explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

3081: PhD Timeline

2025-04-27T15:53:42Z

Aepokk: Title text got updated. Unsure if there's a line break.

{{comic
| number = 3081
| date = April 25, 2025
| title = PhD Timeline
| image = phd_timeline_2x.png
| imagesize = 382x516px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = Rümeysa Öztürk was grabbed off the street in my town one month ago. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyypeEEOklM
}}

Clicking on the image on [https://xkcd.com xkcd.com] takes you to ''[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyypeEEOklM Surveillance video shows Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk apprehended in Somerville, MA]'' on YouTube.

==Explanation==
{{incomplete|You might want to {{w|Detention of Rümeysa Öztürk|copy text over from the Wikipedia page}}, but keep in mind this wiki's main goal is to explain the comic. Don't remove this notice too soon.}}

This comic presents a typical {{w|Doctor of Philosophy}} (Ph.D.) timeline, with a twist. Typically a Ph.D. is broken into a number of steps, from enrollment through to thesis defense. However, in this case, the timeline takes an unexpected turn when, instead of publishing the thesis, the candidate is detained by masked government agents. While this may seem like an unlikely event, it reflects the {{w|detention of Rümeysa Öztürk|lived experience of Rümeysa Öztürk}}, a Turkish Ph.D. student at Tufts University<ref>"Tufts Democrats and Tufts Republicans release joint statement condemning detainment of Rümeysa Öztürk" Tufts Daily 22/04/2025 https://www.tuftsdaily.com/article/2025/04/tufts-democrats-and-tufts-republicans-release-joint-statement-condemning-detainment-of-rumeysa-ozutrk accessed 26/04/2025</ref> who was abruptly detained by six masked {{w|U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement}} (ICE) agents in Somerville, MA while walking to an {{w|iftar}} dinner. Subsequently, she was transported to Vermont and then to a detention facility in Louisiana before a court ordered that she not be removed from Massachusetts.<ref>"Louisiana federal judge denies bond to Rümeysa Öztürk" Tufts Daily 18/04/2025 https://www.tuftsdaily.com/article/2025/04/louisiana-judge-denies-bond-to-rumeysa-ozturk-while-vermont-judge-considers-jurisdiction accessed 26/04/2025</ref>

The reason given for her detention was that her {{w|F visa|F-1 student visa}} was revoked due to, according to a Department of Homeland Security spokeswoman<ref>"DHS detains grad student who advocated for Palestine and the "humanity of all people"" Salon 26/03/2025 https://www.salon.com/2025/03/26/dhs-detains-grad-student-advocated-for-palestine-and-the-humanity-of-all-people/ accessed 26/04/2025</ref>,
her alleged activities in support of the foreign terrorist organization {{w|Hamas}} on the campus of Tufts. Aside from her being co-author of an article in a student newspaper <ref>Op-ed: Try again, President Kumar: Renewing calls for Tufts to adopt March 4 TCU Senate resolutions https://www.tuftsdaily.com/article/2024/03/4ftk27sm6jkj)</ref> which was critical of her university's response towards protests against the ongoing {{w|Gaza war}}, no evidence of support for Hamas has been provided.

At the time of this comic's publication, the US government had recently canceled the visas of over 1,000 foreign students and scholars. This was done with minimal or no explanation and no warning. The U.S. government can cancel a visa if the subject's activities are harmful to U.S. foreign policy interests, though the threat of a visa being revoked has a chilling effect on speech, [[1357: Free Speech|which is protected by]] USA's {{w|First Amendment}}. Ordinarily, revocation of a visa is not, of itself, grounds for detention; that would merely prevent one from reentering the country if one left.<ref>"Visa Stamps and Status" Washington University https://oiss.washu.edu/visa-status-stamps/ accessed 26/04/2025</ref>

The title text says that Somerville is also where [[Randall Munroe]] lives.

For a more detailed account, see {{w|Detention of Rümeysa Öztürk}} on Wikipedia.

==Transcript==
:[A chart shows the typical events in a research program. At the top there is a dotted line. There is a title above the line and the line is labeled with text in the middle breaking the line:]
:US PH.D. PROGRAM TIMELINE
:–––––––ENROLLMENT–––––––––

:[The dotted line aligns with the top of an Y-axis with 7 ticks, the top tick on level with the dotted line. There are seven labels from top towards the bottom, not written near specifik ticks, and with uneven distance. Between each of the labels there is an arrow from the one above pointing the the next. To the right of the first five labels there is a split up rectangle, that are closed at the top , but open at the bottom. Down through the middle part it is split up in two along a kind of S-shape going a bit up from left to right. There is a gab between the top and bottom part of this figure along this s-shape. Both top and bottom part has a label. All text and other parts of the comic has been in black until this. But the last two labels near the Y-axis beneath where the rectangular figure stops, which are still written in black, have been crossed out with red squiggly lines, both the two small arrows and the text. From the label above those crossed out, there goes a red arrow down and then to the right. This point to another red label next to and right of the first of the two that has been crossed out. From beneath this another red arrow point to a second red label, next to the the last of the two that was crossed out. A third red arrow goes beneath this to a final red label.]
:Meet with Advisor
:Research Proposal
:Qualifying Exams
:Purpose Dissertation
:Research and Write dissertation

:[The above is the labels near the rectangular figure to the right with the following labels:]
:Coursework
:Research

:[The final two labels that have been crossed out with red lines:]
:Submit dissertation
:Defend dissertation

:[The new labels written to the right with red:]
:Get grabbed off the sidewalk outside of your home by masked government agents
:Be whisked out of the state before a judge has time to intervene
:????

==References==
{{reflist}}

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics with color]]
[[Category:Charts]]
[[Category:Comics featuring real people]] 
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Comics with red annotations]]

Talk:2452: Aviation Firsts

2021-05-18T01:32:22Z

Aepokk: oops

Someone got into editing just as I thought I'd start, so I'll leave it in case there's population of explanation afoot. But I'm waiting for both ''uncontrolled'' powered flight (I don't mean retrothrusted landing procedure) and controlled ''unpowered'' flight (ditto, not for parachute descents, at least until they make the subsonic ones full parasails). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.192|141.101.98.192]] 01:56, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Is there a well-defined distinction between circumnavigation and orbit? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.33.249|172.69.33.249]] 04:13, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
:given that the Wikipedia entry for “circumnavigation” includes a section for orbital circumnavigation, and that there exists a book with the title “Round About the Earth: circumnavigation from Magellan to Orbit” I think that there is not a well-defined distinction. Intuition is that circumnavigations could be split into two disjoint sets, those done at orbital speed, and those done slower, and that would provide a distinction most could agree with, but I found nothing official to support such a bifurcation.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.63.122|162.158.63.122]] 04:35, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
:I'd instinctively suggest that a true circumnavigation would need to be bookended by touching the surface at the same point (or trivially near - different dock of the same port, hard-landed on a companion runway to that taken off from), or beyond and over its starting track before it finishes (like obviously hard to 'navigate' circumnavigating balloons - and not allowed to be too circumpolar). If a future orbit-inserted Mars-flier eventually 'lands' beyond the point it first started to achieve level flight below Mars's equivalent Karmen-line, having travelled all round the planet in the interim, I might accept that as a special case.
:So far nothing (''but'' Ingenuity) has taken off from Mars, never mind (ditto) landed again, so all the orbiters clearly cannot be counted by this metric, and no rover has driven far enough to have attempted a surface-bound circumnavigation. A long-endurance rover with an advanced version of Ingy for look-ahead might ''jointly'' earn the benchmark as first surface and first (punctuated) flown circumnavigations.
:A suborbital semi-ballistic non-stip circumnavigation might be achievable while trying out sample-return technology (though wouldn't be useful, probably only a failure mode of an orbital insertion attempt).
:A surface-launched 'Martian weather balloon' might actually be the first success, though. It might be one designed to touch down, at least daily, for opportunistic sampling, but at the the risk of damage due to dragging/snagging. Or a non-stop trip, until it cannot maintain height/bumps into Olympus Mons. The engineering risks of a free-drifting balloon (capable of Martian flight) are probably being looked at by several teams right now for a future lander payload. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.109|141.101.99.109]] 12:06, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

where in the comic is the mile high club referenced???? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.219.69|108.162.219.69]] 13:35, 20 April 2021 (UTC)Bumpf
:In the title text, along eith Amelia Earhart and the Hudson River. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 14:19, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

In my new favorite sci-fi series, DB Cooper, who got to know the local bigfoot tribe as a kid, and who is called in adulthood Falls-From-Sky, moves to the planet the sasquatch came from to live with the Starfoot and grow garlic with his grandson Charlie. Jerry Boyd's Bob & Nikki series. And their story is a *subplot*.[[User:Seebert|Seebert]] ([[User talk:Seebert|talk]]) 12:57, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

''Flight, Landing and Controlled Landing were variously achieved by some or all of the prior landers, depending upon your definition of flight.'' I would argue that not '''all''' landers achieved a controlled landing. I recall a couple that did not do enough aerobraking and ended up doing too much lithobraking instead and were not functional afterwards. Should that '''all''' remain in the sentence? [[User:Nutster|Nutster]] ([[User talk:Nutster|talk]]) 02:06, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
:"variously achieved by some or all" means that different landers achieved different subsets. The ones you recall achieved flight (from Earth to Mars) and (crash) landing, but not controlled landing. [[User:Barmar|Barmar]] ([[User talk:Barmar|talk]]) 03:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Hmmm... Reading about how the explanation says "the notion of them [skeletal remains of Amelia Earhart] somehow ending up on the surface of Mars is practically impossible outside the remit of certain conspiracy theories." I immediately had to think on https://what-if.xkcd.com/53/ and https://what-if.xkcd.com/54/ [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 08:33, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
:Thinking about Amelia - her remains were supposedly found, dismissed, and lost. So really, there should be a tick on the Earth side there too [[User:Baldrickk|Baldrickk]] ([[User talk:Baldrickk|talk]]) 09:41, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Adding a table to organize everything might be a good idea because right now the description is a bit confusing. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.12|108.162.216.12]] 13:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

What does a "loop" mean in this context? Does it just refer to a satellite orbit? A definition on the page would help, I think. [[User:Aepokk|Aepokk]] ([[User talk:Aepokk|talk]]) 01:32, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Talk:1876: Eclipse Searches

2017-08-24T08:09:39Z

Aepokk:

I don't get it. - BK {{unsigned ip|108.162.216.16}}

Because people are apparently (according to the Google-search data, anyways) more excited about the upcoming eclipse than they were about the election, Cueball is predicting that society is going to go a little crazy when the eclipse actually happens. Megan adds that the traffic jams will likely be insurmountable and "if you're planning to be on the road, bring water"--i.e., don't expect to go anywhere fast. In the title text Mr. Munroe further explains this statement, noting that past eclipses have generated bad traffic jams and those were before the days of widespread social media networking, which will certainly make matters much worse. [[User:Berets|Berets]] ([[User talk:Berets|talk]]) 17:21, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

::To be fair, not that many of us were excited for election day. The Trumpists were excited. The #imwithheriguess weren't. We wanted Clinton because she wasn't Trump. Nervous about the insanity that would occur if Trump won, but not excited about the mediocrity that would happen if Clinton won. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.245.88|108.162.245.88]] 21:43, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
:::Don't forget the sizeable number of people who had the same opinions, but with the roles reversed (wanting Trump because he wasn't Hillary). Most of the people I know who wanted Trump were in that group. [[User:Mulan15262|Mulan15262]] ([[User talk:Mulan15262|talk]]) 04:02, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
:I guess the association with traffic jams is that in the USofA, people are used to stand for hours in line to vote. --[[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.29|198.41.242.29]] 17:47, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I remember the 1970 eclipse! Here in Northern Virginia, it was nearly total. I was nine and my dad made us a pinhole camera. Now I'm gonna have to make one for my kids, since it looks like the goggles are pretty much sold out. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.255.118|162.158.255.118]] 19:08, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

I understand this XKCD differently. The fact that no one looks up "eclipse" is that something bad will happen during it, that's why Cueball is urged to bring water, as in essential survival gear. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.106|108.162.216.106]] 20:12, 14 August 2017 (UTC) AM
:Yeah, and the Moon will fall into the Sun like the ISS did before: [[1830: ISS Solar Transit 2]] --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:26, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
: Sounds more like 1868 (shouldn't that be linked in the explanation?) :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:29, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

: Not sure what you mean by “The fact that no one looks up "eclipse"” … the graph in the comic shows that ''loads'' of people are looking up "eclipse". [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.11|141.101.99.11]] 13:16, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

What's funny to me is that this growing interest is completely fictitious within the context of my experience, LOL! I have LITERALLY only heard about this eclipse on XKCD, if it were any other comic I would never even have the thought that an eclipse might really be coming. :) I've really seen and heard no mention anywhere else (all I can think right now is that this explanation talks about it crossing the States, maybe it'll be too south to see here in Canada, therefore nobody around here is interested?). It also mystifies me how this and 1868 (again, shouldn't it be linked here?) seem to be making a mountain out of a molehill. An eclipse isn't this weird, uncommon, unheard-of phenomenon, why the big deal???!?! [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 05:29, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

: Because Eclipses are awesome. Its like a good song on the radio it passes quickly but sticks with you for days (or weeks) [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.250|141.101.98.250]] 07:29, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
:: Good songs on radio? I heard about these, but I doubt such mystical thing exists. As for the eclipse: I guess I'll watch the live stream. Or sleep. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 07:45, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
: Yes, eclipses are not too uncommon, but you still have to be lucky to experience one first hand. "Watching a live stream" of an eclipse is like watching porn: Both can be entertaining, but it's nothing like the real thing. [[User:LordHorst|LordHorst]] ([[User talk:LordHorst|talk]]) 08:52, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

:I've heard talk about it outside of XKCD, but I live and work in the 90% band so I think that you are correct about the local variation in how much people care.[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.232|108.162.237.232]] 14:04, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

:This eclipse will have a nearly 70 mile wide path of totality cross the entire continental US. The next major eclipse in the US will be in 2024, but it will cross from Mexico through the Great Lakes and New England. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.65.36|172.68.65.36]] 17:44, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

:I have seen two total eclipses and I am really sad I could not fit it into my plans to be in the totality band in the US this Monday. There is no reason to watch it live streamed, you could see one of the old any time you like. It has nothing on a real Eclipse. There is no doubt in my mind that experiencing those two total eclipses are the most crazy and beautiful nature experiences I have ever had. The one you are going to see this Monday is part of a long series. Each series of eclipses reappear every 18 years 1/3 around the globe to the west. So this eclipse is the next in the series of the first I saw in Europe (I was in Hungary) in August 1999. And the one mentioned in 2024 was the one I say in 2006 in Turkey. I live in Denmark so I had to travel further for those two than most of the people in the US has to, and they even can travel domestic. Go there and have an experience of a life time. And hope that Trump do not cancel the Eclipse... See title text of both [[1302: Year in Review]] and [[1779: 2017]]... Enjoy it you lucky people living right next to the totality! ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 07:25, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

:This is the first total eclipse visible in the continental US since 1979. About half the current US population wasn't even born then. That totality was visible in a much smaller and mostly sparsely-populated part of the US. The last eclipse with totality visible near a significant percentage of the US population was in 1970. It's a pretty safe bet that >80% of the US population has never seen a total eclipse in person. So, while perhaps eclipses are an ordinary event for Canadians, the 2017 eclipse is indeed a "weird, uncommon, unheard-of phenomenon".[[Special:Contributions/162.158.78.226|162.158.78.226]] 18:17, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
:: My reaction is more along the lines of the next xkcd, that it isn't mysterious or once-in-a-lifetime (except perhaps being located conveniently to see the full effects). Though come to think of it, I might never have seen an eclipse myself, or if so YEARS ago when I was young (you referenced one in 1979, maybe I saw that one). I actually wonder if it's like tornados, that we simply don't see them this far north? Really, it's just that it seems like I'm hearing a bigger deal here than makes sense. Cool experience if you can get it, but that's it. :) "Weird", no, completely normal and expected. Hell, this discussion only can exist because it's predicted. "Uncommon", certainly not. A Google search I did just now to try to see if there were any I might have seen led to a page about eclipses visible in Canada in the 20th century, which says there were something like 270. That's approaching an average of 3 per year, just from Canada, while this one seems like it won't even partially be visible to my area. "Unheard Of", definitely not. It would take an incredibly sheltered life to have not heard of eclipses, to know what they are. Sheltered with irresponsible parents. So I stand by that statement. :) [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 06:32, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

[http://kron4.com/2017/08/14/eclipse-traffic-jam-may-be-greatest-in-oregon-history/ Eclipse may cause greatest traffic jam in Oregon history.] [http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article166570472.html A million out-of-state travelers expected to pack Missouri roads for solar eclipse.] [http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/08/solar_eclipse_2017_how_to_driv.html Solar eclipse 2017: How to drive during Aug. 21 eclipse.] [http://www.ajc.com/lifestyles/north-georgia-towns-brace-for-huge-crowds-for-solar-eclipse/1CNySlBBpxuN9VQKXAzTlJ/ North Georgia towns brace for huge crowds for eclipse.] There has been a lot of online activity related to the eclipse in the past few weeks. [[User:Amdir|Amdir]] ([[User talk:Amdir|talk]]) 21:38, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

