Did he forget to write a punchline?
[[Special:Contributions/172.70.131.58|172.70.131.58]] 05:31, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
OH NO!!!!
:I think this comic is just a comment, not a joke. [[User:Beanie|Beanie]] [[User talk:Beanie|talk]] 18:35, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Nah punchline is in the title text [[User:LentilLord|LentilLord]] ([[User talk:LentilLord|talk]]) 06:15, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Randall appears to express a "99th percentile fallacy", in which intelligent people (1%ers of a type) assume that all people will reason in the same way that they do, and will arrive at the same conclusions, if they will only try. The Wikipedia article on [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_hesitancy vaccine hesitancy] contains (rough estimate) some 12,500 words, most of which discuss factors associated with the origin (a long time ago), propagation, and persistence of anti-vaccination movements and other forms of vaccine hesitancy. Twelve thousand words is not congruent with "simple". A common thread may be: the embracing and aggressive assertion of vaccine hesitancy, irrespective of any factual accuracy, represents the assertion of power over the intellectual 1%, which is attractive. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Meter_Telescope Especially when it works.] [[Special:Contributions/172.70.210.45|172.70.210.45]] 07:09, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

: It's true that people have made the topic as lot more complex than it actually is, by coming up with many rationalisations and conspiracies to try to justify being anti-vax, and drawing unjustified conclusions from anecdotal correlations. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.55|172.71.160.55]] 12:59, 25 July 2023 (UTC) B

: One notable point is the herd immunity. Unlike lot of other vaccinated illnesses, there is no herd immunity from covid, because no matter how many vaccines you take and how many times you had covid, you can still spread it. Several politicians argued based on herd immunity even long after this became known. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 18:31, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::Noteable point and useful illustration of the whole topic... There is no vaccine that produces herd immunity YET. But you write as if there never could be...[[User:Tier666|Tier666]] ([[User talk:Tier666|talk]]) 07:29, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Herd immunity, as professed by those that mostly use that term in this context, is via ''not'' being immunised but "catching it normally, surviving (whilst passing it on to others, to hopefully repeat the process in everyone else) and forevermore not being bothered by it again". Of course, that requires surviving (not guaranteed, especially for some you'd be passing it on to) and gaining perpetual infection-induced-resistence (also not guaranteed, it turns out).
:::Immunising everyone, who ''can'' be immunised, drastically reduces the threat of individual fatality (rather than significant risk of dying from the virus, a non-zero but still magnitudes less risk from the injection) and yet actually throttles down the spreadability of the real thing to a similar degree (especially with pro-active variant-tuned boosters). Which is just basic immunity for most, acting as herd immunity who can't/won't be immunised if there aren't too many in the latter camp. But better just to be directly immunised where you don't have a very good reason to rely upon the protective status of everyone else around you. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.25|172.70.90.25]] 09:53, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::::I'm certainly not in the loop on every instance of someone using the term herd immunity, but it seems to me that it's always been used in the sense of protecting people who cannot safely become immune from infection by developing immunity among most other people, by ''either'' vaccination or by natural infection. Do you have any examples of herd immunity excluding immunization?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.120|162.158.62.120]] 20:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::Just take your mind back to the post-outbreak/pre-vaccine period of COVID, when there were those saying that "we don't need lockdowns", or testing, or restrictions of whatever degree of personal liberty they considered to be unduly infringed. Instead just let the virus do its thing (in a "bring it on!" way) and then we'll have herd immunity. Ok, so it was before the western world was clocking up deaths measured in ''way'' more than mere unfortunate handfuls. And when it was still generally imagined by even the experts that it was "catch it once, never again, and the coronavirus doesn't really mutate that quickly" scenario, but it ''was'' the main argument rolled out by the 'passive resistance to even reasonable authority' crowd, treating every suggested precaution as over-reach. Very loosely, as in overlapping in most ways but time, the proto-anti-vaxxers who just hadn't yet been presented a vaccine to actually be anti- to.
:::::As I said, the 'proper' use of the Herd Immunity term is relevent to mass-vaccinations to shut off as many potential infection vectors as possible. But in the context of those already tilted against vaccines it tends to have been the buzzword for using 'pox parties' and other casual disregard for the dangers of live-and-wild viruses which, by design, only increases the spreading potential. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.173|172.71.178.173]] 21:13, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::::::There was definitely a sense pre-vaccine that, once enough people caught it and developed natural immunity, then that would stop transmission and the pandemic would peter out. But that's still herd immunity. Your distinguishing of "proper" use of the term isn't correct, to my understanding. Herd immunity simply refers to enough of the population being immune so that there is a low chance of the non-immune being infected, regardless of how that immunity is developed. It's certainly less painful to get there through large scale vaccination than through natural infection, and the nature of a particular disease and its evolution versus the effectiveness of vaccination may affect the ability to get there, but the concept of herd immunity doesn't require vaccination. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.110.149|172.70.110.149]] 13:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

:::Never say never, but the chance is extremely low. The problem is that the immunity you get is due to antibodies in blood. Which helps if covid gets into blood, helps if it gets to lungs, but covid starts in nose and can spread from there just fine - and blood-based antibodies don't work there. There is separate immunity layer there on mucous membranes, but that one is very bad at remembering stuff long-term AND won't learn anything from injections ever. I've read about some attempts to make vaccines in form of some nasal spray, but it would need to be repeated at least every three months ... and seems those attempts failed. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 19:21, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I added a bunch of info, including a disclaimer to take this with a grain of salt. I normally don't comment on Randall's political comics, as I disagree with nearly all of them, but this one irritates me more than most and borders dangerously close to misinformation. Randall is a physicist. I don't know his familiarity with the virology world, but I would presume not much.
I'm a biologist by degree ''and'' career. Emphasis on microbiology. I'm not vaccinated for Covid-19. I ''never'' will be. I am vaccinated for everything else. I don't trust the vaccine for a number of reasons, not just because there are a statistically significant number of cases of severe harm and death. [[User:Darkwolf0218|Darkwolf0218]] ([[User talk:Darkwolf0218|talk]]) 07:52, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
: I'm glad that a vaccine dose wasn't wasted on you, and can go to someone else who deserves it. I also hope that you don't seek medical attention when you do contract the virus, because those resources can be used for better people as well.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.138|172.70.85.138]] 21:47, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:: What a horrible thing to say to someone. It's exactly this sort of thing that makes people resist changing their minds: why would you want to have anything in common with someone who would say such terrible things?
: Vaccines can have very harmful effects in some cases, but isn't it still safer than the increased risk of COVID-caused death or side effects? [[User:MelodyOfStorms|MelodyOfStorms]] ([[User talk:MelodyOfStorms|talk]]) 17:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
: I don't know it it is a named bias, but I have noticed that people working in a field often don't trust their own field, because they know "how it is done". For example, I work in the aeronautics industry, and many of my colleagues avoid flying, because they get to see everything that's done wrong and get first in line when something bad happens. But they don't realize that if you take a step back and look at the numbers, thanks to redundancy and safety margins, flying is actually quite safe. Other examples include internet security professionals who avoid online purchases.
:: No, the cybersecurity folks are objectively correct, it's very much a dismal science at the moment, as soft is full of holes and people are largely too gullible. Not to mention every modern PC has a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Management_Engine government-mandated backdoor]! The question is usually not how safe you are (you aren't), but how much you have to lose. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.251|172.71.94.251]] 11:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::: I'm not sure... IMO, the amount of direct, obvious hacking going around has plummeted. Main problem is all the ludicrous phishers and spam emails that pop up everywhere. Maybe it's just me, but saying that cybersecurity is essentially rotten at the core seems a bit sensationalized to me. [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 13:18, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::: EVERY PC? While getting rid of Intel ME is problem, the situation is much better regarding AMD. -- [[User:Hkmaly|Hkmaly]] ([[User talk:Hkmaly|talk]]) 18:31, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

: (Almost) nobody claims science "disproves" God, though. The problem is actually that he ''cannot'' be disproven, and [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot such] [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability things] are outside the domain of science. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.8|172.71.94.8]] 08:03, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:Likewise, it's never possible to prove that any given vaccine won't cause harm. I'm allergic to live vaccines. Just... all of them. Any live vaccine I take, I will react to. I've been told, time and again, that that's impossible, that science assures us these are safe, and yet, every time, I get symptoms of the disease. I've been a scientist, in the strictest definition of the word, for over 5 years now, and I've learned that there is nearly ''nothing'' in science that is concrete. Even the established basic laws of the universe are occasionally modified as we learn about things like quarks and antimatter. Dark matter still violates the known laws of physics, but the data suggest that it ''must'' exist. I'm also a Christian who believes that science does not disprove the existence of Creation but rather supports the idea of intelligent (or at least guided) design. We can't disprove the existence of God because it is nearly impossible to conclusively disprove '''anything''' with 100% certainty. Even things we think are true, such as the speed-of-light limitation (does light travel the same speed in both directions or does it move instantly one way and half speed back? We can never know for sure [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pTn6Ewhb27k]) are not conclusive.{{unsigned|Darkwolf0218|08:17, 25 July 2023}}
::Many COVID vaccines are of course not Live. Depends which country you're in whether that's your only (or dominant) option, perhaps. And my (mRNA) first shot gave me a delayed-by-a-few-hours reaction "as if they'd injected a virus in me", which was unpleasant but (clearly) I survived to get a second (booster of the same) and third (booster of a different kind), as suggested for my particular age-slot. Neither of those caused problems, if you'd accept this just as a self-selecting anecdote, and when I finally ''maybe'' got COVID (or just a flu-like thing that general isolation had held up, letting it hit harder once people were being much less virologically cautious again/overcompensating by licking each other constantly) it was something I suffered but survived, whereas it's hard to say that I would have beforehand.
::Science does ''not'' support a 'designer', it's an undefined/undefinable issue. Any Sufficiently Omnipotent God could have designed and created the world last Tuesday, with all your and my memories, experiences and beliefs in place, and it would be untestable for. Science indicates a singularity start to the universe-as-we-see-it, but finds no reason to believe a 'designer' sparked it off. They would have to be sufficiently cogniscent as to know that the particle/radiation mix would eventually coellesce into a planet upon which one particular belief system actually 'worked out' what they did (and many others made up their own, wrong, versions!). Which perhaps means that the Designer ran through the scenario in Their head before they lit the spark, which raises of the question of whether we're actually the pre-spark ''thought experiment'', being simulated to see what will work. And maybe the God Of Logic deciding upon this doesn't ''like'' beings who decide that They exist even though he left no proof, so He'll never actually create us but instead go for a more rational full on agnostic universe when They eventually do the real thing. Disprove that! (Science can't. Theology can't. Never mind, it doesn't matter to a Designer. Only to other people Designed or accidental byproducts of any other process.)
::There are always gaps in science, which more science tries to make narrower (or find new gaps, in the process). Religion tends to pretend there are no gaps, or papers over the gaps with temporary repairs. You can mix science and religion to your own tastes; or stick to just one and put aside the other as irrelevent - either way, but with totally different outcomes in how you deal with the world (and how the world deals with you). [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.210|141.101.98.210]] 09:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:: One could explain to a 5-year-old why people get symptoms from vaccines - some vaccines contain a weakened version of the virus (not Covid, FWIW), while others may cause an immune system reaction to generate anti-bodies, and the immune response is where many symptoms come from. It's concerning that you claim to be a biologist and you don't seem to know this (of course, you could also just be lying about that). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.55|172.71.160.55]] 12:59, 25 July 2023 (UTC) B
:Please keep in mind that a "statistically significant number" is not the same as an actually significant number. Yes, there are more complications than with giving a placebo. Statistically significantly (meaning: more than can reasonably dismissed as random chance) so. No, there are not that many severe complications, especially the mRNA vaccines are quite safe. They are both statistically and actually significantly safer than a CoViD 19 infection or even the general risk of an infection and they offer significant (again statistically and actually) protection from both infection and complications thereof. Lying with statistics is a thing and it mostly happens not because of bad numbers but because people don't know how to read them. [[User:627235|627235]] ([[User talk:627235|talk]]) 12:38, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:Darkwolf0218, I'm genuinely curious what your reasons are. I don't really take anyone's word for it when they say "statistics support me," so, is there a link you can share that you feel is unanswerable? And see how the pro-vax crowd tries to answer it? I really do feel like I'm caught on the fence in a lot of this; the pro-vax crowd APPEARS to have so much expertise, but they're such smug and condescending jerks about it - and they NEVER really seem to engage with what their opponents are ACTUALLY saying - that I feel I'm forced to go to "neutral" talk pages like this one to see what the best arguments "for" and "against" actually are. Many thanks if you ever end up replying! --MeZimm [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.79|172.68.34.79]] 18:25, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::As a general note: the reason that the pro-vax crowd are smug and condescending jerks is the same reason that I, among many others, am frequently unable to be polite to flat-earthers. What do you engage with when your opponent understands nothing and is obviously wrong? What else should you do, if someone advocates a cult of death for what you intuitively know is no good reason at all? There's nothing fair. It's like calling out people who uphold the historicity of the Holocaust for being mean to Holocaust deniers: Holocaust deniers understand almost nothing about the actual event and they discredit themselves the moment they make a cogent point, so there's no point in trying to uphold false notions of equivalence of respect. At any rate, we engage with their arguments and disprove them ad-nauseam. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 16:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::: Well, what is your intention? Is it to change minds? Is it to set the record straight? Is it to learn how they think? Or is it to trash-talk people that you don't like (with the inevitable consequence of making them despise you and everything you stand for, and dig in their heels further, and also incidentally come across as an irrational jerk to any undecided people who might be reading the discussion.)
:::Take the flat-earth analogy: if I were to talk to someone who seemed genuinely convinced that there was a flat earth, I wouldn't suggest they were worthless or that it would be better if they were dead (as was *actually done* to Darkwolf0218 in this very thread!) I would ask what they felt was their best argument, or what (if anything) would change their minds. Depending on how they answer, I can validate whatever legitimacy there may be to their perspectives, carefully explain why I think my beliefs are justified, identify the place where our understandings diverge, fill in gaps in their knowledge which might be useful to forming a more complete understanding of the subject, and (if nothing else) show to all the people reading why my perspective is the reasonable one based on good-faith understanding of the evidence available.
::: And, on the off-chance that I am shown to be wrong about something, I can accept correction gracefully.
::: You refer to "death cults" in your response. Do you know what causes people to stay in cults? It's the perception that everyone outside the cult seems like a hostile aggressor and that the cult is the only place where they will find acceptance. People LEAVE cults when they are compassionately shown that there are better ways to live. -MeZimm [[Special:Contributions/172.68.35.41|172.68.35.41]] 17:02, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::::I understand that responses can be biting and themselves dissuading. However, there's a fair amount of reasons that these comments get made so biting anyway, and maybe some of them will be illuminating.
::::
::::Plenty of people want to change minds. Some just want to trash-talk (and it's not as if this is entirely undeserved). It is also true that anti vaxers have hardly ever been historically accepting of new information or anything that doesn't fit what they've already made up about the topic, so people justifiably perceive changing minds as near-impossible (and my estimation is that even now flow from pro to anti is still higher than the converse). It also stands that anti-vaccination has hardly ever come up with any alternate responses to the COVID pandemic than just "keep doing what we were doing", which is proven to cause more death. With that standing, and with the fact that we recognize thinly-veiled anti-vax rhetoric when we see it like with Darkwolf0218, the comment at them about not using up resources is - if not justified - entirely understandable to me.
::::
::::"whatever legitimacy there may be to their perspectives" is usually taken out of context and warped (e.g. the thalidomide scandal, which happened 60 years ago and with the drug not being approved by the FDA anyway, is being used as a recent and currently-relevant example of pharmaceutical wrongdoing). Careful explanation has been tried, and yet they just dig in or bring up the same thing again. "filling in gaps in their knowledge" is hardly effective when all those gaps magically open at the same places. And reams of papers and other writing, as well as historical evidence, have found that pro-vax is the best method. Also, any being wrong about a claim tends to be simply ignored.
::::
::::Anti-vaxxers are hardly immune to the perception that you mention, because they (and other conspiracy theorists) are quick to name-call anything that doesn't fit their view as being shilled. Compassion has been tried, yes, but the most common response by loads is "shut up you shill" or some other new argument which has already been debunked. And when you've tried everything, and none of it works... you might be tempted to vent and call it quits for the moment. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 18:35, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

It's important to remember that we have all been exposed to aggressive and conflicting media and messaging. Randall's been exposed to media and messaging intended for mainstream intellectuals, whereas others have been exposed to "antivax" media and messaging. _Both_ of these are pushing a view while discrediting any counterinformation, and also contain true infornation. Combining them fairly is a noble and difficult goal. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.18|172.70.114.18]] 10:26, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:It's important to remember that the other side may not have nearly as aggressive or one-sided messaging as your side has. Those who oppose the scientific consensus are notoriously aggressive and tend to repeat the same things over and over again without bringing up or addressing counter-arguments, whereas many science communicators have responded to antivaxx claims. Both sides may be pushing back against what the other side is saying, but only one side is supported by like 99%+ of the people who've professionally studied the topic. Most of antivaxx is spread by celebrities and internet personalities with no scientific education. If you're inclined to try to understand everything each side is saying, go for it. But for laypeople, "trust the experts on their topic of expertise" is a fairly good rule of thumb. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.110|172.71.160.110]] 11:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
:: That has not been my experience. My experience is that (intelligent) dissenters from mainstream views point to specific facts that appear (at least on the surface) to challenge or even debunk the mainstream view, and have specific (and eminently reasonable) questions about those facts which they cannot find a "mainstream" answer for (without being yelled at and called names, or at the very least, being told "don't worry about it, the experts have done your thinking for you." The only people they can find actually talking about such questions are their fellow dissenters, and so it is among their fellow dissenters that they find a home. -MeZimm [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.116|172.68.34.116]] 17:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

The problem with how covid was handled is that it incentivizes pharmaceutical manufacturers, spy agencies, and major digital service providers to stimulate pandemics. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.114.64|172.70.114.64]] 10:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Unrelated to the curr. comic but does anyone find it odd that Randall doesn't make any comics about the Russian invasion of Ukraine? [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 11:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
: Not really? The only time XKCD really got political was when Trump was upon the land, usually he's not as topical. And while the current madness is also depressing, Randall is unlikely to be affected by it as much -- enviable, really! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.250|172.71.94.250]] 12:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:It's also fair to say that an armed conflict that affects a specific group is much harder to make anything approaching a joke--whereas the pandemic was something that affected nearly everyone and had the potential to highlight themes of hope and humanity even amidst the confusion and death [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 18:12, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Does anyone know where I can find a calm, measured discussion between intelligent, informed, and reasonable people who disagree on this topic? (And if you think "my side is the only side that has intelligent, informed, and reasonable people" - that kind of thinking is exactly what perpetuates the polarization problem, which makes it hard to find such discussions.) -MeZimm [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.108|172.68.34.108]] 15:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

:In general, the place to go is probably what are known as rationalist groups. The main locus is probably LessWrong, but there are also important nodes at AstralCodexTen on Substack, its now-static ancestor, SlateStarCodex, and several other descendant sites. They specialize in trying to think about and discuss even prickly subjects, as rationally as they can (which necessarily includes them factoring in some epistemic humility). Personally, I think they might be a bit over-committed to runaway-AI position (even they have some bias they can't get out of, and they happen to have a large proportion of Bay Area tech researchers), but on the upside, they're a worldwide bunch, so they at least avoid some biases you're probably seeing more frequently. Rationalists are typically fans of XKCD themselves, since they're all very science-focused. // Other sources for reasonable discussion of COVID, particularly the "mRNA vaccines aren't necessarily good for you" position, include Bret Weinstein's and Heather Heying's Dark Horse Podcast (they're both evolutionary biologists), and, believe it or not, Joe Rogan - cut away the stand-up and MMA, and he gets some honestly intellectually stimulating guests, such as Michael Osterholm and Robert Malone. // For the "mRNA vaccines are probably good for you" position, there's Derek Lowe's In The Pipeline blog. All of these discuss other topics in addition to COVID, so search around. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.39.178|172.70.39.178]] 16:30, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
::Joe Rogan lets conspiracy theorists on his show, and just nods along as they spout their conspiracies, often without a hint of pushback. If you're looking for an actual debate, where each side brings their best, you're not going to find it there. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.250.138|172.70.250.138]] 16:38, 27 July 2023 (UTC) B
:::I think there do exist conspiracy theorists that have appeared on Rogan's show, but I'm fairly sure Osterholm was not one of them. Nor was Malone (the fellow who invented the entire mRNA technique). Either way, I think it's hard to find debate on JRE, but not for that reason; rather, it's because Rogan's approach is to largely let whoever his guest is, talk. That's important, because while we can probably agree that if a conspiracy theorist gets on Rogan and speaks at length, the other direction doesn't work - someone speaking at length on Rogan doesn't mean they're a conspiracy theorist. // Additionally, there's another problem with using "CT!" as a counterargument. It tacitly implies that institutions are trustworthy, in order to show that the conspiracy is false, and the theorist cannot be trusted. However, there's evidence that institutions have incentive to lie. Presenting that evidence will sound like a conspiracy is being offered, when the party to trust is the opposite of what one would expect. The remedy there is non-trivial: you have to look at the actual claims made, not the claimants. And you have to look at *both* parties' claims; often, the claims made by the challenger might be on reputation, but so are those made by the institution. If we try to say the institution can be trusted more, we run into a circular argument. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.195|172.70.42.195]] 17:42, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
::::Conspiracy theorists are people who present a theory (in the colloquial sense, i.e. roughly a guess) of a conspiracy. It doesn't "tacitly imply institutions are trustworthy"; it implies that they don't have justification for whatever they're claiming about institutions. If you claim that Nazis were hiding advanced alien technology, calling that a conspiracy theory doesn't imply trust in Nazis, it just implies that you think that claim is rather detached from reality. And I don't know who Osterholm is; I was just making a general statement about how Rogan does stuff. Although Malone might be a conspiracy theorist, and saying he "invented the entire mRNA technique" is somewhere between misleading or false - he, along with his co-authors, just wrote 2 early papers, amongst hundreds of researchers who contributed to mRNA vaccine research. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.242.219|172.70.242.219]] 18:58, 27 July 2023 (UTC) B

:Randal obviously has knowledge and opinions on a lot of topics, and the comic often covers topics ranging from love to linguistics. If you see this as preaching, this might not be the comic for you. As for as that "fair and balanced" discussion you are looking for, have you considered that maybe this is one of those topics where intelligent, informed, reasonable people actually fall almost entirely on one side? With some questions, logic leads to the same conclusion for most people who make use of it. This is why you rarely find rational people engaging in debate over the truth of the moon landings, the sphericity of the earth, or the existence of anthropogenic climate change.[[Special:Contributions/172.68.174.184|172.68.174.184]] 19:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

:I see your point, and I don't have a detailed answer, but peer-reviewed studies are at least a good place to start to inform what talking points are defensible and which may be based in shakier assumptions. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 18:11, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:I'd add that this comic clearly isn't about vaccine-critical (as in 'weighing the pros and cons, finding a personal balance of probability whether they confer a net help or harm), but those who start by being anti-whatever and suck up every contrary opinion out there in order to shore up their presupposed position. They don't want to be moved. And possibly some pro-vaccine people also don't want to be, but my experience is that there's many more resonable people who can be swayed by nuances.
:No, not everyone can be given a vaccine (if you have a suppressed immune system, for whatever reason, then it also probably can't be 'taught', in the way a fully functioning one can be, but any risks associated with them are at least as potent and ultimately more of a factor) but that makes it more important that those around them are (it's not just those individuals that need the advantages). Or enforced isolation, which has psychological, physiological and/or financial side-effects that became very obvious during various Lockdowns (definitely necessary prior to the vaccines being developed and tested, thankfully became less needed after they were, but always a balancing act).
:But full on anti-vax thoughts tend to be just "against anything the 'experts' say", drawing upon the more extreme 'theories' that invoke everything from 5G conspiracies to Microsoft-manufactired nanoparticle trackers in a house of cards that they've desperately stapled together to stop any bit of it falling down. And that's not a (mentally, at least initially) healthy place to be - or to try to be in putting yourself in their shoes whilst looking for a compromise position. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.25|172.70.90.25]] 18:40, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:There has been plenty of calm, measured discussion between intelligent people (but one side of most debates will inevitably have underinformed or less-than-reasonable people). But these discussions have been had so many times, and people just keep repeating the same things over and over again, regardless of how many times it's been addressed (and in many cases claims have gotten less reality-based, like claiming that all governments and scientists worldwide are colluding to lie to the public - that isn't even considered a particularly extreme view in public discourse). People loudly taking a firm stance on the opposing side have contributed to public distrust of vaccines and science as a whole, which led to the deaths of millions of people so far (never mind the long-term damage that could result distrusting experts). People who contributed to the deaths of millions of people tend not to be treated too kindly. But if you'd like to be more informed on the topic and you ask questions in good faith, people will respond calmly and respectfully, more often than not (although there are also plenty of resources available to read up on the topic). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.247.98|172.70.247.98]] 19:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC) B
::If, as you say, there is "plenty of" such discussion, then I am begging you: give me a link to the calmest and most measured discussion you are aware of between a pro-vaxxer and an anti-vaxxer. Or at least, a discussion that's in your top twenty "calmest and most measured" of such discussions. Because I cannot find one to save my life. -MeZimm [[Special:Contributions/172.68.34.79|172.68.34.79]] 19:19, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Plenty of science communication channels and wikipedia.org cover this well. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 16:29, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::I don't know that I'd be able to find such a debate any time soon. It's been years since that debate was worth having. At this point, if you're looking for that, your best bet is probably to put together what each side has said in their separate corners. Calm and reasoned responses to anti-vaxx arguments is probably a lot easier to find than live debates - most science communicators I know of on YouTube discussed the topic, or you can just head to Wikipedia. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.87.152|162.158.87.152]] 02:40, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
:::That conversation can happen, but it is extremely painful to have. It is not a discussion that is easy to have in a calm and measured way simply because of the magnitude of the circumstances and the polarization. Nonetheless, some people are open to speak, especially if you listen. Also, a lot of people trust their experience, and this has opened them up to different ideas. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 05:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

:"intelligent, informed, and reasonable people" - this is a contradiction in terms - humans are primarily big bags of irrational emotions and biases, with a limited capacity for assimilating information. The best you can hope for is someone who is slightly less so than the rest. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.196|141.101.98.196]] 10:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

It's really disappointing to see the anti-vaxxers coming out of the woodwork for this comic, I'd assume that most xkcd fans would be more scientifically minded and logical. I definitely agree with Randall on this one, the data is so obvious and unambiguous about how effective the vaccines are, yet people love to pretend that the minor side effects are somehow worse than the illness they prevent, despite having absolutely no evidence other than perhaps some exaggerated anecdotes they heard from a Youtuber's cousin's friend's sister. I've had the vaccine, I've had Covid, the actual disease is far worse than the vaccine's minor side effects. More anecdata, but the science all agrees with it. Sigh. [[User:PotatoGod|PotatoGod]] ([[User talk:PotatoGod|talk]]) 18:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:I'd probably believe both the anti-vaxx threads started in the talk page are all flamebait from lame trolls. Think about it: who the heck reads xkcd, is able to actually write a iscussion thread, and then waste that discussion thread activating their conspiracy theory neurons and yelling out goddamn infuriatingly sensationalized words like "misinformation" and "propaganda".[[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 22:10, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::There are surprisingly many anti-vaxxers among the well educated. That includes doctors. I think there is something viscerally unsettling with injecting stuff into our bodies, especially something that not only doesn't treat an illness but makes us a little sick. And it is stuff that has not been tried on a large scale before, that we know will cause serious complications or even death to a some people (even if it saves much more). It is scary, and it can interfere with our abilities to think rationally. On a subconscious level, it is something we try to avoid, and we will find every reason. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.186.19|172.71.186.19]] 01:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::To quote Richard Feynman (no really), "Of course you laugh at this because it’s self-evident to the rational mind, but not to the emotional mind—the emotional mind can’t laugh at this." [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 02:01, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Yes, injecting stuff into our bodies is viscerally unsettling, and it makes your arm hurt a little and it might make you a little sick for a day or so. And this is all to fight against an invisible disease that spreads through the air and has killed millions of humans, that just randomly showed up one day, and may randomly kill us too, and there's only so much we can do to prevent that (like injecting the above thing, which reduces our risk massively). And all that can be scary, and that can interfere with our ability to think rationally. And on a subconscious level, it is something we try to avoid, and we will find every reason. And some of those reasons include thinking that maybe it hasn't been tested quite enough, or maybe there are frequently complications (and a whole lot of other reasons), but that doesn't mean those reasons are actually justified nor that they correspond to the truth. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.95.103|162.158.95.103]] 02:27, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B

:It's disappointing, but of course the comments on such a comic are going to be a self-selected group of people who felt the need to speak up. This is, admittedly, not a comic that most people need the explanation for. A vocal minority is no reflection on the bulk of Randall's readership. And for those who came to this page to express a dissenting view, we absolutely look forward to civil debate and well-cited caveats. As someone who has trawled the ancient depths of this wiki, the political comics always get a certain amount of "Randall has jumped the shark" (from a comic in 2010) or "this one isn't funny". It's just a normal part of any feedback system. [[User:Dextrous Fred|Dextrous Fred]] ([[User talk:Dextrous Fred|talk]]) 18:19, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

:'the science all agrees with it'. The science doesn't even agree with the previous science. It doesn't even agree with the current science. It is supposed to be a critical discipline. Meaning that ideas that have been rejected or branded as wrong can be explored nonetheless. There is no one science. You should know that all scientific progress comes from the fringes, and almost always is met with rejection and revilement. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 05:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
::Significant scientific progress may have come from the fringes, but this very, very rarely happens. Just think for a second what you're actually saying: that "all" progress is made by scrapping much of what we know and replacing it with entirely new things. No, most progress is made in small increments by building on existing knowledge, in line with the scientific consensus. And modern scientists are more open than ever to bring proven wrong (and many are even excited at the prospect, because that means new stuff to learn), as long as, and here's the crucial part, it's actually supported by evidence. Most "revilement" in the past came from the religious, who didn't want to accept that all that exists doesn't revolve around humanity (many still don't accept this). In any case, I'll accept you saying that roughly no-one agrees with you, but you thinking this somehow gives any credence to your position is you taking a massive leap of logic, possibly through a brink wall or ten (you're employing flat Earth "logic" there). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.54|172.71.160.54]] 13:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC) B

Surely this is an allegory to climate change with the tree being the indicator
:How? [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 02:01, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

People are trying to edit the page to be "more balanced" by spreading vaccine hesitancy. I don't really know where to draw the line between accurately representing their position and not giving them a platform to do harm. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.243.56|172.70.243.56]] 22:23, 25 July 2023 (UTC) B

This comic has gotten more comments in a day than most comics do in a year. Just thought I'd point that out. [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|Trogdor147]] ([[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|talk]]) 22:43, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:Actually maybe not more comments, just more words. [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|Trogdor147]] ([[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Miscellaneous#Help_with_Creating_a_User_Page|talk]]) 22:51, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:Probably because unlike the other vaccine/covid related XKCDs, this one seems to be missing a punchline and therefore reads as preachy.[[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.12|172.69.23.12]] 03:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

This one is probably the creepiest of all COVID comics. It starts with a variant of "I'm not a racist, but" and goes on to call the enormously complex bio-engineered vaccines "the easiest and simplest intervention". Oh no, dear reader, you don't need to understand the technical details. The Science works in mysterious ways. But in Its infinite love, It commands you to inject Its miraculous gift, not once, not twice, but as many times as The Science tells you. The Data says it's safe, therefore it's safe. This is what's easy, this is what's simple, and this is all you need to know, you infidel antivaxxer.
:The development of vaccines is "enormously complex", but this is primarily relevant to people with multiple degrees in microbiology. For the general public, it's as simple as "stick this in your arm to not get sick". Most people know nothing about food production, but trust things they buy in the supermarket. Most people know nothing about construction materials and processes, but trust that a building won't collapse in on itself. Heck, this even applies to medicine, where people are more than happy to let a doctor inject whatever while they're in the hospital. But when it comes to vaccines, everyone seems to think of themselves as an expert, when roughly every person who's studied the topic professionally is telling them they're mistaken. If you want to become an expert, or learn from experts, go for it, but if you're not an expert, you probably shouldn't think of yourself as one. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.210|198.41.242.210]] 09:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
::This is where the creepiness of the comic comes from: instead of appealing to logic and reason, it demands trust. But one does not earn trust with a long history of controversies, making their services mandatory, aggressive propaganda, censorship, or saccharine web-comics. If it weren't for the reputation of the vax crowd (governments, corporations, media and general laypeople combined), I'd probably consider doing it. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.154|172.71.182.154]] 11:14, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::We have spent massive amounts of time appealing to logic and reason to explain why antivaxx isn't justified (and how "a long history of controversies", "propaganda" and "censorship" are all greatly misleading, if not entirely false), but that hasn't worked for many. Humans aren't all that rational, especially on topics that carry emotional appeal (and the other side isn't immune to that, but there are more people on that side who try to actively counteract that weakness we all have through skepticism, and that side also has expert judgement on their side). And the comic never mentions trust. It only states that vaccines are effective. You can either trust scientists on that, or you can engage with the science to find out why that is - your choice. But also, trusting experts on their topic of expertise is fairly logical (while trusting people who know very little about the topic, or trusting your own intuitive feelings, is not all that reliable and therefore not all that logical). [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.118|198.41.242.118]] 13:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
::::Is the thalidomide scandal greatly misleading or entirely false? Many smaller pharmaceutical scandals. The "misinformation policies" of Youtube - can't argue with the WHO, can't doubt the US presidential elections.
::::Vaccines are effective - to some extent - and they all have side effects. It's obvious that the pharmaceutical companies that produce them are financially motivated to exaggerate the positive effects, downplay or hide the adverse ones, and sell as much doses as possible. Knowledge and power don't somehow make an entity truthful. On the contrary, with greater knowledge and greater power, its lies become harder to detect, sometimes even dangerous to expose. Society has a moral obligation to doubt and question, rather than blindly accept everything the authorities say, as Cueball recommends. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.59|172.70.46.59]] 15:32, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::The FDA refused to approve thalidomide, so there goes most of your argument (despite this, they also added even more regulations as a result of this). Also, why is the only example you offer from 60 years ago? If you know anything whatsoever about medical history, you should know that what happened that long ago might as well have been happening on a different planet for how different it is from modern medicine, given how much more we've learnt about medicine and safe and effective medical practices (which included learning from the mistakes of our past). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.95.44|162.158.95.44]] 18:06, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
::::::There used to be a nice long list of controversies on Wikipedia that I wanted to share, but it seems to be gone. Here's random page describing six scandals from 1986 to 2020, found by googling "Pfizer controversies": https://corporatewatch.org/pfizer-six-scandals-to-remember/ Feel free to substitute Pfizer with Johnson&Johnson and the like in the search bar. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.49|172.71.182.49]] 19:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::Of course pharmaceutical companies are financially motivated, and are often very, very greedy. If you've ever listened any amount to a pro-vaccine science communicator, you've probably have heard them complaining about that. But that doesn't mean the entire system of regulation and verification that's been built around that cannot be trusted. Ending up in prison for fabricating results would be rather contrary to their goal of making money. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.95.44|162.158.95.44]] 18:06, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
:::::Big Pharma is a big (heh) problem. Many people, on either side, are cognizant of it, but one should understand that Pharma is pragmatic - not always-evil OR always-good, but they're rather willing to do unethical things in the name of money. With that said, COVID-19 doesn't have much reason to be one of them. They made their billions, and COVID clearly isn't as much of a problem as it was two or three years ago. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 18:14, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::Trust is a spectrum! Note how the link above doesn't mention imprisonment, only fines, which suggests that Big Pharma is balancing on its own spectrum of conscientiousness, looking for the optimal point that maximizes profits minus fines. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.49|172.71.182.49]] 19:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

