Talk:1325: Rejection - Revision history

146.70.174.163 at 15:57, 12 February 2026

2026-02-12T15:57:40Z

162.158.186.30 at 15:48, 21 September 2019

2019-09-21T15:48:15Z

108.162.250.162 at 06:35, 12 August 2015

2015-08-12T06:35:16Z

Kynde: adding and correcting signature for the two post I made previously.

2015-05-19T12:39:39Z

adding and correcting signature for the two post I made previously.

Kynde at 12:38, 19 May 2015

2015-05-19T12:38:42Z

Pudder: New comments at the bottom, unless replying to an existing comment

2014-12-11T16:00:40Z

New comments at the bottom, unless replying to an existing comment

108.162.216.114 at 15:35, 11 December 2014

2014-12-11T15:35:57Z

103.22.201.240 at 14:59, 27 May 2014

2014-05-27T14:59:01Z

173.245.55.87 at 13:45, 8 May 2014

2014-05-08T13:45:36Z

173.245.54.91 at 19:37, 4 April 2014

2014-04-04T19:37:21Z

@@ Line 58: / Line 58: @@
 Ugh Randall. Your presumption that the woman is acting fully rational because people act rational, is countered by the fact that you believe the guy in front of you is not acting rational. Can't you just admit for once that all people act irrational. The guy complaining could very well be right about the particular girl he is talking about. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.114|108.162.216.114]] 15:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
 : Except nothing in this indicates that he is talking about a specific event or person, hence why the first thing we see him say is "Women say-" not "She says-" or "This girl said-". This comic is addressing a common trope and attitude, not a particular person. Additionally, it's not rationality that's in question here, it's agency and self awareness. A person may reject the advance of another because they are not interested, and the resulting "Women say they want-" nonsense is attacking their agency (in implying that their choice is faulty and/or should be vetoed, even though it is entirely the person's choice that no other authority need be considered) and their self awareness (by claiming that they don't know what they want, which is ridiculous). -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162|108.162.250.162]] 06:35, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 There is a [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Merge_Cueball_.26_Rob|community portal discussion]] of what to call Cueball and what to do in case with more than one Cueball. I have added this comic to the new Category:Multiple Cueballs. In this case the Cueball walking in front is the protagonist of the story and hence it makes sence for our community to call him Cueball, so this has been kept in the explanation. But it has been made clear that the other character is Cueball-like. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
 My first parsing of "...respond to rejection by belittling their judgement and self awareness" was that it was referring to the proposistioner criticizing themselves, which, in the context, would have made the comic really dark. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.30|162.158.186.30]] 15:48, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:48, 21 September 2019
Line 60:		Line 60:

	There is a [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Merge_Cueball_.26_Rob\|community portal discussion]] of what to call Cueball and what to do in case with more than one Cueball. I have added this comic to the new Category:Multiple Cueballs. In this case the Cueball walking in front is the protagonist of the story and hence it makes sence for our community to call him Cueball, so this has been kept in the explanation. But it has been made clear that the other character is Cueball-like. --[[User:Kynde\|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde\|talk]]) 12:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)		There is a [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Merge_Cueball_.26_Rob\|community portal discussion]] of what to call Cueball and what to do in case with more than one Cueball. I have added this comic to the new Category:Multiple Cueballs. In this case the Cueball walking in front is the protagonist of the story and hence it makes sence for our community to call him Cueball, so this has been kept in the explanation. But it has been made clear that the other character is Cueball-like. --[[User:Kynde\|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde\|talk]]) 12:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	My first parsing of "...respond to rejection by belittling their judgement and self awareness" was that it was referring to the proposistioner criticizing themselves, which, in the context, would have made the comic really dark. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.186.30\|162.158.186.30]] 15:48, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 06:35, 12 August 2015
Line 57:		Line 57:

	Ugh Randall. Your presumption that the woman is acting fully rational because people act rational, is countered by the fact that you believe the guy in front of you is not acting rational. Can't you just admit for once that all people act irrational. The guy complaining could very well be right about the particular girl he is talking about. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.114\|108.162.216.114]] 15:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)		Ugh Randall. Your presumption that the woman is acting fully rational because people act rational, is countered by the fact that you believe the guy in front of you is not acting rational. Can't you just admit for once that all people act irrational. The guy complaining could very well be right about the particular girl he is talking about. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.114\|108.162.216.114]] 15:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
		+	: Except nothing in this indicates that he is talking about a specific event or person, hence why the first thing we see him say is "Women say-" not "She says-" or "This girl said-". This comic is addressing a common trope and attitude, not a particular person. Additionally, it's not rationality that's in question here, it's agency and self awareness. A person may reject the advance of another because they are not interested, and the resulting "Women say they want-" nonsense is attacking their agency (in implying that their choice is faulty and/or should be vetoed, even though it is entirely the person's choice that no other authority need be considered) and their self awareness (by claiming that they don't know what they want, which is ridiculous). -Pennpenn [[Special:Contributions/108.162.250.162\|108.162.250.162]] 06:35, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

	There is a [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Merge_Cueball_.26_Rob\|community portal discussion]] of what to call Cueball and what to do in case with more than one Cueball. I have added this comic to the new Category:Multiple Cueballs. In this case the Cueball walking in front is the protagonist of the story and hence it makes sence for our community to call him Cueball, so this has been kept in the explanation. But it has been made clear that the other character is Cueball-like. --[[User:Kynde\|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde\|talk]]) 12:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)		There is a [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Merge_Cueball_.26_Rob\|community portal discussion]] of what to call Cueball and what to do in case with more than one Cueball. I have added this comic to the new Category:Multiple Cueballs. In this case the Cueball walking in front is the protagonist of the story and hence it makes sence for our community to call him Cueball, so this has been kept in the explanation. But it has been made clear that the other character is Cueball-like. --[[User:Kynde\|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde\|talk]]) 12:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 :Cueball has a bigger head. Please notice the difference. [[Special:Contributions/103.22.201.240|103.22.201.240]] 14:59, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
-::That last post makes no sense. Neither of these guys are Cueball in Randall's view, since Cueball is a concept made up on explain xkcd. But it is usually considered that the protagonist of a story is Cueball. And in this case this is obviously the front guy who corrects the guy behind. See my post below
+::That last post makes no sense. Neither of these guys are Cueball in Randall's view, since Cueball is a concept made up on explain xkcd. But it is usually considered that the protagonist of a story is Cueball. And in this case this is obviously the front guy who corrects the guy behind. See my post below from this date. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)
 First of all we dont know that the first guy has been recently rejected, that is actually an assumption made by the second guy. Also, the "they choose jerks over nice guys" argument is wrong not because it lacks judgement and self awareness, it is wrong because it belittles the woman's judgement and self-awareness. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.105|108.162.254.105]] 08:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
@@ Line 58: / Line 58: @@
 Ugh Randall. Your presumption that the woman is acting fully rational because people act rational, is countered by the fact that you believe the guy in front of you is not acting rational. Can't you just admit for once that all people act irrational. The guy complaining could very well be right about the particular girl he is talking about. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.114|108.162.216.114]] 15:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
-There is a [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Merge_Cueball_.26_Rob|community portal discussion]] of what to call Cueball and what to do in case with more than one Cueball. I have added this comic to the new Category:Multiple Cueballs. In this case the Cueball walking in front is the protagonist of the story and hence it makes sence for our community to call him Cueball, so this has been kept in the explanation. But it has been made clear that the other character is Cueball-like. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 13:34, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
+There is a [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#Merge_Cueball_.26_Rob|community portal discussion]] of what to call Cueball and what to do in case with more than one Cueball. I have added this comic to the new Category:Multiple Cueballs. In this case the Cueball walking in front is the protagonist of the story and hence it makes sence for our community to call him Cueball, so this has been kept in the explanation. But it has been made clear that the other character is Cueball-like. --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 12:39, 19 May 2015 (UTC)

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 :Cueball has a bigger head. Please notice the difference. [[Special:Contributions/103.22.201.240|103.22.201.240]] 14:59, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
 First of all we dont know that the first guy has been recently rejected, that is actually an assumption made by the second guy. Also, the "they choose jerks over nice guys" argument is wrong not because it lacks judgement and self awareness, it is wrong because it belittles the woman's judgement and self-awareness. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.105|108.162.254.105]] 08:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)
@@ Line 56: / Line 57: @@
 Ugh Randall. Your presumption that the woman is acting fully rational because people act rational, is countered by the fact that you believe the guy in front of you is not acting rational. Can't you just admit for once that all people act irrational. The guy complaining could very well be right about the particular girl he is talking about. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.114|108.162.216.114]] 15:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:00, 11 December 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	Ugh Randall. Your presumption that the woman is acting fully rational because people act rational, is countered by the fact that you believe the guy in front of you is not acting rational. Can't you just admit for once that all people act irrational. The guy complaining could very well be right about the particular girl he is talking about. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.114\|108.162.216.114]] 15:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
−
	How do we know which one is Cueball and which one is “guy”?		How do we know which one is Cueball and which one is “guy”?

