Latest revision |
Your text |
Line 48: |
Line 48: |
| | | |
| :I did a significant rewrite of the explanation and incorporated most of these alternative interpretations. :) [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 01:42, 9 January 2015 (UTC) | | :I did a significant rewrite of the explanation and incorporated most of these alternative interpretations. :) [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 01:42, 9 January 2015 (UTC) |
− |
| |
− | ;Revert on 1/9/15
| |
− | Hey, I just saw [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1470:_Kix&diff=82393&oldid=82376 this revert] and wanted to discuss it with the person who did that revert. I was the one who had put quite a bit of time into trying to improve the quality of the explanation yesterday. I believe that the new text I put in did not substantially change the overall meaning of the explanation or any of the individual items in that list. I also took care to account for additional ideas that made sense from this discussion page. By reverting all of that, you threw quite a bit of work away that I (and possibly a number of other people) felt was valuable. Please, before reverting it again, could you work with us on this? Thanks. [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 00:30, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
| |
− | :Looking at the edit log, it looks a lot like a straight up revert through multiple peoples' edits, which I really can't say I a fan of. Try to avoid doing stuff like that, it destroys good edits along with the ones you disagree with. '''[[User:Davidy22|<u>{{Color|#707|David}}<font color=#070 size=3>y</font></u><font color=#508 size=4>²²</font>]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 02:20, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
| |
− | ::Given the edit summary on the revert (that "someone" had "incorrectly" changed the definitions), I can't help but see it as terribly ironic, seeing as how the comic (and the explanation) is about how people can interpret things differently. [[User:KieferSkunk|KieferSkunk]] ([[User talk:KieferSkunk|talk]]) 09:34, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | Maybe last word "Fucker" is a cameo for SOAD and their song Chop Suey {{unsigned|Valdemar}}
| |
− |
| |
− |
| |
− | I think "Kid tested, mother infected" sounds like a thinly veiled AIDS joke. (edit: This is my first time editing xkcd, the other contributions aren't me)--[[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.71|108.162.216.71]] 22:33, 13 February 2015 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | My understanding of the "motherfucker" one was different. I thought it was used either as an expletive (because they were frustrated at being unable to come up with a reasonable proposal) or it was just a joke proposal (as brainstorming sessions always seem to descend into as people get bored). Anyone else agree? [[User:Baquea|Baquea]] ([[User talk:Baquea|talk]]) 11:08, 5 December 2016 (UTC)
| |
− |
| |
− | Shouldn't the "Mother Not Notified" and "Mother Watching Helplessly" make the "Kid Tested" assertion be reinterpreted using the same grammar? In "Mother Selected", the interpretation would be "Selected [by] mother" and "Tested [by] kid". But "Mother Not Notified" would be "Mother [was] Not Notified", which would lead "Kid Tested" to be parsed as "Kid [was] Tested". So of course the "Mother [was] watching helplesly" as tests were being run on her kid. {{unsigned ip|173.245.49.75}}
| |
− |
| |
− | As someone who had no idea what Kix was when I saw the cartoon, I thought until I came to this site that it was some 'egg donor' company that promised exceptional children as the outcome. Go figure (and yes, in that case the last entry makes total sense). [[Special:Contributions/172.68.2.52|172.68.2.52]] 00:13, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
| |