I thought the easiest and simplest intervention was to rely on the natural immune response to produce antibodies. Not sure if it's the most effective though, but it's proven to be effective enough for me personally, and it definitely has the best effectiveness to complexity ratio. Anyway, the decisive advantage of the method is not siding with the modern mass-surveilling thought-controlling Inquisition. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.49|172.71.182.49]] 08:00, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:Yeah, and quite a few people who considered their natural immune response to be effective enough are dead now. Anecdotes is not how you determine whether something works or not. [[Special:Contributions/198.41.242.210|198.41.242.210]] 09:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
:(@172.71...) Have you understood the point of [[2557: Immunity|this comic]]? Oh well, never mind. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.25|172.70.90.25]] 09:53, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::Imagine a company selling a pocket device that has been rigorously proven to reduce 1000 times the chance of being struck by a lightning. The company routinely electrocutes kittens in public to show what happens to those unprotected, and the company's fans are notorious for patronizing and lecturing those who haven't yet purchased the device. Would you buy it? As for myself, while generally trying to avoid death and suffering, I can afford the luxury to pay with a tiny fraction of my expected lifetime for other things I value. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.154|172.71.182.154]] 11:14, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::A few thousand people have gotten killed by lightning in the same time it took Covid to kill millions (and that's with a bunch of preventative measures against Covid). So that analogy is completely on the wrong scale. Absolutely no idea where you get "electrocutes kittens in public" from. Many people are dying all by themselves. We're the ones trying to STOP deaths. At best we sometimes point deaths out when people try to imply or assert that it's not serious. So are you intentionally dishonest, or just accidentally dishonest? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.110|172.71.160.110]] 11:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC) B
::::Low probabilities do matter at the national level as they accumulate into mortality statistics, but in daily life, people tend to classify things as either dangerous or safe-ish. On the global scale, cars kill (say) millions, and lightnings kill (say) thousands. Does this difference of three orders of magnitude matter that much? People drive their cars fearlessly and don't panic when they spot a storm cloud. On the other hand, we mortals are doomed to die, and no matter how hard we try, it's still impossible to STOP death. Considering the whole bulk of death causes combined, it seems you are influenced by so-called "zero-risk bias", i.e. focusing on minimizing one particular type of risk while disregarding the rest of them.
::::As for the public kitten electrocution (for the greater good of inducing electricity fear and stopping lightning deaths), it's a metaphor for behavior one might find repelling: semi-mandatory vaccinations, aggressive propaganda, social media censorship etc. And what's dishonest in taking a small risk to make a point? Why can't you respect my personal decision? Essential liberty, little temporary safety, Benjamin Franklin.
[[Special:Contributions/172.71.102.4|172.71.102.4]] 13:24, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::Counterpoint: anyone who wants to give up others' safety for a little of their own liberty also deserves neither (which I would argue is just as important as Franklin's sentiment), and the ideology of antivaxxers causes mass-death for essentially no reason. Why can't you respect the decision of the world around you to not be at risk of death because they're next to you? [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 16:15, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::::::Hmm, I guess essential is more valuable than little and temporary, be it safety or liberty. Then again, in reality, the vaxxers are safe with their unreasonably effective vaccine, and the antivaxxers are only responsible for their own well-being. No harm done! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.59|172.71.94.59]] 17:22, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::::I wouldn't be so sure about that, because there are people who intend to get the vaccine but cannot right now, and antivaxxers risk exposing them too. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 18:06, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::::::::Fine, some harm is done (in a probabilistic sense). In a world where car owners don't feel guilty for being probabilistic suicide killers, and most Covid-fearing people can get their shots, I find this threat level acceptable. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.176|172.70.46.176]] 04:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::To some extent, people who own automobiles aren't in much control over their transportation (though I'm fully in favor of scrapping automobiles for transport and replacing them with trains). You're in full control to sign up and get the COVID vaccine, but you've already outed yourself as a death cultist when you casually refer to the proven incitement of death by antivaxxers as acceptable, so I'd rather you just hole yourself up in your room and let a better person than you get the shot they need. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 16:31, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
::::::::"anyone who wants to give up others' safety for a little of their own liberty also deserves neither" - a misquote of Benjamin Franklin, who was objecting to a proposal by the Penn family (which was ruling Pennsylvania '''from britain''' at the time) to give the Pennsylvania General Assembly a lump-sum one-time payment in exchange for the Pennsylvania General Assembly agreeing it didn't have authority to tax the Penns.[https://www.npr.org/2015/03/02/390245038/ben-franklins-famous-liberty-safety-quote-lost-its-context-in-21st-century] It had nothing to do with the desire of antivax cultists to be fucking narcissistic plague rats.
:::::::::Pfft, better to be a free narcissistic plague rat than a caged narcissistic lab rat. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.176|172.70.46.176]] 04:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm actually wondering whether this comic is meant to say A) Antivaxxers made/make things complicated while it isn't. Or B) Whether or not you decided to take the vaccine was a very complicated decision for some ('the pandemic brought with it so much confusing stuff. Ambiguous data, weird tradeoffs, disagreements, dilemmas, and uncertainty'), so if you really try to 'meet people where they are' you should be open-minded to speak with people on both sides, people that took the vaccine and people that didn't. Although Cueball claims to be open-minded, he can't fathom the idea that although taking the vaccine felt like the most effective, easiest and simplest intervention to him, there might be people out there (maybe even the other two people in the comic, who don't say a word) that made another decision, because they felt that decision was better for them, not just 'to make it complicated'. This comic was sent in the chat of my group of friends and it seems there are different ways to interpret the comic. Either it's a very good comic or I'm overthinking it (I'm leaning towards explanation B). What do you think? [[User:K|K]] ([[User talk:K|talk]]) 14:00, 26 July 2023 (UTC) K

Was there some news event or something that prompted this? Seems so random at this point. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.175.13|162.158.175.13]] 19:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

'''Let's make it quite simple.''' Meeting antivax nutjobs 'where they are' is impossible for sane people, because there IS no logic to the insane antivax cultist position. "You can't logic someone out of a position they didn't logic themselves into."
:This is a matter of personal preference, not logic. You can't logic someone into liking apples, insults won't help you either. In fact, this kind of attitude might contribute a lot to the person's distaste for apples. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.76.74|141.101.76.74]] 06:09, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
::Do you think people LIKE getting jabbed with a needle? You're not supposed to LIKE getting vaccinated, you're supposed to do to avoid the risk of not doing it. And being "logic'ed" into doing something to avoid some risk is one of the basic things that we use logic for. If that wouldn't work on you, then I can only presume you don't care about logic at all, and you make all your decisions purely based on emotional appeal, which would be concerning, to say the least. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.35|172.71.160.35]] 15:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC) B
:Indeed, however, you are arguing with a boogeyman in your head, in reality, the whole conversation has been flanderized to oblivion, where someone is either 'one of us' or 'one of them'. Being hesitant of a new biotechnological advancement is not being a nutjob, it's being cautious, and people who know the history of science, kind of have good reason to be cautious about the newest panacea. Remember people eating radioactive candy because it was 'reinvigorating'? How about people using lead in gasoline? How long did it take us to prove that lead in gasoline was bad? How long did thalidomide take? How long did asbestos take? Did the Romans ever figure out that their plumbing was making them stupid and die? Technology is not always good. And it definitely is '''no good''' without being aware that there are always unintended effects to progress. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 02:12, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
::People who know the history of science, know that we've learnt from every mistake that's been made in the past, we've learnt so much about safe and effective medical practices, and we've learnt so much more about reality itself, and they know that science is the most reliable method to gain knowledge about reality. People who know nothing about the history of science, or those who are engaging in the most egregious of cherry-picking, would imply something like "the Romans were not very bright, therefore we can't trust any science", as you just did. Once you move past the "science = bad" silliness and you begin to understand how we conclude that medicine is safe and effective, your entire argument falls apart. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.54|172.71.160.54]] 13:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC) B
:::People who know history know that the only thing we can learn from history is that we don't learn from history. Also, I didn't imply what you understood, I merely gave you one of many examples where society-wide technological advancements had a hidden cost that was only understood many years later. Science is not bat at all, it is a method, and that method must be open to criticism, even criticism no one wants to hear. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 17:20, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

