Editing Talk:2679: Quantified Self

Jump to: navigation, search
Ambox notice.png Please sign your posts with ~~~~

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 23: Line 23:
 
::::That last part should be obvious.  Just as one would expect that those who push the google blog have actually watched it. ;-)
 
::::That last part should be obvious.  Just as one would expect that those who push the google blog have actually watched it. ;-)
  
βˆ’
GOOMHR![https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=GOOMHR] - Although for me it was the opposite aim. I've had periods of time when I wouldn't even like (if I noticed, I wasn't like OCD or anything[1]!!!) to make a return journey that meant I even crossed the road at a different point and thus passed under a different telegraph wire between a different set of adjacent poles, on the presumption that if I were to 'retract my path' then it would be irrevocably looped around at least one telegraph poles. (But normal lamp-posts were Ok... the path-'string' could just pass over and around the top and continue to retract. And it could pass above/below anything movable like cars, people, etc.) My ideal would be to be topologically contracted to zero length. Nut I wasn't actually obsessed by it, just... sometimes noticed when I was forced to do something that would cause such 'problems' and might deliberately ensure that any such loop was fully reversed (in strict reverse order to any such transit adding them in) ''if at all possible''. Of course, once it was spoilt by one end of the journey being held by a loop, the rest didn't matter so much. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.71|162.158.34.71]] 18:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
+
GOOMHR![https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=GOOMHR Randall is _always_ looking through your eyes] - Although for me it was the opposite aim. I've had periods of time when I wouldn't even like (if I noticed, I wasn't like OCD or anything[1]!!!) to make a return journey that meant I even crossed the road at a different point and thus passed under a different telegraph wire between a different set of adjacent poles, on the presumption that if I were to 'retract my path' then it would be irrevocably looped around at least one telegraph poles. (But normal lamp-posts were Ok... the path-'string' could just pass over and around the top and continue to retract. And it could pass above/below anything movable like cars, people, etc.) My ideal would be to be topologically contracted to zero length. Nut I wasn't actually obsessed by it, just... sometimes noticed when I was forced to do something that would cause such 'problems' and might deliberately ensure that any such loop was fully reversed (in strict reverse order to any such transit adding them in) ''if at all possible''. Of course, once it was spoilt by one end of the journey being held by a loop, the rest didn't matter so much. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.71|162.158.34.71]] 18:21, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 
:''[1] Not even CDO, which is like OCD but ordered alphabetically!''
 
:''[1] Not even CDO, which is like OCD but ordered alphabetically!''
 
:: I definitely am also someone who always played it your way, the reverse XKCD. My cats play it straight though, running into the house, through, and out a different entrance repeatedly one day, then the other way the day after. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.45|172.68.210.45]] 19:35, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
 
:: I definitely am also someone who always played it your way, the reverse XKCD. My cats play it straight though, running into the house, through, and out a different entrance repeatedly one day, then the other way the day after. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.45|172.68.210.45]] 19:35, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Templates used on this page: