall to change, I am a fan of "Because sometimes we all need a little help." [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.29|173.245.54.29]] 21:18, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change''': I've always been a bit unsettled by it myself. Some deaf readers may be more insulted by it than blind ones. vote for "'''Cause you're #dumb''" (or perhaps another NOT symbol... so only people that don't understand are insulted... and the tagline can be linked to a page that explains why it isn't an insult) [[User:Edo|Edo]] ([[User talk:Edo|talk]]) 23:16, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''KEEP'''. I actually had the feeling the fellow who complained may not understand sarcasm very well. Regardless, the tagline to me is remarkably funny and one of the things I always point out to folks when I first turn them on to XKCD. I worry they will stop following XKCD if they don't understand a post, which is why I am especially glad your site exists. There are many types of humor that will be lost on folks. Myself, for example. I was just railing to my friends about how much I did not like a recent popular vine which showed a guy, kinda probably the father, scaring a very young child strapped in a cat seat, by yelling in horror as the cats convertible roof was closed. Because I did not grow up watching laugh-tracked America's Funniest (sic) Home Video segments, I am not conditioned for casual schadenfreude-driven videos. But I know that's just me. I don't want to limit free-speech merely because it is not for me. Regardless, I really just want you to '''KEEP''' it because to me it is darn funny and just the sort of humor most of the folks who enjoy XKCD appreciate. --[[User:Hugo|Hugo]] ([[User talk:Hugo|talk]]) 23:25, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

I will also vote '''keep'''. While it ''might'' be considered offensive, it's really no more "offensive" than XKCD itself. Lest we forget the line at the bottom of every comic page:
:Warning: this comic occasionally contains strong language (which may be unsuitable for children), unusual humor (which may be unsuitable for adults), and '''advanced mathematics (which may be unsuitable for liberal-arts majors)'''.
I don't see how "It's 'cause you're dumb." is any worse. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 23:52, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

:: I don't think it's offensive, it's more childish, which may be off-putting for first time readers. Hence I vote for '''change'''. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.216|199.27.130.216]] 01:12, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep''', per the reasoning of, among other people, Zefiro. I like the tagline a lot and don't see much at all, if anything, that's wrong with it. Like Hugo, I feel like it's a bit of ''entirely'' appropriate humor. [[User:APerson|APerson]] ([[User talk:APerson|talk!]]) 00:36, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change'''. I know it's supposed to be a joke, but it seems out of place and not particularly funny, and it could discourage potential readers. I don't have an idea for a new tagline, but plenty of good ones have been suggested here. [[User:Cheese Lord Eggplant|Cheese Lord Eggplant]] ([[User talk:Cheese Lord Eggplant|talk]]) 03:13, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' better sums up my vote, and I wish to explain why. I understand the views (as stated above) that it might discourage potential viewers, but I have seen enough well-put arguments that point out why it should not be removed for the arguments on the other side of the debate. However, I do understand that sightless users would get pretty pissed off at being told that they're dumb over and over. Is there perhaps a way to hide the text from programs designed to assisted the disabled? I have a couple of suggestions.

Perhaps it can instead simply be an image, and can even be done in a more stylized text that hints at the humour behind it (no, I have no specific suggestions). This image should not have the words it says in the meta-text within it. I just think it's not worth removing it over, it's kind of funny (or very funny, depending who you ask), replacement suggestions kinda make it bland, and this is a way to avoid having sightless people get told they're dumb over and over. The stylization is just a suggestion, because most alternative taglines I've heard don't sound up to par compared to it. Just anything to point out the sarcastic and purely humorous intentions.

I'd like to enforce my suggestion of having an image with no meta-text that can be read by bringing up that explainxkcd.com can hardly ''lose'' popularity if for the sensitive minority they don't have a tagline (especially if this tagline they are not aware of could be construed as offensive). 'Cause seriously, who's going to go tell a blind person "hey man the tagline for this site is insulting to you want to hear it?" so they'll just not learn of its existence and go on peacefully. So: Image, stylized to clearly express humour, with no program-interpretable meta-text for the blind to hear. I'd like this opinion to be closely considered, and I'd love to hear intelligent replies. ''For all intents and purposes,'' I vote '''Keep''', but to address the issue proactively and adaptively to get the best for both worlds.

I would like to point out one change I would definitely agree with, however. The commenter at 108.162.249.157 not far up suggests "It's 'cause we're dumb", and I would totally back that. That one change could make a world of difference for some people. --[[User:Znayx|Znayx]] ([[User talk:Znayx|talk]]) 09:15, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

: "It's cause we're dumb" is actually a pretty acceptable change in my opinion. I still vote keep, but wouldn't mind seeing that one. Right now the no tagline version looks lonely. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.40|108.162.221.40]] 14:56, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

::For the record, I would oppose a change of "It's cause we're dumb" because it's simply not as funny (the joke benefits from it sounding like it's a mock insult) and for the reasons in my main post right below this one that I see no reason to change the tagline which should not offend or be taken personally by someone who has enough sense of humour and intelligence to enjoy xkcd. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 17:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
::This brings up the point that it is indeed a mock insult, and one that everyone gets when they visit the site, those with perfect vision are insulted just as much as the blind, or white, or black, etc... [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.34|108.162.221.34]] 00:34, 13 February 2016 (UTC) Sam

I would vote '''keep''' as it is. I am mindful of offensive content, but context is key. This is a website whose primary purpose is explaining a humour-based webcomic that touches on topics that require some intelligence to really enjoy. The tagline is obviously (I hope) tongue-in-cheek. "if you need explanation of this sometimes very technical and specialized and sometimes ambiguous webcomic, you're clearly a moron". I think that most people on this site and elsewhere would consider those who enjoy xkcd (a webcomic that often concerns itself with science, history, technology, etc.) to be relatively intelligent. Just perhaps not in every particular area (as noted right at the top of this discussion). I also think it is clear that this is a wiki an thus the tagline is directed to everyone, even the people who wrote the tagline. We're all here because we're "dumb" in the sense of occasionally needing (or at least enjoying) a deeper explanation for the comics. If someone who is blind is using the site other than for its originally intended purpose, and it helps them, that's awesome. But that doesn't mean the tagline must acknowledge all possible uses of the site. Just the thesis statement of the site, which is "this site is for explaining something you might not understand". If there are blind people who use this site just to read the comic and never to need or enjoy the explanations, then I guess they are smarter than me. I do not personally believe in changing the tagline of the entire community because it doesn't apply to one small group that is using the site for a different purpose than its intentions (again, not knocking them for using the site at all, but seriously, don't walk into McDonalds and go "''I eat here because my doctor says I need more sodium, and I actually hate the food. I'm offended by your "I'm loving it" tagline. Change it!''". Or complain about Disneyland's slogan because you suffer from depression.). I would also have expected anyone who reads xkcd often enough to bother coming to this site just to do so because of their blindness would have a sense of humour and would understand the context in which the tagline was intended, and not take it personally. [[User:TheHYPO|TheHYPO]] ([[User talk:TheHYPO|talk]]) 17:25, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
:I really agree with basically everything TheHypo writes, both here and his above comment on the reason "we're dumb" would not work at all. The idea with keeping the text but only as an image could be used, but I just do not like that we change this because someone made a ''troll complaint'' somewhere, regardless of him being blind or not; that is just one more good reason to keep it. Then again if we really wish to make it better for blind people, then by all means use an image. But keep the text in the image then! If you do enjoy xkcd then you should be able to spot the humor, and with the way Randall himself keep on mocking people on his own page, and in his comics, then why should this not fit well in with this explain page, and why should we not keep on doing what we have been doing so far? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 22:19, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

How about '''Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're ''dumb*''.''' (''*Or don't get the joke because it is either outside your area of expertise or in a format that isn't accessible to you'') - [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.23|141.101.70.23]] 04:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. I've always realized it was a joke, but I think we could do a bit better. How about, "Some comics may be funnier than they appear" as suggested by 199.27.130.198? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.42|173.245.54.42]] 19:35, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. When I first started reading this wiki and noticed the tagline, I wasn't offended, and I realized it was a joke. But it also gave me an impression that this wiki is run by immature people as this is a childish insult, used as joke. Naturally, I wasn't too keen on following thissite closely and would only visit here when there's a comic that I don't understand at all. Thankfully, after reading through multiple explanations, I no longer think that the writers are immature and as I started reading other explanations, I started coming here even for the comics that I understand. My point is, it took me couple of months to warm towards explainxkcd and most people aren't that persistent/ give the chance to prove. So we are making lot of people to alienate with the site just at the tagline, even before they get to the content. I vote for '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear'''. [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.216|199.27.130.216]] 01:07, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' would be my vote. Today's society puts too much emphasis on protecting people's feelings, to the point that some people have onion-paper-thin skins, too thin to operate effectively when out in public! I feel this complaint falls under this category. Such over sensitivity shouldn't seriously be catered to. Politely listened to and considered, at most. Bending to such things just encourages people to be more sensitive.

The way I see it, you CANNOT enjoy xkcd without being smarter than average, or you'd have to turn to xkcd Explain for every single comic! It cannot be fun to require being walked through every single one. Conversely, I doubt there's very many of these smart people who are smart enough to get every joke (and every nuance) without assistance. Therefore it should be clear that is is a simple tongue-in-cheek joke, you don't really mean it seriously. It should be taken in the tone that it's meant, and it offends me when people don't.

For example, right now I'm at a bar at a Valentine's Day event. As I'm hopelessly single, this day is problematic for me, especially to be in public. I COULD ask that people refrain from love stuff, from flaunting their relationship, etc., that I'm here for other reasons. But as an intelligent adult I realize this would be unreasonable, that many people, especially most here tonight, enjoy the love stuff, enjoy Valentine's Day. It is certainly not their fault I don't, not directly, and they should not be held responsible for my discomfort.

If the final vote is for Change, I like "It's because '''we're''' dumb", or "we're all dumb", be inclusive to reduce how derogatory it sounds. Remember, while sightless people might find this site useful, the primary reason for it IS because we're dumb, i.e. we need help getting the joke. - NiceGuy1[[Special:Contributions/198.41.235.215|198.41.235.215]] 04:53, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Wait, so they think they're smarter than me? I'm offended! ;-)
Okay so I'm not. I almost voted keep because the primary raison d'être of exkcd is not for blind people. It was created specifically for people who need help understanding some of the science, math, and arcana behind the humor.
But you know what? "It's 'cause you're dumb" is not that funny. Some of the suggestions are better. So I vote "'''CHANGE'''". [[User:Saspic45|Saspic45]] ([[User talk:Saspic45|talk]]) 07:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

How about "Explain xkcd: It's 'cause we're dumb."? This has more of a feeling of inclusiveness and camaraderie to me, as in we're all equals more-or-less in the face of RM's brilliance and having a good time enjoying the material together. Came up with it about a year ago, because as it is the tagline struck me as a bit harsh, and have said it that way in my mind ever since.
Edit: Ok, I see this has been suggested, so +1 for that minor change.

'''Change.''' While I didn't notice it at first, I was pretty offput when I did. As someone who has some trouble catching sarcasm all the time, I was excited when I found this site -- it helps me with not only things outside my knowledge, but also lets me check when something ''is'' being sarcastic. And when I finally noticed that tagline, even though I knew it couldn't be directed straight at me, it still sort of felt like it. I've been called dumb nearly throughout my life for not catching sarcasm which others seem to understand immediately, and it doesn't exactly feel nice (or in the spirit of XKCD!) to have that little reminder floating there. It's not even worded to be funny, either, just sorta cold. Sarcastically saying someone is dumb for not getting sarcasm... it's a vicious loop. And when there are so many other options -- many of which have fun puns or a much more friendly feel -- why are people so attached to this one? And from what it seems, a lot of people seem attached to it purely for the purpose of being stubborn against people who don't like it. Plus, why is it such an awful thing to try to make people feel more welcome? Jeez, guys. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.11|108.162.216.11]] 21:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Change it please. I see it all the time, and it feels SO condescending. I often check out the site to get more information about a topic in the scope of a given strip, or to see if there's any subtext outside of the primary joke, and it ALWAYS feels like the site is insulting my ability to understand "simple humor". I understand that it's supposed to be a tongue-in-cheek joke, but I hate it. I think it should either be changed to one of the previous suggestions, or use a rotating set of taglines, or it should just be removed completely, because I utterly dislike the way it currently is. [[Special:Contributions/130.215.123.52|130.215.123.52]] 12:27, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Definitely '''change''' - I'm surprised what it was doing there in the first place - but I do not like the "we're dumb" version either. My current favorite is "Because we all need a little help", as it is equally directed at both the non-joke-understanding audience and the screenreading audience; but I definitely like "Some comics may be funnier than they appear" and, to a lesser extent, "You're one of today's lucky 10,000" (not sure, actually, whether that one would benefit from a link to the relevant comic). Incidentally, how did the previous guy manage to post four hours in the future? Or is the AM/PM to 24h conversion broken? --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.81.88|141.101.81.88]] 08:39, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Wow, this blew up... I never found the tagline particularly funny, but I honestly can't believe so many people appear to be offended by it. If someone is dumb enough to believe it is specifically aimed at them, not realise that it is humor, and think it is actually worth getting upset about, then the tagline is perfectly justified. Should be changed to "Please click here if you are easily offended", with a link to Disney.com, (or 4chan/b/...) --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 12:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change'''. Even smart humans need positive words. Many of the proposed alternative with only positive words suits me fine. [[User:MGitsfullofsheep|MGitsfullofsheep]] ([[User talk:MGitsfullofsheep|talk]]) 13:25, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep''', but modify the Skip to Content tags to bypass it. It's humorous, and there's no such thing as a humorous tag line that won't offend '''someone'''. Can pretty much guarantee that if it's changed to something else, some wag will start a discussion about how that new subtitle offends them... {{unsigned|Danemcg}}

If it's not too late, I vote '''keep''', I regularly view the site for detailed information about comic topics and am always amused to read the tag line. I hope the poor fellow who tallies our votes here will mind that we're likely an unrepresentative group - if you're offended, you're likely to turn out, where a contented user (nearly myself) might just pass by. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.36|108.162.216.36]] 14:34, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''keep'''. Anyone who's actually offended by this is way to sensitive...[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.11|108.162.216.11]] 15:09, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. Never found it funny. We can do better. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 16:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Change'''. It offends too many people (myself included, although more at first than now) to be kept. [[User:Z|Z]] ([[User talk:Z|talk]]) 16:57, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I too vote '''change''' if it's not too late. Not because it's particularly offensive but more because it's not funny or xkcd-ish enough to justify any offence it may or may not cause. I prefer some of the suggestions we've had:
* Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000! (with, of course, a link to the relevant comic)
* '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear.''' This one is my favourite and I feel it captures very well my main reason for using explainxkcd
::[[Special:Contributions/141.101.106.149|141.101.106.149]] 21:12, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''Keep'''. If we legitimately had a large group of blind people who were offended at this tagline, I would be in support of changing it. However, the only supposedly blind person who we know of that takes offense was obviously a belligerent individual. Do we really want to take a guy who says "I've found more intelligent, compassionate, humane, wise, sympathetic, inclusive, and infinitely funnier *dingleberries* than [Randall Munroe].*Rude gesture*" seriously? do we really want some ranting asshole somewhere to dictate what our site does or does not do? seriously? [[User:VfiftyV|VfiftyV]] ([[User talk:VfiftyV|talk]]) 00:11, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I vote '''change'''. I've always disliked the tagline, it's a bland and obvious "joke" that's at odds with the friendly, clever tone of both the comics and the rest of this site. Even if it's clear we don't mean it, calling every visitor to this site dumb, with no further context, just isn't setting a good example for the kind of *clever* sarcasm that Randall uses. We can do better. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.32|108.162.221.32]] 01:12, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep''' because it's clearly meant as a joke. It makes no sense to change this site over one person's "offense" that the unaffiliated xkcd site isn't blind-friendly enough.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.142.217|162.158.142.217]] 02:31, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. Anyone with a sense of humor can understand that it's at least humorous. And, the primary purpose of the site ''is'' to... explain the comics, mainly to those who don't understand them. If it does get read out loud to every blind person who visits, then please, by all means, '''Change''' the layout at least to keep that from happening. But it shouldn't be removed due to half-baked complaints. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.168|108.162.245.168]] 02:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I've already voted above, but I would like to call out the sightlessness issue as a red herring. One of the premises of accessible design is that all users get the same content, although perhaps in different ways, so I think we're going in the wrong direction in proposing to change or hide the text for blind users but not for everyone else. If we're to keep it, then let us keep it for all. If we're to change it, then let us change it (to the same thing) for all. If we're to remove it, then let us remove it for all. [[User:Jkshapiro|Jkshapiro]] ([[User talk:Jkshapiro|talk]]) 04:22, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

Alright, I've tallied up the votes twice and counted 36-31 the first time, and 39-32 the second time. Both times were majority keep, though there was still a strong showing for people wanting to change it. I've fixed and restored the black hat figure who was supposed to be speaking the tagline back in the old blog days, and I turned the tagline off for screen readers since the blind may only need us for the transcript, and accessibility for the blind is a big part of why we had a transcript to begin with. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 07:44, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
:I think this is a great compromise. And cool that it is Black Hat's line. I did not know this used to be the case. Is it correct that the font color has also been turned gray so it is not so prominent? --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 08:45, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
::Yeah, back when this site was a blog, [https://web.archive.org/web/20130118141641/http://www.explainxkcd.com/ the tagline was Black Hat's line.] [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Tagline&action=history looking at the edit history for the tagline], it looks like we've made some vague attempts to restore black hat's face next to the tagline before, but mediawiki doesn't process markup in that area. I did a little bit of CSS magic this time round to fix it properly this time. He's a little fuzzy though, could be better. The tagline's always been gray though. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:57, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

: Just before I start, since I'm an IP user and therefore hard to identify (should probably make an account one of these days, but oh well), I just want to quickly mention that I am the same person as [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.157|108.162.249.157]] who posted on the 11 Feb.

: Now that's out of the way, I want to say that I disagree with the outcome decided for this post. While I appreciate the attempt to compromise by having it look a bit more like Black Hat is saying the line, I still think that the substance of the arguments against the current tag line are much stronger than the arguments for keeping it. The arguments for keeping it all basically boil down to "It's a joke and it's been there forever so there is no need to change and anyone who suggests otherwise should just man the f*** up." Nowhere have I seen anyone in the keep-camp argue as to why none of the alternatives are just as good or better than the current line. Pretty much, the only reason ever given to stick to the current tag line is that it's the status quo.

: On the other hand, you have many, many people pointing out that the tagline is offensive and that, even if the reader does understand it to be a joke, it's not a particularly clever one and provides a rather unwelcoming atmosphere. What many of the people in the keep-camp are ignoring is the fact that not everybody has a high level of self-confidence, and that being called dumb, even if the intention is tongue-in-cheek, just comes off as hostile and drives people away. It is also true that all tone of voice suggesting sarcasm is completely lost in text, which is why over at the [http://doctorwho.answers.wikia.com/wiki/Doctor_Who_Answers:Policies#Additional Doctor Who Answers Wiki] we specifically point this out in our policy of civility towards fellow users. This wiki is very different from that one in many ways, but I don't think it would be dumb to look at what others have noticed and learn from their mistakes, especially since that particular wording was added due to a bad misunderstanding leading from lost sarcasm. There has already been somebody here who admits they find understanding sarcasm to be difficult. Should we really be calling them dumb? Furthermore, the quote seems to directly contradict Randall's attitude towards ignorance, summed up so perfectly in [[1053: Ten Thousand]]. We should be welcoming ignorant, or "dumb", people in the hopes of enlightening them with the wisdom of the community here. Singling them out as dumb isn't going to help them.

: Finally, I fear the reason there aren't more change votes are because many of the people who were put off by the tagline simply never came back to this wiki after their first visit. I wouldn't be surprised if reader retention rates increased if you changed the tagline, and if the number of readers who convert to users also increases if the community provided a more friendly first-impression.

: Now, I know that I have raised this all before, along with many of the other people who voted for change, and it still doesn't seem to have made an impact of the people who try to insist that an insult with no wit or humour is "just a joke". I think the best way for us to prove that the tagline needs to change is to conduct a little experiment. Let's look at a list of commonly supported alternatives:

:# '''It's 'cause we're dumb'''
:# '''Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!'''
:# '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear'''
:# '''Because sometimes we all need a little help'''

: Explanations for why these taglines are better than the current have already been provided. I challenge anyone reading this post from the keep-camp to explain why "It's 'cause you're dumb" is better than each of those taglines individually, without falling back on arguments of legacy or that the people reading the line are thin-skinned wusses. If reasonable counter-arguments can be made against each of those lines in favour of the current one, then I will back down. Until then, I cannot accept that the battle of ideas has chosen the current tagline. There are just so many better alternatives that are funnier, more in-line with the xkcd spirit, and above all, are welcoming to new readers into the community instead of turning them away the moment they reach the front door. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.157|108.162.250.157]] 11:28, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

:: Dude, you are not getting how voting and democracy works. The people who are proposing a change, are the equivalent of lobbyist --having lots of lobbyist does not equate to "strong support". None of these lobbyist have been able to agree on a single rewording, so they are not arguing for the same cause. On the the other hand there are thousands of of visitors (voters), of those who actually voted, voted to keep and not go with the suggestions of the lobbyists. Had there on the other-hand been a majority for change, the what would the change be? At best we would have to consolidate the suggestions (candidates), and since there is no term limit on tag-lines, the existing one should be a running candidate as well, and then make an eating contest between all the possible candidates [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.109|162.158.255.109]] 19:50, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

OK, I'll take a stab at it. "It's 'cause you're dumb" is better than any of these because it is funnier than any of these. It's funny for the same reason that the titles of numerous books, "XXX for Dummies" are funny. In fact, if it weren't such an obvious rip-off, the tag line could be "xkcd for Dummies", which would be the same joke.

:# '''It's 'cause we're dumb''' is sort of awkward, and why would I want an explanation for something I didn't understand from a bunch of dummies, anyway? I want somebody smart to explain it to the dummy - me - who didn't get the joke.
:# '''Congratulations! You're one of today's lucky 10,000!''' is meaningless, and therefore not funny, unless you click on it and then let Randall tell you the joke behind that punch line. I do love the sentiment now that I've seen that comic, and somehow linking to that comic as an explanation of what explainxkcd.com is all about is a great idea, but as a tag line, by itself, it just isn't funny.
:# '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear''' is sort of cute, as it relates to the warning in rear-view mirrors, but it is so actually true in the case of xkcd that it loses some of its funniness by being a serious explanation of why the explainxkcd.com site is valuable.
:# '''Because sometimes we all need a little help''' - is sweet, sympathetic, and inclusive; it's just not very funny.

By contrast, "It's 'cause you're dumb" grabbed me the first time I saw it as being relevant to why explainxkcd.com is a great site, and equally importantly, it made me laugh. Maybe it is to be expected that among the viewers of a site dedicated to explaining jokes there will be a reasonable percentage that don't get this particular joke, either. Maybe the solution is a link on that line to a page that explains the "It's 'cause you're dumb" joke in the way xkcd jokes are explained: "It's funny because you are not really dumb, you just maybe didn't get some very esoteric reference, and you'll enjoy the humor of xkcd more when that reference is explained. But, when jokes need to be explained, it is common for people to feel like they must be stupid, so we make a joke about that feeling. It's not really pointed at you in particular; after all, this is a published web-site - the folks who wrote it probably don't even know you." [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.41|108.162.221.41]] 18:44, 16 February 2016‎

'''Change''', kind of. How about this: "Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're <strike>dumb</strike> of average intelligence." Maybe even include a (hidden) link to [[1386: People are Stupid]]. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.220.17|108.162.220.17]] 23:42, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

: (I landed in an edit conflict with the person above, so my comments do not take their response into account.)

: Thank you 108. You actually provided a decent rebuttal against the counterproposal, which has been lacking until this time. While I do not agree with all your points, I can actually see your point-of-view. Personally, I think that if we're going to use it as a reference to the "___ for Dummies" books, it needs to be clearer so people don't take it as an insult, but otherwise I understand your points.

: @162: As my friend, one of the greatest admins on one of the biggest non-Wikipedia wikis, says, wikis are not democracies. It is the idea with the best supporting arguments that wins, not the idea with the most votes, as many people support certain ideas for superficial reasons that are not aligned with the overall aim of improving the wiki to attract more readers/editors and improve content. Especially with such a close vote, I would put more emphasis on the quality of the arguments than the pure numbers of supports/opposes.

: Looking at the proper counter-arguments finally provided, I would shift the counter-proposal for a new tagline to tagline 3 suggested above: '''Some comics may be funnier than they appear'''. From above, I can see the argument against 1 being that people don't want help from dummies, 2 will probably be obscure for new users and may alienate them upon entry, and 4 is just too soppy. 3 however is funny, it's accessible, and it's actually funnier in my opinion because it actually ''does'' describe exactly what we do here. To the new user, it will at first just be a mildly amusing reference (still funnier than the current line in my opinion) but it will take on a new meaning and relevance as people use this wiki more, and the gradual realisation of relevance will make the tagline even more appropriate and amusing. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.163|108.162.250.163]] 23:59, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I’m the lurker who suggested “Some comics are funnier than they appear.” I was bemused to see it get any traction at all, since it’s not that hysterically funny, and perhaps incomprehensible outside the US where convex car mirrors aren’t etched “Objects in mirror are closer than they appear.”

Wow, am I glad I didn’t create an account here when posting it!

I expected to see more spit-balling in kind, not an outpouring of orneriness from a majority of this obviously intelligent community who are apparently too stubborn to admit that there could possibly be anything wrong with greeting newcomers, “It’s ‘cause you’re dumb.” I took the starting point of the thread to be the obviousness that ANYTHING ELSE would be better than that.

I also expected the admin to deliberate a little harder, showing how he evaluated arguments and suggestions and tried to do the right thing, rather than just counting votes. Notwithstanding the facade of democracy in his benevolent dictatorship, he also doesn’t seem to have taken into account that the effect of NOT changing the tagline—-thus continuing to alienate a lot of users and potential contributors like me-—far, FAR outweighs any potential backlash from the old guard who are married to it. What are they going to do, rage-quit because they didn’t get their way? Because something on their favorite wiki got **gasp!** CHANGED?

Boo hoo, I didn’t get my way on a small thing which doesn’t really matter. At all. I only followed up here because I noticed the banner soliciting user input had changed. However, the ugly tone of this little tempest in a teapot has certainly convinced me that this community isn’t worth joining or contributing to. I reserve the right to continue lurking, but I’m sure as hell turning my AdBlock back on.[[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.198|199.27.130.198]] 07:10, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) said "We're all idiots 99% of the time about 99% of things. It's the 1% that makes up for all the rest." Learning begins by owning your dumb. [[User:Bob Stein - VisiBone|Bob Stein - VisiBone]] ([[User talk:Bob Stein - VisiBone|talk]]) 16:12, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. I felt offended -- but -- so what. It is true. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.91.169|141.101.91.169]] 21:20, 17 February 2016 (UTC) Martin

* '''Keep''' It is funny. People are not made of glass, not even dumb ones. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.172|108.162.245.172]] 23:15, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

: ''199 wrote:"I was bemused to see it get any traction at all, since it’s [...] perhaps incomprehensible outside the US where convex car mirrors aren’t etched “Objects in mirror are closer than they appear.”"''
: You don't need to worry about that. American culture has spread throughout the world so thoroughly that I assume most English speakers will understand it. I myself am an Aussie, who spent most of her childhood living in Europe, and I understood the reference perfectly. And while it might not be "hysterically funny", it is certainly more universally funny than the insult.

: Admins, please heed what 199 said in the rest of his/her message. You have yet another example in a long line of people being turned off from this wiki community because they don't like the attitude of this statement, nor the stubborn adherence to it despite so many people pointing out how wrong it is. You are aware that "It was just a joke" is a common defence bullies make, right? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.157|108.162.250.157]] 00:53, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

So, @Davidy22, can you add a "Jump to Transcript" link in the jump-to-nav div, and move the jump-to-nav div to before the tagline in the HTML? Thank you! [[User:Hat|Hat]] ([[User talk:Hat|talk]]) 08:58, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

At 12,000 words this discussion has beaten the H0/HO discussion on wikipedia... How long until we beat Star Trek Into Darkness??? --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 12:10, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

'''Keep'''. I like the humour in it. 18.February 2016 12:40 (UTC) Fabian

XKCD provides transcripts about a week after a new comic comes out, so saying that blind readers require explainxkcd is a bit of an overstatement (although to be honest the official transcripts are somewhat vague). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.70.217|141.101.70.217]] 19:45, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

: Generally most transcripts gets completed within hours of the comics being posted. More complex ones can take longer, and there is sometimes a bit of back and forth as far as layout is concerned, but the content tends to be there pretty quickly. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 09:35, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

"Explain xkcd: extra knowledge, see discussions." I wish I'd thought of that one a week ago. And Randall says it's not an acronym, eh? [[Special:Contributions/199.27.130.198|199.27.130.198]] 09:21, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

:Ah crap... that's actually really good. I'd have supported this had it been mentioned earlier, even though I voted to keep the current. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 02:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

For what it's worth, if the matter is ever re-opened, I'd vote to '''change''' to one of the alternate suggestions -- I quite like "extra knowledge, see discussions" but many others would be fine. The current one is a poor way to greet newcomers; it certainly gave ''me'' pause. Perhaps I've been sensitized by the general uptick in incivility in many places in recent years, but I'm actively avoiding forums and sites that appear to be encouraging rudeness. If one disregards that header, it becomes clear that this site isn't like that, but one has to get past that header first. [[User:BunsenH|BunsenH]] ([[User talk:BunsenH|talk]]) 17:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

'''Change''' because the only justification to keep it seems to be "It's just a joke why are people always so offended at everything" [[User:256.256.256.256|256.256.256.256]] ([[User talk:256.256.256.256|talk about me behind my]] [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dQw4w9WgXcQ/ back]) 12:55, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

I’d say '''change''' it. It’s not funny, it’s never been funny and it never will be funny. Why does a tag line have to be funny any way? All it needs to be is memorable and eye catching. I personally like “congratulations you’re one of today’s lucky 10,000” it’s a direct reference to an existing comic and encourages learning more.
:I agree, so '''change''' from me. —[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User:While False/explain xkcd museum|'''museum''']] | [[User talk:While False|talk]] | [[special:Contributions/While_False|contributions]] | [[special:Log/While_False|logs]] | [[Special:UserRights/While_False|rights]] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&printable=yes printable version] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&action=info page information] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere/User:While_False what links there] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangesLinked&days=30&from=&target=User%3AWhile_False related changes] | [https://www.google.com Google search] | current time: {{CURRENTTIME}}) 18:27, 8 December 2022 (UTC)

== Concerning recent spam ==

In light of the recent and large amount of spam that we've been seeing, I've revoked new users of the right to create and move pages, as well as access to the write api. If your account is three days old and has 10 or more edits under it, you will still be allowed to create and move pages. This will end when the spambots decide to leave. To the person who's doing this, don't ruin this for the other people who use this site. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 19:36, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
:In light of the recent burst of spam, creation of talk pages will also be shut off for new users. We will create an empty talk page for new comics in place of this feature. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 06:47, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
: So what will you do in three days when the spambot can create new pages again? [[User:Mikemk|Mikemk]] ([[User talk:Mikemk|talk]]) 07:58, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
::They have to hit both criteria. The flaw there is that spambots have also demonstrated themselves to be capable of editing pages, but I'm not sure what to do for that aside from look for a better captcha. If it comes to it, I'll write my own. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 08:05, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
aw man. tfw another troll already beat me to the punch {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.62}}

@Davidy22: Maybe we should use something like [[MW:Extension:TitleBlacklist]] or [[MW:Manual:Combating spam#.24wgSpamRegex]]. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 14:25, 16 February 2016 (UTC)
:Hum. I'll take a look when I get home. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 05:02, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
:: Sigh, it's getting out of hand again... --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 15:19, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Alright, I'm not sure what's happening here. This is what's in the localsettings file:

$wgGroupPermissions['user']['createtalk'] = false;
$wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['createtalk'] = false;

:::I don't know why this doesn't work. Probably well overdue for a mediawiki upgrade, but I have midterms and papers coming up. This timing is inconvenient. The title blacklist is for a newer mediawiki version, I'll lock and upgrade this weekend. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:07, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
:::For now, I'll try removing talk page creation rights from all non-admin users. I'll make the talk pages for new explanations. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:09, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Alright, I made a test account and I realised I'm very dumb. I forgot to turn off createtalk for all, so people could still make talk pages. I've also added mandatory email verification. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 23:34, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
::::See tagline ;-) --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 01:51, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
:::::I do want to find/write a better CAPTCHA though, none of these measures I've taken stop account creation, so the spammers might try just shoving a million accounts at us. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 03:03, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
:::Oooh nevermind forcing email verification turns off anonymous editing. Don't want to go that far, and it didn't stop that one spammer anyways. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:17, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

== Will verifying my email turn off the CAPTCHA ==

Pretty much what the section title says. I find the way the captcha works here kinda annoying, since I submit and then get the CAPTCHA. I'd be willing to put in my email address if it would stop the CAPTCHA, but, otherwise, I don't see any point in doing so.

If it does stop the CAPTCHA, I would suggest mentioning this in the preferences as one of the benefits of adding an email, and perhaps point it out on the page when the CAPTCHA appears.

IF not, then will I just have the CAPTCHA forever? Or will it go away once I put in enough edits? Or do I need to do something else?

[[User:Trlkly|Trlkly]] ([[User talk:Trlkly|talk]]) 00:10, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

:The email address is optional, we have it set up so that users less than 3 days old with less than 10 edits will have to fill in a CAPTCHA when they edit. It's set up that way to limit and make the damage that spambots can inflict much easier to fix. You appear to have cleared the 10 edit boundery today, so you should be able to start editing CAPTCHA free now. Giving people a way to bypass the anti spam window by providing an email address is an idea though, I'll see if I can't write a plugin for that after I'm done with finals. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:24, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

== Why does Mediawiki look so "old" all of a sudden? ==

Screendhots: [http://i.imgur.com/smN1a45.png][http://i.imgur.com/qdpxhdY.png]

I've tried this in three browsers, and they all look the same. [[User:KangaroOS|Kangaro]][[User talk:KangaroOS|OS]] 12:56, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
:High traffic, high load, everything is on fire. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:28, 4 April 2016 (UTC)
:: Man ! The fire started by Randall is out of control.. It has been so long, and this is looking very ugly. Did wiki go in "printer-friendly version only" mode ? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.56|162.158.255.56]] 04:10, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

(H'rm - realized I posted this in the wrong place - further discussion should go [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Technical#Stylesheets not working?|here]].) [[User:KangaroOS|Kangaro]][[User talk:KangaroOS|OS]] 15:20, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

== Annoying ad ==

From the anti-noscript text shown when an ad is blocked by noscript: "our ads are restricted to unobtrusive images and slow animated GIFs."

Yet the ad blocked features a drawing of a woman in her underwear. I find this very obtrusive.

Also, can you get rid of the captcha needed to even view content on this site using Tor? https://support.cloudflare.com/hc/en-us/articles/203306930-Does-CloudFlare-block-Tor- {{unsigned ip|162.158.17.66}}
:Looked through our bids, a guy who was auto approved used the privelidge to put that ad up. I cancelled the ad, if he puts it up again he's getting banned. I'll get on the tor options in cloudflare. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:41, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

== Random Question ==
Since this is the miscellaneous section, I assume I can ask a question based on anything, even if it's not XKCD or wiki-related. Am I correct? Or is there another place to do that? --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 16:21, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:Nothing expressly forbids it, but do remember the purpose of the site. If you want to ask a question not related to xkcd or the site, there is likely another, better outlet for your question on the internet. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 17:14, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
:Ah. Okay. Just making sure. --[[User:JayRulesXKCD|JayRulesXKCD]] ([[User talk:JayRulesXKCD|talk]]) 17:47, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

== "What if: Hide the Atmosphere" question ==

At the end, Randall notes one "may not want to" dig out Texas, and the guy in the illustration mentions "specifically requesting" something. As someone not from the USA, I don't know what he's referring to. Could someone please explain it? {{unsigned ip|172.68.51.28}}
:It's a reference to {{w|Don't Mess with Texas}}. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 20:52, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

== Blinking advert ==

There's an ad for something called Goliath Fallen that blinks occasionally. A static picture would be fine but the blinking is distracting --[[User:Figvh|Figvh]] ([[User talk:Figvh|talk]]) 04:22, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

== What is Randall Munroe's wife's name? ==
I am curious--haven't been able to find it. {{unsigned ip|162.158.62.141}}
:We accept privacy. Ask Randall himself. [[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:21, 19 May 2018 (UTC)
:We could refer to her as Megan, based on the character even despite its' "everywoman" stance. Megan is represented as Randall's wife in the ''_ Years'' comic series (with Randall being the supportive main Cueball character), as well as in other comics where Randall is represented as a Cueball in a comic with a Megan. {{unsigned ip|172.70.130.6}} 18:52, 26 Jul 2021 (UTC)
::Also, broken signing because I forgot that <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> was a thing. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.6|172.70.130.6]] 18:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

== 5 bucks that most of these are spambots. ==

[[File:probablyspammers.png]]

🤔

[[User:DPS2004|DPS2004'); DROP TABLE users;--]] ([[User talk:DPS2004|talk]]) 19:07, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
:I tried "DROP TABLE users;" but then I lost my login... ;)
:The more serious thing is that when the Captcha was broken (after 31 March) that bots were too dumb but with the new reCaptcha V2 this happens again.
:But since those users take no further actions and IPs also can edit here it doesn't seem to be a problem. Nevertheless old users with zero edits may be purged in the future.
:[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:17, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

== Header pointing to FAQ implies content that doesn't exist ==

"All explain xkcd editors should check the latest update at the Editor FAQ. We now support LaTeX..."

Strangely, the FAQ doesn't mention LaTex once.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.210.34|172.69.210.34]] 15:06, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
:You're right but the (yet last) question "How do I enter mathematical or chemical formulas?" belongs to this. The Math functionality uses LaTeX syntax and I will mention this. I thought people who know the markup <code><nowiki><math>...</math></nowiki></code> do know that it's based on LaTeX. Nevertheless reading this {{w|Help:Displaying a formula|manual}} is mandatory. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:08, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

== Unable to create own user page? ==

Hi, I'm a new user here. When I try to put info on my user page it says I don't have permission to create it. Same applies for my talk page. Please help.[[User:VannaWho|VannaWho]] ([[User talk:VannaWho|talk]]) 07:18, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
:I've clarified the corresponding section in the [[explain xkcd:Editor FAQ|Editor FAQ]]. You will become a trusted user after a few more edits, but right now I've created your user and talk page. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:57, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
:Thanks. I'm looking forwards to becoming an active member of the community here.[[User:VannaWho|VannaWho]] ([[User talk:VannaWho|talk]]) 13:09, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

== 2018 ==

This probably only means something to me, but has anyone else noted that we are approaching comic 2018 in 2018? I don't think any other comic has been posted in in the year its number represents. Maybe the sign of the apocalypse? Or like all the other signs of the apocalypse, just a random occurrence. I am interested in seeing if it is memorialized in some way. {{unsigned ip|172.69.33.239}}
:Please do not forget to sign your comments. Nevertheless the apocalypse was already here: [[998: 2012]]. And a comic with the name 2018 was published last December ([[1935: 2018]]). The comic number 2018 will probably happen on July 11 and the number 2019 will be two days later on July 13 (ohhh, it's a Friday...). --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 08:41, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

== Random Kettle ==

Hello, so I had https://xk3d.xkcd.com/880/ open for an extended amount of time. When I came back to it today, I had a random blue kettle that was not on any other of my xkcd pages, and it would change locations every time i refreshed. (I have several screenshots, just not sure how to upload here.)