If you dislike apples because someone else told you to like apples, then you’re a contrarian idiot. If you had an apple and didn’t like it then you’re disliking apples for a logical reason. Similarly, if you refuse to get a vaccine because someone else told you to get a vaccine then you’re Ali a contrarian idiot. The vaccine equivalent to “having the Apple” to determine that you don’t like it would be actually running tests of your own to determine efficacy and safety of the vaccine. Since you can’t run a large scale vaccine test at home your only option is to rely on the information provided by the experts. Don’t trust the experts? Then why do you trust the fake internet experts?
:I disagree with your association of contrarianism with idiocy. Moderate contrarianism is a valuable personality trait that prevents communities from degenerating into monolithic oppressive echo chambers, and opposing an irritatingly widespread idea is not the same as doing things to spite some random guy. As for anti-vaccination, it's more of a lifestyle preference than a product preference. Am I in grave danger if I take the vaccine? Probably not. Am I in grave danger if I refuse it? Probably not. Rationally, I even agree that vaccination is most likely the healthier option, but the difference doesn't seem significant enough. So I ''prefer'' to indulge in contrarianism. It is against my personal ''preferences'' to be manipulated by powerful organizations and their numerous supporters into obediently taking some experimental substance, repeatedly, at regular intervals. But again, it's not a fear of adverse side effects, it's an aversion to anything force-fed, not distrust in the sense of "I don't trust the quality of your product", but in the sense of "I don't trust you to tell me what to do". And of course, I don't trust the "fake internet experts" either, I don't even read them on purpose. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.46.177|172.70.46.177]] 09:31, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
::While contrarianism IS valuable, it's not a reason to do things. If (as you say) getting and not getting the vaccine are equal situations for you medically, but getting it is socially encouraged, then the only reason you have to NOT get it is to be contrarian, as you say. It's contrarian, but it brings no benefit to you. Being contrarian AGAINST logic is the issue. If the vaccine was more medically dubious than beneficial but still had the social gain, then yeah, contrarianism has benefits because there are costs to weigh. But if being contrarian only provides downsides, it's illogical and you're just making something simple complicated. --[[User:Magicalus|Magicalus]] ([[User talk:Magicalus|talk]]) 12:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
:::It's illogical only in the assumption that:
:::1) Human beings are model rational agents maximizing a precisely defined real-valued utility function
:::2) Maintaining health is the ultimate goal and meaning of life
:::3) There are no unknown unknowns
:::If one feels being manipulated and the health risk is not too high, one can choose the seemingly less healthy option. It might even turn out to be more healthy because of some unknown unknowns not taken into account in the rational assessment of the vaccine's utility. Might not. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.250|172.71.94.250]] 16:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
::::So the logic is "There could be an unknown downside, so it's better not to risk it." If we're just going to claim unknowns, we can't assume all unknowns are negative. Who knows, maybe it turns out 0.01% of the people who get the vaccine get superpowers. That line of thinking is just an endless pit because there are infinite arguments on both sides. So out of the remaining arguments, let's talk about the second one. The idea isn't that maintaining health is the ultimate goal, it's that maintaining health is a positive thing to do and the vaccine in this regard is, for the sake of argument, neutral. The first argument doesn't make sense. You're eitehr implying that humans act illogically anyways, so it IS an illogical action, or that "social credit" is determined by illogical humans who don't always make the right choices. So this is illogical if humans make logical decisions, health is a beneficial trait, and the vaccine doesn't give people superpowers and doesn't turn them into rats. Being contrarian here only serves as a detriment unless what is essentially random chance works in your favor and not against. --[[User:Magicalus|Magicalus]] ([[User talk:Magicalus|talk]]) 01:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
::Skepticism is a valuable personality trait (that prevents communities from degenerating into monolithic oppressive echo chambers). Contrarianism, on the other hand, may sometimes have the same effect, while at other times could lead to people literally dying, just for the sake you being able to disagree with something. Being contrarian seems, at most, like a useful thought exercise to get a different perspective (which is essentially a part of skepticism in any case). Letting contrarianism be a driving factor in significant life decisions seems like a terrible idea. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.35|172.71.160.35]] 15:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC) B
:::Can't skepticism lead to people literally dying, just for the sake you being able to doubt something? Can't conformism lead to people literally dying? Any -ism, taken to the absolute, is a terrible idea in significant life decisions. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.94.250|172.71.94.250]] 16:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

It seems to me like the very term "anti-vaxxer" has become a misleading slur applied to anyone who opposes certain policies, regardless of reason. I think vaccines are great; I got my (multiple) COVID shots, flu shot every year, etc.. But apparently I'm an "anti-vaxxer" because I oppose vaccine MANDATES. I would rather respect other people's personally autonomy, letting them make their choice about their body, rather than force people to undergo medical procedures against their will, even if I think their reasons are stupid. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.135.105|172.70.135.105]] 17:06, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
:Think carefully. Some people want the vaccine, but can't get it for now or have other facts preventing them, and antivaxxers will expose these yet-un-immunized folks to COVID, which is a gross violation of the personal liberty of '''not having COVID-19.''' If you actually did take all those shots and aren't lying in order to make yourself seem better, then you'd know that.
:Everyone likes personal autonomy, but nobody considers the fact that a person's personal autonomy is invalid when it endangers others... and that's exactly what anti-vaxxers do. They're not just affecting themselves, they're hurting others - as we've seen in places where nobody vaccinates against polio and it makes a sharp uptick. In that light, a vaccine mandate is the best available option. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 13:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
::After thinking carefully, I've come to the conclusion that you just want to A) call me a liar with no evidence or reason, and B) redefine personal liberty to mean the exact opposite. It's not going to be productive for me to try to have any kind of rational discussion with you. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.135.134|172.70.135.134]] 01:48, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
:::Can you clarify? The person you are responding to is simply saying that you shouldn't use personal autonomy as an excuse when you are actively harming other people. Main problem though, is the person's equivalence of your rather balanced opinion with the opinions of the radical anti-vaxxers that spit out nonsense about 5G contamination and microchip scandals. [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 02:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

This comic reads like it's almost self aware. "Things are never that simple" "That never happens". Indeed Randall. And this is no exception. For all the good any treatment may or may not do, it is ethically imperative to always acquire informed consent from the subjects. Informed consent was not acquired because the risks were not fully understood at the time. Most people were not made aware of this fact, and were misled into thinking that this was a tried and tested treatment. Long term side effects cannot be found at "warp speed" they are by definition, long term. Science is meant to be critical, and there is no way we can be critical of a treatment that we gave to up to 60% of the population in two years. Remember to take care of your biases. If you gave your product to more than 60% of the world population, would you want to find out that it wasn't great? Would you want to find out it might have not been a good idea? No. Conflict of interest. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 01:56, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
:While the world isn't simple all of the time, it also stands that some situations are less complex than others - and this one was particularly simple.

:You say "may or may not do" as if you live in 2020 and this is still some sort of hypothetical. '''This is not hypothetical: during the first year, the vaccines already saved 20 million lives.''' Immunizing people to COVID '''works.'''

:Your next statement is about informed consent, and the first thing you cast doubt on is the idea that the vaccines were tried and tested, but.. .they were. There were 110 possible candidates in clinical development at one point - what do you think they did to narrow it down to a few? Eeny miney moe? Rock paper scissors? There was no misleading because it's just true that the final candidates were tried and tested, and we did it faster because of (among other things) much higher funding, usage of mRNA tech built by people such as Katalin Kariko and Drew Weissmann, as well as overlapping trial phases and an appreciable head-start given that we'd done a lot of work on vaccination of coronaviruses already (since 2002 in fact).

:"Long term side effects" in the field of vaccines are really rare. Even severe side effects at '''any''' length of time are rare for any vaccinations, but they show up within the first few weeks a great majority of the time - this is expected, because vaccines are only taken at one moment, and the body will eliminate the payload in a matter of months. Therefore, panicking about long term side effects is irrelevant here - COVID-19 has '''far more likelihood to affect you long-term anyway.'''

:There is a way we can be critical of a treatment given to a vast amount of people: '''look at what it did.''' And what it did was reduce disease, hospitalization and death incident multiple-fold!

:"If you gave your product to more than 60% of the world population, would you want to find out that it wasn't great?" There is no need to answer hypotheticals that didn't happen when I can simply say that if my product was given to 60% of the world population, reduced disease 8-fold, hospitalization 25-fold and death 25-fold, I'd be '''ecstatic that I was a great contributor to the solution of the pandemic and made a few billions on the side!''' Because that's what happened. [[User:Andrewtheexplainer|Andrewtheexplainer]] ([[User talk:Andrewtheexplainer|talk]]) 13:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

:So how many million more deaths would've been acceptable in your opinion, in order for us to meet whatever criteria for medical treatment, across however many decades or centuries, that exists in your head? Also, for how many years have you been a virologist (or a biologist, or some other scientist that researches medical treatments)? I'm guess ZERO, because almost all scientists agree that the vaccine went through sufficient testing, on par with other new treatments, and it's mostly laypeople who know nothing about medical testing that are complaining about the medical testing. Also, we haven't seen any of these long-term side effects you speak of, so is your position that people weren't warned about ... nothing? Thinking that people were "misled" can only really be described as a delusion. The testing it went through is fairly well-publicised, for anyone who cares to look it up (even before anti-vaxxers started anti-vaxxing about it). [[Special:Contributions/172.71.160.54|172.71.160.54]] 13:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC) B

:: Here is some real science that casts doubt on how good an idea this whole program was. I will cite one of a lot of articles 'Compelling evidence has been published to indicate that the spike protein, which is derived from SARS-CoV-2 and generated from the vaccines currently being employed, is not only able to cross the blood–brain barrier but may cause inflammation and/or blood clots in the brain. Consequently, '''should vaccine-induced expression of spike proteins not be limited to the site of injection and draining lymph nodes there is the potential of long-term implications following inoculation that may be identical to that of patients exhibiting neurological complications after being infected with SARS-CoV-2'''.' [https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8780773/ spike is not the best idea]. Here is another one that compounds nicely to that hypothesis in bold, there is evidence that vaccine induced spike does not stay at the injection site, I cite: 'We found that vaccine-associated synthetic mRNA persists in systemic circulation for at least 2 weeks.' [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35884842/ mrna circulates in blood after shot]. Look, you can laugh at me and that's ok. Here's some more science for yall's enjoyment. [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35028901/ Could SARS-CoV-2 Spike Protein Be Responsible for Long-COVID Syndrome?], [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34328172/ SARS-CoV-2 spike protein S1 induces fibrin(ogen) resistant to fibrinolysis: implications for microclot formation in COVID-19], [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35523737/ Sars-Cov-2 Spike Protein-Induced Damage of hiPSC-Derived Cardiomyocytes]. Now, my point is this: '''there is good reason to doubt the covid vaccine, and a measured conversation recognizes the risks, instead of downplaying them, or straight up denying their existence. It also does not involve insulting the nonbelievers. That is the most sad and ironic part of all this.''' Science does not trust, it verifies. Cheers fellow science enthusiasts. I look forward to you all citing scientific papers supporting the hypothesis that covid vaccines are safe and effective. [[User:Scienceizkool|Scienceizkool]] ([[User talk:Scienceizkool|talk]]) 17:10, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

::: I'm not too inclined to dig through a bunch of studies (and also other studies, and responses, and breakdowns, and such) to see what's up. But also, it's kind of a "boy who cried wolf" situation. Anti-vax has made so many patently absurd claims, misrepresentations and blatant lies, that I'm not too inclined to put much weight into any further claims, nor evaluate them in much detail. And no, that's not an ad hominem fallacy: I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong, I'm just saying I don't have a good reason to think you may be right, and I have better things to spend my time on. I'm happy enough to let scientists investigate those claims, and update their consensus and public statements, along with medical treatments, appropriately (because, even if granting you that it's the worst possible case, which it most likely isn't and doesn't seem to be, none of what you cited demonstrates that vaccines were the wrong decision, given what we knew at the time, nor that anti-vax was justified - the essence of science is to learn new things, and update our beliefs appropriately, not to believe unjustified things because we may one day learn new information which justifies it). Also, the claim was never that vaccines carry ZERO risk, which seems to be all that all your links can "debunk", from a cursory glance. All medicine carries some risk, the question is whether the risk of the vaccine is worse than the risk of the disease, which I don't see addressed there, and which still seems highly doubtful, given how many confirmed '''deaths''' we have from Covid. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.246.136|172.71.246.136]] 19:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC) B

User talk:Jeff

2023-07-26T00:48:56Z

84596Gamma: /* Vandalism */

{{notice|This is the talk page of Jeff, the creator of Explain XKCD. If you have a comment about the wiki, please use the [[Explain XKCD:Community portal]]. Use this page only for personal messages to Jeff, of for requests that require server access.}} 

== Print Book? ==

Hi Jeff,

Has it ever been suggested that parts of ExplainXKCD -- say, the first ten years of comments -- could be made into a print book, obviously only with the permission of Randall Munroe? -- margavriel
: It has not been suggested - I'm not even sure how to go about and do such a thing. I wouldn't even know how to communicate to Randall. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 00:23, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

== ParserFunctions ==

Hi Jeff,

Just thought I'd run this up the flagpole... any thought about installing the ParserFunctions extension? I think this site could benefit from a few templates that would aid in indexing/categorizing the entries as content is migrated, and ParserFunctions would make some really impressive things possible... but installing any extension or not would be up to you.

Also, do you have any feelings about us users creating templates in the Template namespace, which we could use to maintain the content? Just wanted to get your thumbs-up before/if I did something like that. Just want to play nice. Love the site, and the new wiki format.

- PT [[User:IronyChef|IronyChef]] ([[User talk:IronyChef|talk]]) 03:05, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
:ParserFunctions are awesome, yup! --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 06:56, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
::{{done}} Yes to both. I have enabled ParserFunctions and Templates sound like a great idea. IronyChef, please send me an email at the address on the blog and I'll make you an admin if necessary to edit templates. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 08:03, 1 August 2012 (EDT)

== Extension:Variable ==
Just wondering what you thought about adding the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Variables Variables extension]. I'm toying with revising {{tl|LATESTCOMIC}} to not be so expensive (both in terms of template expansion, and ongoing maintenance.) I could do that now, but the wiki would have to re-expand and re-evaluate the same expression about six times, being slightly counter-productive. -- [[User:IronyChef|IronyChef]] ([[User talk:IronyChef|talk]]) 14:54, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
:: any thoughts ... up, down, sideways? Thanks! -- [[User:IronyChef|IronyChef]] ([[User talk:IronyChef|talk]]) 15:34, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
::: I'm up for it... Let me get it installed on the wiki side when I get a chance. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 23:13, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

== Bugging you again.... ==

Could you take a look at [//www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?limit=10000&tagfilter=&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=Philosopher&namespace=8&year=&month=-1] and tell me if I'm thinking in about the same way as you are here? Also, I've brought up [[MediaWiki:Tagline]] and [[Explain XKCD:Community portal]], as it'd be cool to have a tagline. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 10:46, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
:With you 100% on the File Delete reasons. Thanks. I agree also about having a tagline. What do you think it should be? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 11:13, 1 August 2012 (EDT)
::Nothing's coming to mind right now. Perhaps someone else will think of something. --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 17:54, 2 August 2012 (EDT)
Discussion continued at [[Explain XKCD:Community portal/Proposals#Tagline]].

== Automatic Import ==
Moved to [[Explain XKCD:Community portal/Proposals#Automatic Import]]. (Header left to avoid breaking links.) --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 00:30, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

== Please watch [[Explain XKCD:Community portal/Administrators' noticeboard]] ==

I'd like to ask that the admins consider adding [[Explain XKCD:Community portal/Administrators' noticeboard]] to their [[wikipedia:Help:Watching pages|watchlists]]. On a similar note, I've just started a discussion there about spammers. -''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 02:02, 4 August 2012 (EDT)

== Images from Wikimedia Commons and SVG ==
Please set <code>$wgUseInstantCommons = true;</code> in the wiki's LocalSettings.php, so we can use images from Wikimedia Commons without having to reupload them here.
Also, I'd be neat if you could [[mw:Manual:Image Administration#SVG|enable svg images]]. Thanks! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 04:20, 4 August 2012 (EDT)
: {{done}}, Instant Commons is on. Will need a little more work to get SVG images to work. What renderer to do you suggest I use? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 12:05, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
:: That'll depend on what you have available in your server. They say there that ImageMagick seems to be an acceptable choice, but rsvg seems to be the best one if the dependencies can be sorted out. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 13:20, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

== Search suggestions ==

Hi,

could you please set $wgEnableMWSuggest [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:$wgEnableMWSuggest] to true? This enables search suggestions for the search field, and often this helps you to skip the search results. --[[User:SlashMe|SlashMe]] ([[User talk:SlashMe|talk]]) 09:10, 4 August 2012 (EDT)
:{{done}} OK, this is has been added to the LocalSettings. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 12:06, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

== Time zone ==

Please set the wiki to UTC (<tt>$wgLocaltimezone = "UTC";</tt> in LocalSettings.php), as it's the most neutral option for our international community. In any case, each user can choose their time zone in their preferences.
:{{done}} Ok, set. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 12:07, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

== Short urls, site logo, lowercase xkcd ==

Hi,
I'm not sure if you tried it but http://shorturls.redwerks.org is a great (and simple :D) tool to implement clean urls with mediawiki. That would make urls much nicer around here.

Also, if you could, please take a look at [[Explain XKCD:Community portal/Proposals#Naming conventions]], where your assistance is needed for some server changes. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 15:31, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

:Hi again :) just to remind you about the short urls thing. I think it would be great if we could have wiki links in the form "explainxkcd.com/wiki/link_title". It might be necessary to move the wiki into a different folder name than "wiki", but that's just a matter of renaming the folder and changing <code>$wgScriptPath</code> in LocalSettings.php accordingly. The link above makes things really straighforward, it should really only take you a few minutes to set everything up.
:Another cool thing that could be done is set up a server redirect so that links in the form of explainxkcd.com/number would point to the comics in the wiki instead of returning a 404 error (for instance, http://explainxkcd.com/123 would point to http://explainxkcd.com/wiki/123). That way, we could replicate xkcd's own url system for comics and people could simply type explainxkcd.com/123 and get the explanation for the corresponding comic. This redirect can probably be set up in the hosting company's web interface, but in case it can't, let me know if you need any help. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 22:03, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
::Hi Waldir - I'll work on the short URL thing. I want that to work for sure. With regards to the redirect, I have been working on it for a while and I have a few .htaccess files and etc that don't work. I'll be grateful for the help on it. Please send me an email if you know how to get it done. This would also allow anyone from xkcd.com/435 to just add explain and go to the comic explanation. Very helpful. Been working on it unsuccessfully for a while. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 01:41, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
:::Ugh, it must be my hosting because I did all of the shorturls correctly it just sent it to a 404 page for the site over and over again. The url seemed to be the right one, but didn't send it to the right location. It should NOT be this difficult. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 02:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