Line 56:		Line 54:

	[[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.87\|173.245.55.87]] 13:45, 8 May 2014 (UTC)		[[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.87\|173.245.55.87]] 13:45, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	Ugh Randall. Your presumption that the woman is acting fully rational because people act rational, is countered by the fact that you believe the guy in front of you is not acting rational. Can't you just admit for once that all people act irrational. The guy complaining could very well be right about the particular girl he is talking about. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.114\|108.162.216.114]] 15:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:35, 11 December 2014
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	Ugh Randall. Your presumption that the woman is acting fully rational because people act rational, is countered by the fact that you believe the guy in front of you is not acting rational. Can't you just admit for once that all people act irrational. The guy complaining could very well be right about the particular girl he is talking about. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.114\|108.162.216.114]] 15:35, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
		+
	How do we know which one is Cueball and which one is “guy”?		How do we know which one is Cueball and which one is “guy”?

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:59, 27 May 2014
Line 4:		Line 4:

	:I was wondering the same thing. Is there some kind of assumption that Cueball is always the "smart" stick figure? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.65\|108.162.254.65]] 15:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)		:I was wondering the same thing. Is there some kind of assumption that Cueball is always the "smart" stick figure? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.65\|108.162.254.65]] 15:12, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	:Cueball has a bigger head. Please notice the difference. [[Special:Contributions/103.22.201.240\|103.22.201.240]] 14:59, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

	First of all we dont know that the first guy has been recently rejected, that is actually an assumption made by the second guy. Also, the "they choose jerks over nice guys" argument is wrong not because it lacks judgement and self awareness, it is wrong because it belittles the woman's judgement and self-awareness. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.105\|108.162.254.105]] 08:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)		First of all we dont know that the first guy has been recently rejected, that is actually an assumption made by the second guy. Also, the "they choose jerks over nice guys" argument is wrong not because it lacks judgement and self awareness, it is wrong because it belittles the woman's judgement and self-awareness. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.105\|108.162.254.105]] 08:44, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:45, 8 May 2014
Line 46:		Line 46:
	How do we know that the girl did not go with someone who is more jerk than the character who thinks to be a nice guy? {{unsigned ip\|141.101.70.103}}		How do we know that the girl did not go with someone who is more jerk than the character who thinks to be a nice guy? {{unsigned ip\|141.101.70.103}}
	:Doesn't matter. "Nice Guy" said "they", not "she", so he is generalizing. If he specified his last girlfriend, he might have case, but he did not, so he does not. Anonymous 19:37, 4 April 2014 (UTC)		:Doesn't matter. "Nice Guy" said "they", not "she", so he is generalizing. If he specified his last girlfriend, he might have case, but he did not, so he does not. Anonymous 19:37, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
		+
		+	I found the girl's response to be rude and belittling his judgement. She cut him off before he could finish. He could have said something like '''"what they really want are interesting, exciting guys"''' as if he was making a discovery on the matter. He could have said that girls used it as a casual expression.
		+
		+	Or he could have said that girls want the "bad boy", which could mean muscular, but not character-wise bad.
		+
		+	[[Special:Contributions/173.245.55.87\|173.245.55.87]] 13:45, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:37, 4 April 2014
Line 45:		Line 45:

	How do we know that the girl did not go with someone who is more jerk than the character who thinks to be a nice guy? {{unsigned ip\|141.101.70.103}}		How do we know that the girl did not go with someone who is more jerk than the character who thinks to be a nice guy? {{unsigned ip\|141.101.70.103}}
		+	:Doesn't matter. "Nice Guy" said "they", not "she", so he is generalizing. If he specified his last girlfriend, he might have case, but he did not, so he does not. Anonymous 19:37, 4 April 2014 (UTC)