It went away when the back page button was pressed, but does anybody know what or WHY this kettle was there? {{unsigned|DeathFox4}}
:Please do not forget to sign your comments. You probably want to talk about this matter here: [[Talk:880: Headache]]. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:44, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

== Where to ask questions to find a specific comic? ==

Hello,

Someone searching for a specific comic has gotten me to try to find a place to ask the community, but haven't found any?

[https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/9uzvqv/help_me_find_the_one_where/]

kind regards,
Dodo --[[User:Dodo|Dodo]]
:Please sign your posts with <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki> because then we also see a timestamp of your comment. That's important because we could see that your question from reddit was solved there slightly after your post here. It's from SMBC and not xkcd. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:55, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

== Incomplete "Created by a _" Tag Jokes ==

I'm not lobbying for their return or anything, I'm just curious why they were removed. Or rather, why the incomplete tag was rewritten to discourage them. It was a good bit of comedy, and their removal makes it seem like this wiki is trying to be more serious than it really needs to be, IMO. [[User:CJB42|CJB42]] ([[User talk:CJB42|talk]]) 19:18, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
:I'm the creator of the BOT which initially presented a new page by honestly mentioning it was NOT created by a human. Years later, people started to make that joke. Sometimes it was really funny, but you can't repeat a joke for over hundreds of times, not funny and stupid attempts to reach that first jokes. And that incomplete tag is meant to be there for mentioning what's wrong or missing, sadly most editors don't use it for this reason. Nonetheless a nice joke is still welcome there, but it should be funny and not just an urge to present a "joke." --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:51, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

== xkcd.wtf ==

Hi everyone, I've recently made this small project http://xkcd.wtf/ . It's not yet finished, but somehow Big Goog' picked it up, so I thought I'll go live. It is important to me to announce it here first, since it uses explainxkcd's API and wouldn't be possible without all of you.

Originally, this was meant to be a Uni project, but the course was cancelled and the already purchased domain sat dormant for many months. Just recently, I picked it up and made a first prototype in Perl, then I undertook the painful process of rewriting it as a buzzword-compliant Javascript Single Page Application (so my server doesn't have to proxy everything). It sometimes craps out, because xkcd's API is awful (the 'real' one doesn't have CORS, the c.xkcd.com one is often offline) [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 22:19, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
:Nice, I know you have many skills in programming. What's the purpose of this project?
:Funny findings: The TLD isn't welcome always like here "In June 2012, Ryan Singel of Wired predicted that the .wtf domain would not be applied by anyone." and my own first investigation:
:<code>[root@localhost ~]# whois xkcd.wtf</code>
:<code>No whois server is known for this kind of object.</code>
:I'm running CentOS with no pending updates...
:Besides kidding, it works great and could be a good presentation on pages using a bad layout here. My goal is still to get this site much more mobile compliant, but there are still also issues on parts you don't use. Nonetheless let me know if you need help, hoping you will help here in the future too. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:49, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
::hi, sorry I missed your post! The purpose was to do this as a university project, but the course was cancelled after I bought the domain in anticipation of it. not wanting it to go to waste, I've implemented it in my spare time. the whois error is strange; it works on Fedora (which queries whois.donuts.co (no m)). I may come back to your offer for help (thanks) and definitely won't be leaving explainxkcd.com (my expertise lies with computer topics, and there weren't many comics about that recently. that's why I've quieted down a bit) [[User:Gir|//gir.st/]] ([[User talk:Gir|talk]]) 17:03, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

== xkcd Sorting Options ==
Is there any way to sort xkcd comics by size? [[Special:Contributions/141.101.77.80|141.101.77.80]] 04:37, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
:What size? The pictures, the explanation, or what? Explanations are changed every day. So, for what purpose is this idea? --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:21, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
::I can see some benefit in being able to sort explanations by size as some of the earlier comics have fairly short explanations that could be expanded, but I'm not sure this is worth the effort of setting up a sort function. I don't know why you would want to sort the images by size other than perhaps for general interest. [[User:A(l)Chemist|AlChemist]] ([[User talk:A(l)Chemist|talk]]) 10:55, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
:::A small sized explanation doesn't say anything about it's quality. IMHO in contrast there are many overwhelming explanations which are far too long, TL;DR... --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:32, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
::::I agree. Most of the early explanations are just fine. I was just trying to guess why they were suggesting a sort function. [[User:A(l)Chemist|AlChemist]] ([[User talk:A(l)Chemist|talk]]) 14:15, 16 February 2019 (UTC)

== 1204: Detail has the incorrect picture ==

Not sure where to put this but just look at the title. Not sure how one changes it, but a typo was fixed and usually the newest picture is used. [[User:Netherin5|Netherin5]] ([[User talk:Netherin5|talk]]) 14:15, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

== Regarding the alt-right trolls ==
Safe to say everything they leave is deletable, ''including'' the little "jew reverted my edits, help!" complaint they almost always leave on the discussion pages? --[[User:Youforgotthisthing|Youforgotthisthing]] ([[User talk:Youforgotthisthing|talk]]) 00:53, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

== Is the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline a relic of the past? ==

Yes, I'm going there, because this issue isn't going away.

I read through the entirety of the [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Sightless_readers_offended_by_the_.22It.27s_.27cause_you.27re_dumb.22_tagline. Explain XKCD tagline debate from 2016], and I have to admit, I was surprised. I had not considered that there would be so many people in support of this tagline, nor that the debate had been going on this long. I was actually sure that most people were in agreement with me that it's unnecessarily insulting and demeaning. It seems that isn't the case.

The main argument from the Keep side appears to be that "it's just a joke". Here are some examples of that sentiment:

* "Suggesting that anyone who isn't part of the 0.1% of the population who share all of Randall's abilities and references, is dumb, can't be anything but a joke."
* "it is a rather obvious joke"
* "If a user doesn't understand that it is a joke, then he won't understand XKCD's jokes, either, no matter how much explaination he can get."
* "I always thought the tagline fit nicely with the "sarcasm" part of xkcd's own tagline."
* "It's not hiding behind "just a joke", it IS the joke. It's tongue-in-cheek. It's so obviously false that you have to intentionally ignore the joke and manufacture offense about something benign."
* "It's amusing to me. The joke is clear, and universal. Offence may be taken equally by anyone reading. It fits well."
* "Looks like the kind of joke you'd actually find in the comments."
* "I can't believe we've become such a limp-wristed baby society that we can't even have a joke like "It's 'cause you're dumb" as the tagline. Nobody would reasonably get offended at it."
* "If there ever really was a single person who took the tag line seriously, then it was just telling them the truth."
* "the joke benefits from it sounding like it's a mock insult"
* "I doubt there's very many of these smart people who are smart enough to get every joke (and every nuance) without assistance. Therefore it should be clear that is is a simple tongue-in-cheek joke, you don't really mean it seriously. It should be taken in the tone that it's meant, and it offends me when people don't."
* "It's 'cause you're dumb" grabbed me the first time I saw it as being relevant to why explainxkcd.com is a great site, and equally importantly, it made me laugh."

I like to think that I do understand xkcd's humor very well - even the more subtle aspects of it, like Randall's perpetual social paranoia, his sarcasm at common failings of societies and organizations, his absurdism, his childlike wonder at the things we don't know. I love it, it makes me laugh and it makes me happy.

I am not a delicate snowflake, and I believe firmly that we should not allow people to use "being offended" as a weapon of control to take away freedoms or to force their agenda on others. That kind of behavior should rightfully be challenged and resisted.

However, I am not arguing on the basis of offense. I believe that I actually have a solid, reasonable foundation for my case for change that can be accepted by all, if I can argue it effectively enough. Because you see... I never got the joke.

When I came to Explain XKCD for the first time, and saw the "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline, my reaction was "Well, that isn't true, and it's a bit childish." It didn't come across as sarcasm to me; it comes across more like the kind of boorish flippancy expected of an anonymous imageboard, where being crude is the local currency. Mentally, I just couldn't fit it with what I saw as an otherwise fine mission of collaboratively explaining a very clever webcomic as a service to readers all over the world. And I didn't like it. It's not the kind of tone that I enjoy in a community.

"I don't like it" is not, of course, an argument, and would be a poor foundation from which to make my case - particularly as I am up against people who insist that the tagline ''is'' xkcd's humor and tone. So instead, I would like to argue this case: '''I think that this is what xkcd's tone ''used to be'', and that it isn't what xkcd's tone is ''now'''''.

The "It's 'cause you're dumb" tagline is actually ''ten years old''. It originally appeared in a different context; it was in the header image for the Explain XKCD blog.

[[File:explain xkcd blog header image.png|center]]

The image of Black Hat insulting Cueball is subtly different to what the tagline is now, and so I think some of the nuance - that might soften the joke or make it less antagonistic - has been lost. I have a theory that this is part of the reason why people are so polarized on whether the tagline is insulting or not, because I suspect that some people are remembering this older version. However, that's away from the point.

My point is this: it is no longer 2009 and things have changed.

xkcd, and Randall himself, have changed - Randall has published more than 1500 comics in that time, as well as books dedicated to explaining science and technology in his unique, witty style. He loves knowledge and discovery and celebrates the little things that people find interesting, often standing up to defend such pursuits against those who might otherwise dismiss them. That is xkcd to me. And I submit that Explain XKCD has, in those ten years, outgrown the tagline as well, We are, I think, more encyclopedists than agitators. If most people on this wiki are like me, they find pleasure in carefully unraveling the mystery of an xkcd comic and creating a resource that's as useful as can be. The tagline serves no purpose, in that case, other than to drive away contributors.

We shouldn't be afraid to offend. But I don't think we should offend needlessly. I think we're better than that.

[[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 21:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

:I really like the old banner, and think that the tone fits well with many of the older comics. But I agree with you that most of the newer comics have a less childish tone to them, where it is not as fitting. Also having it as a tagline instead of a banner makes it less obvious to be a character-statement. It is not an important issue to me, but I agree with you. After all explainxkcd is a site, for the lucky [[Ten Thousand]] each day. [[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 07:36, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

== Pageviews? ==

Any idea how many pageviews, on average, this wiki gets? I'm not looking for any detailed breakdown or historical stats, just a rough average for the main page each day. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.57|172.69.23.57]] 02:21, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

I'd be really curious to know which pages are the most viewed on this website. Which comics are the most unintelligible to people? [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.201|173.245.54.201]] 23:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

== xkcd site's fine print ==

I just noticed the fine print on the xkcd site, under the comics list: "xkcd.com is best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.0 or below on a Pentium 3±1 emulated in Javascript on an Apple IIGS at a screen resolution of 1024x1. Please enable your ad blockers, disable high-heat drying, and remove your device from Airplane Mode and set it to Boat Mode. For security reasons, please leave caps lock on while browsing."

Is there an explanation for the above? (copied from xkcd's homepage on 8/8/19)

My first thought was "Those are low requirements". Then the "on an Apple IIGS" tripped me up. (I know so little of Apple software use that I can't say that portion is incorrect.) I like the humor of the screen resolution (although I think only computers could read it) and the suggested mode.

M.Striker
(didn't realize that this was an edit and not a message; deleted my included e-mail)

:The text you mentioned is explained at [[footnote]]. I guess you are new to this wiki/project? Feel free to improve any of the sites you find (many can be found by using the search function), or to comment/discuss the pages in the discussion section. If you want to sign your comments on here or in a comment section (with or without an existing account), you can use four "~"-symbols. (Do not wory, it will not show you actual IP adress). [[User:Lupo|Lupo]] ([[User talk:Lupo|talk]]) 06:18, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

== Randall NYT excerpt from "How To: Absurd Scientific Advice for Common Real-World Problems" ==

FYI, Randall has an article in Tuesday's ''New York Times'': [https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/science/what-makes-a-red-sky-at-night-and-at-morning.html "What Makes a Red Sky at Night (and at Morning)"]. It's an excerpt from "How To: Absurd Scientific Advice for Common Real-World Problems." [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 03:34, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

== More ads? ==

Is it me, or are there now a ton of extra advertisements on this site? There is one between every paragraph of explanation. At least, when viewed with a mobile browser. It's a huge distraction, so I'm going to be enabling an adblocker.

: I would also like to file a complaint. [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 03:10, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

:: [[user:Davidy22]] If hosting expense is the problem, would it be possible to move to miraheze? [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 11:54, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

::: Hello? Anyone there? [[User:Benjaminikuta|Benjaminikuta]] ([[User talk:Benjaminikuta|talk]]) 06:55, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

== Should we* reference xkcd.com "black lives matter" banner ==

I consume almost all my xkcd directly from explain xkcd. So i only visit xkcd.com rarely.

I had been wondering why Randall was avoiding referencing the black lives matter movement which is clearly topical.

But i note that xkcd.com has a banner featuring Cueball saying "black lives matter".

Should we do the same?

* my apologies if we already do

[[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 06:01, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

:I'm not entirely sure if I understand the question. We list most (all?) the variants of Randall's banners on the [[:xkcd Header text]] page, and as of Tuesday (a bit late), that includes the Black Lives Matter banner. We also acknowledge it in [[2315: Eventual Consistency#Trivia]] as the first comic that ran after the banner went up. There's reason to ask if this wiki should give banners in general more prominent treatment, and question is raised on [[:Talk:xkcd Header text]].
:But are you asking if ExplainXKCD should adopt its own editorial position and feature a banner? I think it's really hard for wikis to make high-level editorial decisions like that. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 06:28, 11 June 2020 (UTC)
:: this was the question. And I hadn't looked hard enough. Thank you
:: no, not suggesting we do editorial, but glad we recognise what Randall has done. Cheers [[User:Boatster|Boatster]] ([[User talk:Boatster|talk]]) 12:30, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

== is scraping this site ok? ==

Hi everyone! Some days ago I scraped explainxkcd to get the webcomics' content, and created an interactive network chart where nodes are comics and two nodes share a link if they have words in common. (It's here: https://www.fluentdata.tech/visualizing-the-xkcd-comics-network-using-google-vision-spacy-and-d3/)

However, looking back I don't know if I had permission to actually scrape this site. Where can I get this information? Is scraping OK?
:From [[explain xkcd:Copyrights]], "The Explain XKCD wiki is generally licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 license (CC-BY-SA-3.0). This means that you can freely reuse our content, but you have to say where you got it — if you're sharing on the internet, a link back to the article is appropriate." So yes, scraping this site is allowed, but you should credit the site. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 03:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

== So what happened to the site? ==
Just curious, but it was down last night (June 14, Eastern Daylight time's night) and this morning has reverted to February. This is not a complaint, it's curiosity and a willingness to help out. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 15:41, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
:I'm curious too. It was down on the morning of Friday the 11th & is currently back up showing last Wednesday the 9th's comic. A post asking about it on [https://www.reddit.com/r/xkcd/comments/nxrm65 r/xkcd] got over 140 upvotes in 3 days. [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 16:30, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
::The page was down for more than four days. Problem is there seem to be no administrators attached to explain xkcd anymore, so no one who actually knows anything replies to these posts... :-/ So if the page goes down permanently there seems to be no one who still uses this page, who knows what to do... [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:03, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
:::That would be a shame since a ton of good content would be lost. Somebody somewhere needs to be paying the bills for the site to be hosted though. Don't they know what happens to the product they're paying for? [[User:Bischoff|Bischoff]] ([[User talk:Bischoff|talk]]) 13:01, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
::::Indeed, is there anyway we can contribute to the upkeep of the site? --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.182|141.101.76.182]]

== Stuck? ==
So, nothing yet for the August 7, 2021 comic? I normally see the main page update within an hour of the new xkcd appearing. Not complaining, just hoping nothing is wrong. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 20:43, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

== Help finding a specific comic. ==

I've been trying to find this specific comic but I can not find it anywhere. It's the one where a character suggests going to another building to avoid companies like Google and Facebook and tries to leave only to find the doors (and windows?) replaced with walls. Turns out Google and Facebook bought all the buildings and removed all doors so people can only use their services.
: (Above unsigned post by [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.65|108.162.245.65]] 04:38, 28 October 2021‎ (UTC).)
: 99% sure that's not an xkcd (though it does sound entertaining). You might try asking on r/xkcd, they can often ID even non-xkcd comics.
: Please sign your posts. [[User:Esogalt|Esogalt]] ([[User talk:Esogalt|talk]]) 05:32, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

== Update/further correct the Bots pages? ==

Seeing an edit to [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Bots the site's meta-page on Bots] (and making a minor grammatical edit myself), the current and seemingly unfixable inactivity of DgbrtBOT and its replacement by Theusaof... (though not, yet, as an officially recognised member of the Bots group?) makes the statement "There are 3 bots" dubiously correct, depending upon how you count them. As a humble IP unconnected to any 'bot, I am neither confident enough in the facts to revise all the relevent details nor able to do much about it (not even create the above page's Talk-space) but maybe someone else here can muster up both qualities. So over to you..? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.36|172.70.91.36]] 11:48, 1 December 2021 (UTC)

== Countdown Timer ==

Does anyone know what the timer in the upper right corner of the website is? As of writing, it's around "20D 20H 20M" (ha ha). Is this for some kind of event I don't know about (I mean, I don't keep track of that sort of thing, so I wouldn't usually know anyway, but still), or is this just something weird Randall's doing that we're all going to find out together?

Just curious.
(Tidal Rose)

:Yes, I've been wondering, too. I can't find any good explanation anywhere for it -- I looked on Reddit, etc. I guess he really is keeping it a secret -- perhaps a book announcement. -- [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.253|162.158.255.253]] 00:51, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

It appears that the accompanying image may also be updating (not minute to minute at the moment). Curious to see what this little black line does! (My bet is that it's a new book as well)

:My first thought was counting down to Webb reaching L2, but it's a couple days late for that... looks to be approximately 10AM Eastern on January 31, though my datemath is probably not too good when the local hour is <6. [[User:Davidhbrown|Davidhbrown]] ([[User talk:Davidhbrown|talk]]) 05:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

The image has definitely updated!

Is there a place where the progressive images are archived? [[User:Fuzzymo|Fuzzymo]] ([[User talk:Fuzzymo|talk]]) 01:00, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
:There is a [[Countdown_in_header_text|page structure]] now created for it. Go directly to [[Countdown_in_header_text/images|the /images sub-page]] for the captured series-so-far. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.43|162.158.159.43]] 04:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

The exact time it's counting down to is Monday, January 31, 2022 at 10 AM EST (Munroe's time zone) [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.165|108.162.229.165]] 23:55, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Could it be for [https://www.nationaldaystoday.com/national-backward-day/ National Backward Day?]
:Already mentioned (and mostly rejected?) in the ''real'' conversation about this. (See the [[Countdown in header text]] page, etc, if you haven't already.) Not sure what the plane would have to do with it, unless it turns out to be flying backwards when we see movement lines. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.155|172.70.162.155]] 17:53, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

== What if 103 ==

Why is it "not quite a coincidence" that the titanic was traveling at about the same speed when it hit bottom as when it hit the iceberg?
: 1. please sign your posts! 2. im guessing the joke is that it wasnt moving [[Special:Contributions/108.162.221.201|108.162.221.201]] 17:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Bumpf
:: What are you talking about? Its speed was around 20.5 kts at the time of impact.

== Syndication comic: uploaded with no number, link to xkcd doesn't work? ==

https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Syndication

In the title, the page is very broken and there's no evidence Randall Munroe ever uploaded this. Someone in the comments theorises it's a fan uploaded comic pretending to be official. Any way to find out? [[User:Mushrooms|Mushrooms]] ([[User talk:Mushrooms|talk]]) 08:08, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

== Concerning a certain editor ==

I'm puzzled and slightly worried as to the motives of [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?limit=50&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Gadget-HotCat&namespace=&tagfilter=&start=&end= a given named editor]. Having made direct comments myself (and seen others do so), albeit only as an IP, I'm concerned as to their potentially reckless nature. As messages to(/in reply to) them have done very little to get a valid explanation, I thought I should note the case slightly more formally. They seemed quite helpful when they started to post (at a time of notable vandalism, and I'm reluctant to jump to any adverse conclusion about that) and I obviously cannot speak of their time beyond this submission, but I find an overwhelming amount of their most recent interactions to be (to put it charitably) naive, despite clearly the intelligence to use advanced Wiki markup/etc.

I welcome a ready and willing editor. Moreover one who has bothered to get an accountable account, more than I have ever done! I would be happy to see them usefully contribute further, but could they perhaps realise (or accept, if they already know) that the drive to submit random and (pretty much always) unexplanatory content is not useful to anyone. And that's all I wish to say, right now. As much of a nudge as I want to make for the moment. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.64|141.101.99.64]] 14:45, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

== xkcd Volume 0 ==
xkcd Volume 0 is a collection of chosen comic strips - but there's also red-text found scattered though pages, usually as some type of cypher or code. Because of that, can an authorized user create a stub for [[xkcd Volume 0]] so that the codes can be documented, or does that risk too much of a copyright violation? --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.56|108.162.241.56]] 00:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

== ==
Is there a comic that mentions Russia? Omg Omg Omg {{unsigned|Omg omg omg Бельков|23:02, 19 March 2023 (UTC)}}
:@[[User:Omg omg omg Бельков|Omg omg omg Бельков]]: [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?search=russia&title=Special%3ASearch&go=Go Let me use the search bar]. ~ [[user:megan|Megan]] she/her [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 23:25, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
:Might be a good idea if the mods had a look at the following accounts, BTW:
:"Omg сайт вместо гидры", "Omg omg omg Бельков", "Omgomg", "Площадка omg", "Darknet omg omg", "Ссылка на omgomg", "Омгомгомг магазин", "Омгомгомг сайт", "Омгомгомг ссылка", "Омг сайт магазин", "Омг ссылка", "Омг тор ссылка", "Площадка omg ссылка", "Сайт омг омг ссылка", "Сайт omg onion", "Сайт omg shop", "Сайт omgomg", "Omgomgomg ссылка", "Omg omg market onion", "Omg onion", "Omg online", "Omg shop ссылка", "Omg web net", "Omgomg гидра", "Omgomg замена гидре", "Omgomg market", "Omgomg tor", "Omgomgomg магазин", "Omgomgomg сайт", "Omg omg сайт зеркало", "Omg omg ссылка онион", "Omg omg сайт аналог гидры", "Omg зеркало", "Omg аналог гидры", "Omg вместо гидры", "Omg даркнет", "Omg дарк", "Omg маркет", "Omg omg площадка тор", "Omg онион", "Omg площадка даркнета", "Omg площадка новая", "Omg площадка торговая", "Omg ссылка", "Omg dark", "Omg darknet", "Omg market", "Omg omg даркнет", "Omg omg магазин ссылка", "Omg omg площадка отзывы", "Omg omg площадка сайт", "Зеркало ссылка омг"
:Wasn't particularly concerned, but then one decided to have a go at posting. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.185|172.69.79.185]] 23:51, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

== Email Trial ==
We're currently carrying out an experiment that involves sending surprise messages to some ''carefully chosen'' email users around the world. This part of the experiment is Sending the "Happy Birthday" message to /dev/null by the morning of March 27th. We may continue selecting email users to send the surprise messages to. Stay tuned, thanks. [[User:Email Trial 1|Email Trial 1]] ([[User talk:Email Trial 1|talk]]) (UTC)

If you do not want to reveal your email address, you can use one of the "Free online anonymous email senders" instead. This is an experiment. [[User:Email Trial 1|Email Trial 1]] ([[User talk:Email Trial 1|talk]]) (UTC)

:@[[User:Email Trial 1|Email Trial 1]]: That sounds like spamming. Don't spam! ~ [[user:megan|Megan]] she/her [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 23:57, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

::More than that, it sounds like ''scamming'', in one of a number of ways it might end up if you try to email that tencent account. And it has nothing to do with xkcd or explainxkcd community business, so... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.158|172.70.162.158]] 01:12, 24 March 2023 (UTC)