It is unlikely that the volume of Google searches will reach the same ultimate height as election searches do in the second graph. After all, the result is a forgone conclusion. Right? [[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]]) 01:54, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Are there any usefully updated trackers of the search/in comparison to the election search? The linked WaPo article doesn't seem to include it.
: I wanted to verify the data myself, so I compared them in Google Trends. Here's a comparison between the 2 terms, similar to the one in the comic. [https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=2017-06-20%202017-08-23,2016-09-04%202016-11-04&geo=US,US&q=eclipse,election Google Trends: Eclipse vs Election] Saibot84 14:48, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
::Well fuck, looks like Randall's predictions really did pan out. Election hype was BURIED under eclipse hype. [[User:Aepokk|Aepokk]] ([[User talk:Aepokk|talk]]) 08:09, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

890: Etymology

2016-12-12T08:22:02Z

Aepokk: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 890
| date = April 25, 2011
| title = Etymology
| image = etymology.png
| titletext = For some reason, my childhood suspension of disbelief had no problem with the fact that this ancient galaxy is full of humans, but was derailed by language. There's no Asia OR Europe there, so where'd they get all the Indo-European roots?
}}

==Explanation==
This comic references one of the scenes from the sci-fi classic {{w|Star Wars}} set in {{w|Mos Eisley Cantina}} at the spaceport on {{w|Tatooine}} a wretched hive of scum and villainy.

In this scene {{w|Obi-Wan Kenobi}} (with the beard) and {{w|Luke Skywalker}} on the left are trying to get off the planet secretly and they enlist help from {{w|Han Solo}} and {{w|Chewbacca}}. Chewbacca is the very hairy one because he is a {{w|wookiee}} from the planet Kashyyyk.

Han Solo tells Luke he is captain of the famous ship the ''{{w|Millennium Falcon}}''. When Luke asks what that is he brags about it telling that ''It's the ship that made the {{w|Millennium_Falcon#Kessel_Run|Kessel Run}} in less than 12 {{w|Parsecs}}!'' (Which is nonsense, as a parsec is a distance unit, not a measure of time). But it turns out that what Luke asks about is what a {{w|falcon}} is.

{{w|Etymology}} is the study of the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time. [[Randall]] wonders what Luke would say to Han if he had no idea what a falcon was.

Normally the viewers of sci-fi accept that the aliens speak standard English, and do not wonder why they have a word like falcon because of the etymology of the word in our world, but there is no evidence of a falcon in the Star Wars universe - especially for Luke who has been raised only on Tatooine, a desert world.

In the title text, Randall references the fact that Star Wars is set "a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away" and muses over the fact that he as a child did not have any problems dispensing his disbelief in a distant galaxy full of humans, but was still derailed by the language. It would seem unlikely that another galaxy has creatures to similar to humans, while at the same time being filled with so many other types of creatures.

The reference to {{w|Indo-European}} roots is another reference to etymology. As an example, certain words will have Indo-European roots because the word originated in Indo-European languages. And as there are nor Asia or Europe in Star Wars how come they use the English language?

==Transcript==
:[Four people are sitting around a small round table in a room with large windows. The four are Obi-Wan Kenobi in a cloak and with beard, Luke Skywalker with black hair down his forehead and down his neck, Han Solo with shorter black hair and the hairy creature is Chewbacca. On the table is two cylinders, a white and a smaller black. Outside the window is two alien creatures walking by. Closest is a creature looking like a Rodian (like Greedo) and further back is a creature with two black horns on top of a regular Cueball like appearnce. They walk in a street outside with buildings behind.]
:Han Solo: Han Solo. I'm captain of the ''Millennium Falcon''.

:[Zoom in on Luke:]
:Luke Skywalker: What's that?

:[Zoom in on Han:]
:Han: It's the ship that made the Kessel Run in less than 12 Parsecs!

:[Zoom in on Luke:]
:Luke: No, what's a falcon?

:[Zoom in on a silent Han. Beat panel.]

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Star Wars]]
[[Category:Language]]
[[Category:Animals]]

Talk:1771: It Was I

2016-12-12T08:19:17Z

Aepokk:

"It me" isn't "caveman-speak"... It's a popular Internet meme. See [http://www.papermag.com/it-me-you-and-everyone-we-know-a-look-at-the-webs-most-ambiguous-meme-1427655235.html here] and [http://www.papermag.com/an-interview-with-pastaversaucy-the-inventor-of-the-it-me-meme-1427658503.html here], for starters. --[[User:Esterhazy|Esterhazy]] ([[User talk:Esterhazy|talk]]) 07:47, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Not super familiar with the general style on this wiki, but surely we should note that this ''Star Wars'' comic comes ahead of Friday's ''Rogue One'' premiere, right? Like in a trivia section or the main article somehow? [[User:Aepokk|Aepokk]] ([[User talk:Aepokk|talk]]) 08:19, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

1122: Electoral Precedent

2016-11-15T02:45:16Z

Aepokk: /* Explanation */ I blame Randall for this, personally

{{comic
| number = 1122
| date = October 17, 2012
| title = Electoral Precedent
| image = electoral_precedent.png
| titletext = No white guy who's been mentioned on twitter has gone on to win.
}}

==Explanation==
During election season in U.S. presidential elections — and especially in election night coverage — it is common for the media to make comments like the ones set out in the first panel of this comic. [[Randall Munroe|Randall]] is demonstrating the problem with making such statements, many of which simply come down to coincidence.

After the first panel the next 56 panels in this comic refer to each one of the {{w|United States presidential election#Electoral college results|56 presidential elections}} in U.S. history before {{w|Barack Obama|Obama's}} re-election in 2012. The panels depict a pre-election commentator noting a quality or condition that has never occurred to a candidate, until one of the candidates in that election broke the streak. In other words, one can always find at least one unique thing about a candidate who has gone on to win (or in some cases, lose) or the circumstances under which they won (or lost) that is unique from all previous winners (or losers). It's worth noting that some of these 'firsts' were truly precedent-setting (such as the first incumbent losing, the first president to win a third term, the first Catholic president, etc.), but the fact that they hadn't happened was no assurance that there wouldn't be a first time. As the years pass on, these 'streaks' become more and more nested and complicated, and then brought by Randall to the point of absurdity by pointing out very trivial things, such as "No Democratic {{w|incumbent}} without combat experience has ever beaten someone whose first name is worth more in {{w|Scrabble}}" (1996).

The flaw made by pundits while reporting such streaks is that there will always be ''something'' that has never happened before in an election, and they purport to suggest that these things are related to the candidate's win or loss. Randall considers this a logical flaw. A common one is, as noted in several panels, candidates can't win without winning certain states. The question, however, is one of {{w|Correlation does not imply causation|cause or effect}}.

Given that there have only been 56 elections, there are always going to be things that haven't happened before. If you go out looking for them, you're sure to find some. There is no magic about why these events haven't happened. In most cases, it is merely coincidence.

In the last two panels two more statements like the previous are given. They were both true before the {{w|United States presidential election, 2012|election in 2012}} on November the 6th. The comic came out in the middle of the campaign on October the 17th. The statements were constructed so that the first predicts that Obama can't win over {{w|Mitt Romney}}, and the second that he cannot lose. As Obama won the election he thus ended the streak ''Democratic incumbents never beat taller challengers'' whereas the other streak is still valid.

The title text refers to the fact that {{w|Twitter}} was founded in 2006. Obama won in 2008, so at the time of the comic it was true that no white male person mentioned on Twitter had ever gone on to win the presidency; although certainly some former presidents, all of whom were white males, have subsequently been mentioned on Twitter. This streak was broken in the next election year, when Donald Trump won the 2016 election.

During these last four week before the election Randall posted no fewer than four comics related to this election. The others being: [[1127: Congress]], [[1130: Poll Watching]] and [[1131: Math]].

==Transcript==
:The problem with statements like
:"No <party> candidate has won the election without <state>"
:Or
:"No president has been reelected under <circumstances>"

