Difference between revisions of "Talk:3232: Countdown Standard"
TheusafBOT (talk | contribs) (Created by theusafBOT: talk page for 3232) |
|||
| (14 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
<!-- Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom. --> | <!-- Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom. --> | ||
| + | Refer to all 4 Lethal Weapons movies for discussion. {{unsigned ip|45.138.52.240}} | ||
| + | :{{citation needed}} --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:45, 14 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Don't most people say "on three", "on one", or "on go" before starting the count anyway? And then delay the final (action) number a teensy bit? e.g. "On one. Ready? 3 2 <b>1</b>" This isn't that ambiguous, not that I would object to standardisation. [[User:Sameldacamel34|Sameldacamel34]] ([[User talk:Sameldacamel34|talk]]) 23:13, 13 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :It is appallingly common for me to hear the inconsistent and dissonant, "On the count of three…one, two, three, GO!" (This is problematic because it is "on the count of THREE" not "on the count of GO, the word after three". Or at least, that is what I understand those words to mean.) [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 02:09, 14 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | :Just "on three" is the most common, I think. You say "On three. Ready? One, two THREE." [[User:Dogman15|Dogman15]] ([[User talk:Dogman15|talk]]) 02:42, 14 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | And the Lord spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it. -- Monty Python and the Holy Grail [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 00:35, 14 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
| + | :[Arthur:] Right. One, two, five! | ||
| + | :[Galahad:] Three, sir. | ||
| + | :[Arthur:] Three! [*throws it*] | ||
| + | :...just to complicate matters. ;) [[Special:Contributions/81.179.199.253|81.179.199.253]] 00:54, 14 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
| + | ::Fantastic guys ;-) --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:44, 14 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Four... Two... One... One Half... One Quarter... One Eighth... One Sixteenth... One Thirty-second... One Sixty-Fourth... [go to infinity] GO! [[User:King Pando|King Pando]] ([[User talk:King Pando|talk]]) 03:47, 14 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Just to make things even weirder: the movie industry counts 5, 4, 3, 2, go! | ||
| + | [[Special:Contributions/76.133.66.138|76.133.66.138]] 03:59, 14 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
| + | :{{citation needed}} --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:44, 14 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
| + | |||
| + | I'm sure people all over the world will follow this standard just as faithfully as they follow ISO 8601. {{unsigned|2a00:1a28:1410:5::10db}} | ||
| + | :Here for reference: [[1179: ISO 8601]]. But there is at least one more with ISO reference: [[2322: ISO Paper Size Golden Spiral]]. So that is three comics referencing the ISO system directly (this one not in titel but in the text so no doubt that it would belong with the other two. But I'm not sure three is enough to create and ISO category? Could not on the spot find any others...? If someone can then we could make a category! --[[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 06:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 06:47, 14 April 2026
Refer to all 4 Lethal Weapons movies for discussion. 45.138.52.240 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
- [citation needed] --Kynde (talk) 06:45, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
Don't most people say "on three", "on one", or "on go" before starting the count anyway? And then delay the final (action) number a teensy bit? e.g. "On one. Ready? 3 2 1" This isn't that ambiguous, not that I would object to standardisation. Sameldacamel34 (talk) 23:13, 13 April 2026 (UTC)
- It is appallingly common for me to hear the inconsistent and dissonant, "On the count of three…one, two, three, GO!" (This is problematic because it is "on the count of THREE" not "on the count of GO, the word after three". Or at least, that is what I understand those words to mean.) JohnHawkinson (talk) 02:09, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
- Just "on three" is the most common, I think. You say "On three. Ready? One, two THREE." Dogman15 (talk) 02:42, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
And the Lord spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Pin. Then shalt thou count to three, no more, no less. Three shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be three. Four shalt thou not count, neither count thou two, excepting that thou then proceed to three. Five is right out. Once the number three, being the third number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it. -- Monty Python and the Holy Grail Jordan Brown (talk) 00:35, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
- [Arthur:] Right. One, two, five!
- [Galahad:] Three, sir.
- [Arthur:] Three! [*throws it*]
- ...just to complicate matters. ;) 81.179.199.253 00:54, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
Four... Two... One... One Half... One Quarter... One Eighth... One Sixteenth... One Thirty-second... One Sixty-Fourth... [go to infinity] GO! King Pando (talk) 03:47, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
Just to make things even weirder: the movie industry counts 5, 4, 3, 2, go! 76.133.66.138 03:59, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
- [citation needed] --Kynde (talk) 06:44, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
I'm sure people all over the world will follow this standard just as faithfully as they follow ISO 8601. -- 2a00:1a28:1410:5::10db (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)
- Here for reference: 1179: ISO 8601. But there is at least one more with ISO reference: 2322: ISO Paper Size Golden Spiral. So that is three comics referencing the ISO system directly (this one not in titel but in the text so no doubt that it would belong with the other two. But I'm not sure three is enough to create and ISO category? Could not on the spot find any others...? If someone can then we could make a category! --Kynde (talk) 06:43, 14 April 2026 (UTC)