:{{w|United States presidential election, 1788-1789|1788}}... No one has been elected president before. ...But Washington was.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1792|1792}}... No incumbent has ever been reelected. ...Until Washington.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1796|1796}}... No one without false teeth has become president. ...But Adams did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1800|1800}}... No challenger has beaten an incumbent. ...But Jefferson did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1804|1804}}... No incumbent has beaten a challenger. ...Until Jefferson.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1808|1808}}... No congressman has ever become president. ...Until Madison.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1812|1812}}... No one can win without New York. ...But Madison did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1816|1816}}... No candidate who doesn't wear a wig can get elected. ...Until Monroe was.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1820|1820}}... No one who wears pants instead of breeches can be reelected. ...But Monroe was.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1824|1824}}... No one has ever won without a popular majority. ...J.Q. Adams did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1828|1828}}... Only people from Massachusetts and Virginia can win. ...Until Jackson did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1832|1832}}... The only presidents who get reelected are Virginians. ...Until Jackson.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1836|1836}}... New Yorkers always lose. ...Until Van Buren.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1840|1840}}... No one over 65 has won the presidency. ...Until Harrison did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1844|1844}}... No one who's lost his home state has won. ...But Polk did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1848|1848}}... The Democrats don't lose when they win Pennsylvania. ...But they did in 1848.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1852|1852}}... New England Democrats can't win. ...Until Pierce did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1856|1856}}... No one can become president without getting married. ...Until Buchanan did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1860|1860}}... No one over 6'3" can get elected. ...Until Lincoln.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1864|1864}}... No one with a beard has been reelected. ...But Lincoln was.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1868|1868}}... No one can be president if their parent are alive. ...Until Grant.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1872|1872}}... No one with a beard has been reelected in peacetime. ...Until Grant was.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1876|1876}}... No one can win a majority of the popular vote and still lose. ...Tilden did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1880|1880}}... As goes California, so goes the nation. ...Until it went Hancock.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1884|1884}}... Candidates named "James" can't lose. ...Until James Blaine.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1888|1888}}... No sitting president has been beaten since the Civil War. ...Cleveland was.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1892|1892}}... No former president has been elected. ...Until Cleveland.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1896|1896}}... Tall midwesterners are unbeatable. ...Bryan wasn't.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1900|1900}}... No Republican shorter than 5'8" has been reelected. ...Until McKinley was.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1904|1904}}... No one under 45 has become president. ...Roosevelt did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1908|1908}}... No Republican who hasn't served in the military has won. ...Until Taft.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1912|1912}}... After Lincoln beat the Democrats while sporting a beard with no mustache, the only Democrats who can win have a mustache with no beard. ...Wilson had neither.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1916|1916}}... No Democrat has won without Indiana. ...Wilson did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1920|1920}}... No incumbent senator has won. ...Until Harding.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1924|1924}}... No one with two Cs in their name has become president. ...Until Calvin Coolidge.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1928|1928}}... No one who got ten million votes has lost. ...Until Al Smith.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1932|1932}}... No Democrat has won since women secured the right to vote. ...Until FDR did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1936|1936}}... No President's been reelected with double-digit unemployment. ...Until FDR was.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1940|1940}}... No one has won a third term. ...Until FDR did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1944|1944}}... No Democrat has won during wartime. ...Until FDR did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1948|1948}}... Democrats can't win without Alabama. ...Truman did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1952|1952}}... No Republican has won without winning the House or Senate. ...Eisenhower did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1956|1956}}... No Republican has won without Missouri. ...Until Eisenhower.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1960|1960}}... Republicans without facial hair are unbeatable. ...Kennedy beat Nixon.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1964|1964}}... No Democrat has won without Georgia. ...Johnson did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1968|1968}}... No Republican vice president has risen to the Presidency through an election. ...Until Nixon.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1972|1972}}... No wartime candidate has won without Massachusetts. ...Until Nixon did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1976|1976}}... No one who lost New Mexico has won. ...But Carter did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1980|1980}}... No one has been elected President after a divorce. ...Until Reagan was.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1984|1984}}... No left-handed president has been reelected. ...Until Reagan was.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1988|1988}}... No Democrat who has won Wisconsin (without being from there) has lost. ...Until Dukakis did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1992|1992}}... No Democrat has won without a majority of the Catholic vote. ...Until Clinton did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 1996|1996}}... No Dem. incumbent without combat experience has beaten someone whose first name is worth more in Scrabble. ...Until Bill beat Bob.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 2000|2000}}... No Republican has won without Vermont. ...Until Bush did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 2004|2004}}... No Republican without combat experience has beaten someone two inches taller. ...Until Bush did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 2008|2008}}... No Democrat can win without Missouri. ...Until Obama did.
:{{w|United States presidential election, 2012|2012}}... Democratic incumbents never beat taller challengers. No nominee whose first name contains a "K" has lost. Which streak will break?

==Trivia/Errors==
* There was an error in the original 1800 panel of the comic, as Jefferson (not Adams) was the first challenger to beat an incumbent, when Jefferson beat then-president Adams in 1800. This was later corrected.

* Also, one of the statements of a streak for the 2012 elections can be considered wrong: in 1952, the Republican candidate/running mate Eisenhower/Nixon defeated the Democratic alliterative ticket Stevenson/Sparkman (in what can only be described as a landslide). The comic has been changed, and now reads "Democratic incumbents never beat taller challengers" as the streak which would have the Republican ticket as the winners.

{{comic discussion}}
[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Statistics]]
[[Category:Politics]]
[[Category:Comics featuring John F. Kennedy]]

Talk:1028: Communication

2015-09-06T08:55:31Z

Aepokk:

I can't decide if the irony that this comic didn't communicate its idea well was intentional or if I just didn't get it at first because I'm dumb... {{unsigned ip|71.240.171.146}}
:Don't worry. Not everybody can read "international," so it may be a bit hard to interpret. Really, he's just citing John R. Trimble: ''"Clear writers assume, with a pessimism born of experience, that whatever isn't plainly stated the reader will invariably misconstrue."'' In this case, after several examples of ''poor'' communication (and the consequences) the only ''clear'' communicator is [[Beret Guy]], who rather adeptly shows rather than tells [[Cueball]] of the peril. Visual [http://wordnik.com/words/prolix prolix]? Maybe. As you say, that may be the point. -- [[User:IronyChef|IronyChef]] ([[User talk:IronyChef|talk]]) 02:44, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
:Well, it wouldn't be that you're dumb, it would be that you're "bad at reading comics" :) [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 16:43, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't believe that the holes are only one person deep. It seems as though the heads are level with the ground just to show who is falling into each hole at that moment. [[Special:Contributions/108.20.154.235|108.20.154.235]] 11:20, 21 September 2012 (UTC)

After panel 5-6, does WHG think that he actually communicated the left hole successfully to the girl, given that he does not understand her "hole!" message as a warning of the right hole? I remember that's how I read it the first time. {{unsigned ip|87.104.184.2}}

Where does the name Harry come from? Is this established usage on the wiki? Dropping it in the explanation out of nowhere is confusing. [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 16:44, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

:Using names to refer to the characters was a tradition that was officially started back on the blog when Berg [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=770:_All_the_Girls guest authored] one of the explanations. This makes it easier for everyone to be sure they are referring to the same character, and they're also cute fan-made names. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 17:04, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

::Sure sure, I get that, but [[Cueball]] and [[Danish]] have pages where confused users can go to understand where the name came from. "Harry" just drops out of nowhere here. Does he appear in other comics? Should we make a page for him? [[User:Jerodast|- jerodast]] ([[User talk:Jerodast|talk]]) 16:19, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

:::I don't think we call him Harry, but there are other comics where a character with a little bit of hair shows up. If he shows up in at least 3 comics you can go ahead and create the category and his character page. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 17:04, 22 December 2012 (UTC)

::::He was of course referring to [[Hairy]] which has been clarified long time ago. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 14:11, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

I disagree that the moral is that the best way to teach is to show someone, I believe the moral is that teaching hasn't happened until the learner understands. If you succeed in communicating by talking, that's great, if you succeed by showing, that's great too. However, if you try to teach by talking and the other person doesn't understand, you've failed. If you try to teach by showing and the other person doesn't understand, you've also failed. I'm going to make a change to include that. If anyone objects, revert it. [[User:Djbrasier|Djbrasier]] ([[User talk:Djbrasier|talk]]) 20:35, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
:I agree with you (that is a first ;-) I think you forgot to implement the change you were advocating for, and said you would make. I have tried to make it clear that it is about communication not about how you do it. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 17:20, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

I took the moral to be that you need to not immediately jump to what you're you're saying, rather talk a little first. [[User:Banak|Banak]] ([[User talk:Banak|talk]]) 17:00, 16 November 2013 (UTC)

I don't get what part of "there's a hole over there" is so hard to understand that you need to show them it for people not to be confused. Really, this comic must've been based on some special kind of stupid people.--[[Special:Contributions/141.101.81.208|141.101.81.208]] 07:56, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

:Are you familiar with the concept of a metaphor? Did you miss the xkcd comic where Randall himself pointed out that models are imperfect representations of abstract ideas (iirc, the example in question was gravity as it relates to spacetime, "what's pulling the planet down into the grid then?") It isn't lost on me that this comment is a year old, I just... it felt like it necessitated a response. If you're getting caught up in the specifics of this being a literal situation, then it's you who has missed the point. [[User:Aepokk|Aepokk]] ([[User talk:Aepokk|talk]]) 08:55, 6 September 2015 (UTC)