== wgCapitalLinks ==

Hi Jeff! When you have a few spare minutes, please add the following to LocalSettings.php:
$wgCapitalLinks = false;
This allows page titles not to be automatically capitalized by the software, which is important for filenames and for some comic titles such as [[s/keyboard/leopard/]]. Cheers, [[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 21:34, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
:{{done}} --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 01:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
::...and this broke our templates (and maybe [[Special:RecentChanges]]?). See [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Admin requests]]. Can't we just style the page titles so they appear as though they aren't capitalized when they really are? (As done at [[wikipedia:Xkcd]], using the DISPLAYTITLE magic word (called through [[wikipedia:Template:DISPLAYTITLE]]).) --''[[User:Philosopher|Philosopher]]'' [[User talk:Philosopher|Let us reason together.]] 04:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
:::Looks like transition pains would be inevitable. I think everything is sorted out for now. See the Admin requests thread for details. As for using DISPLAYTITLE, I understand the rationale, but this is xkcd and attention to capitalization is necessary in several pages, and I believe we'd rather use a complete solution (so that pages actually have the correct title) rather than hacking what is shown to viewers. In any case, we shouldn't have many problems in the future because of this; People will only capitalize the first letter of a title when it's actually necessary; otherwise, lazyness/convenience makes us all use lowercase everywhere (besides, redirects can be used just in case, such as {{tl|yesno}} → {{tl|YesNo}}. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 09:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

== External Images ==

Has there actually been a decision on external images? Or is it just to be decided later?  [[User:Grep|grep]][[User_talk:Grep|talk]] 
: No decision yet. What do you think? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 21:16, 28 August 2012 (UTC)
::Well, the whitelisting seems an OK idea. This would help you save space on the servers that you are hosting on, so that's a plus. I say go for whitelisting.  [[User:Grep|grep]][[User_talk:Grep|talk]]  Mostly I am wondering because I created a PHP script that creates an image to display the results of a poll (like on the Moving the Wiki topic in Proposals). For my situation any method of something external being placed on this site will work.
::'''I just''' got an idea... what if there was a group of moderators that check external images and approve them. The more approvals a person gets, the more "reliable" they are considered to be... ?  [[User:Grep|grep]][[User_talk:Grep|talk]] 

== Short Link Problem Fix? ==

Is <code>mod_rewrite</code> installed and enabled? 
[https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Short_URL/Apache MW ShortURL] 
Are all of the config files (including the wiki one) set up?

 [[User:Grep|grep]][[User_talk:Grep|talk]] 

== New admin please? ==

This is a bit forthright of me, but nothing appears to be being done about it. Would you read this [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Proposals#Spampage Rampage]] and comment on it? Thanks, [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]] and the community 17:47, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

== Small change ==

Hi Jeff! Long time no see. Look, could you add
:<code>$wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['autopatrol'] = true;</code>
to LocalSettings.php? That will allow edits by [[mw:auto-confirmed|auto-confirmed]] users not to be marked with a red exclamation mark in recent changes so we can more quickly spot edits that might need reviewing. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 02:16, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

:Btw while you're at it, please also add
::<code>$wgAllowUserJs = true;</code>
::<code>$wgAllowUserCss = true;</code>
:So users can make their own scripts and styles to enhance the wiki (I need that, for instance, to test stuff without affecting anyone else, before integrating them on site-wide javascript/css pages) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 16:52, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

{{done}} and {{done}} --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 19:55, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

:Thanks! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 19:57, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

:: Sorry, I forgot a small detail: it is necessary to set up the following so that "auto-confirmed" doesn't mean "any registered user":
:: <code>$wgAutoConfirmAge = 60*60*24*3 // accounts become auto-confirmed after 3 days</code>
:: <code>$wgAutoConfirmCount = 10 // ...and 10 edits</code>
:: Cheers, [[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 21:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

::: {{done}} --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 21:49, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

:::: Thanks, again. Also, since the wiki didn't break, I take it that you noticed the missing semicolons which I stupidly forgot to include at the end of the lines, and added them. Sorry for the slip-up. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 17:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
::::: No worries, I know that much at least! :) --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 17:36, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Did you by any chance write "auto patrol" instead of "autopatrol"? [[Special:ListGroupRights]] suggests so, and if that's the case, that explains why the changes don't seem to have had the effects I expected from them (edits by auto-patrolled users still marked with the red exclamation mark in Special:RecentChanges). Could you check that the line reads exactly <code>$wgGroupPermissions['autoconfirmed']['autopatrol'] = true;</code>? --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 17:54, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
: That's what I thought I put even though autocorrect wanted to change it. Can't look now, will have a look when I get home. ---[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 17:55, 26 November 2012 (UTC)
:: Any news? No pressure, I'm just curious :) --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 15:34, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
::: Bah - I keep forgetting when I get home. I'll try to get it done this weekend. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 17:35, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
:::: Much delayed, but {{done}} --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 02:50, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
::::: Thanks, Jeff. I'll let you know if there's any further issues, but I believe everything should be working now. --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 03:34, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

== Links to category pages ==

I couldn't help but notice the number of your edits to your page. You can link to category pages by putting a colon in front of "Category". <code><nowiki>[[:Category:Pages to delete]]</nowiki></code> produces [[:Category:Pages to delete]]. It also doesn't add the category to that page, it just links to it. Cheers, [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 17:30, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
: Oh geez. You saw that? That's a little embarrassing with not knowing what to do, I kept trying to figure out how to put the link there. Thanks for the help! I couldn't find that information anywhere. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 17:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

::When I had to learn about that trick the edits on that page looked fairly similar. I eventually found the right page [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Links] (ctrl+f "category", it's buried) and managed it. I have the Recent Changes page set to auto-refresh every minute. I see a few things. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 17:43, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

== Your opinion? ==

Please comment [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Technical#We need more maintainers|here]]. Cheers, [[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 17:21, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
:Update: we've been offered help by [[mediawiki:User:Dantman|an experienced MediaWiki developer]], I think we can finally solve the server-side issues now! Please take a look at the thread linked above. [[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 20:07, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

== I am really dumb ==

and this morning, while creating a user name, I goofed it and wrote .mau, (with a trailing comma) instead of .mau. (with a trailing dot, which is my trademark). I know that a bureaucrat on MediaWiki can change a username which had few edits (my own edits are three including this one): could you do this, or at least delete this username so that I may recreate it without leaving a dead one? TIA, [[User:.mau,|.mau,]] ([[User talk:.mau,|talk]]) 15:09, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
:You can actually change your signature to .mau. if you want, to mask that for now. Just make a page called User:.mau,/sig and craft your signature to your liking, then go to my preferences at the top and set your sig to <nowiki>{{SUBST:User:.mau,/sig}}</nowiki>. If you want an example, [[User:Lcarsos/sig]] is a near-vanilla and quite clean example of a custom sig, while [[User:Omega/sig]] and my sig, [[User:Davidy22/sig]] are slightly more tricked-out options. Wikipedia's guidelines to signature crafting are {{w|Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing_your_signature|here.}} '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 15:53, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
::ok, thanks! [[User:.mau,|.mau.]] ([[User talk:.mau,|talk]]) 09:55, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
:::Aw, that's it? No bling or anything? Meeehhh. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:16, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
:(to Jeff) I believe user renaming is not possible in vanilla mediawiki. An extension is required: [[mw:Extension:Renameuser]] --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 18:21, 17 January 2013 (UTC)
::I find a bit disturbing to have a "wrong" username, especially because I may not remember it somewhen (yes, the word does not exist, but I like its sound); but I don't need any flashy signature, so I just changed the traling comma to a dot. --[[User:.mau,|.mau.]] ([[User talk:.mau,|talk]]) 14:09, 18 January 2013 (UTC)

==/wiki/==
Now that the site apparently redirects to the wiki, could the entire wiki URL just be explainxkcd.com, without the trailing wiki? It's mostly for cleanliness, but also to throw off the spambots for a while. Those accursed spam happy bots. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 04:29, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
: Sounds good, I'm working on that part next. It is next on my "to-do" list complete some URL work like that. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 18:05, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
::''nag''. Also, the spam is becoming an issue. A pretty big issue. Time to switch captchas? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:04, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
::: OK - sounds good to me, any ones you recommend? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 13:33, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:::: I don't remember which captcha the wiki uses, but I know securimage and recaptcha are two very competent options. Alternately, you could use [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ConfirmEdit ConfirmEdit] to screen anon edits. Much of the spam seems to be automated, so questycaptcha should screen out most of the chaff. Just simple questions, like "What webcomic does this site explain" or "Who created XKCD" should be sufficient to screw up our current spammers. Also, rm /wiki/ plx. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 13:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::Confirm edit is in and Recaptcha is out. Let's try that. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 14:11, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::The questions appear to be case-sensitive. To avoid frustration, could you add a notice to every question saying that the answers have to be in all lower/upper case? I got "What's the name of this wiki" wrong a bunch of times, and I think it's due to capitalization. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:30, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::::Ok - cool. I changed it to $wgSitename instead of just writing it out. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 14:32, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::::If we get no spam tomorrow, I will hold a party in your talk page. Oh, and /wiki/. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:38, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::I'll just hijack this thread and ask: Isn't it time Davidy22 got admin tools? It's long overdue. And please promote Lcarsos‏‎ to bureaucrat, so he can make new admins if needed. And seconded: <code>/wiki/</code> ! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 02:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::Could you also put confirmEdit in general page creation for anonymous users? There's still a couple of spam pages being made that don't actually advertise anything. There hasn't been an account creation in a long time, so I think we've killed off the spam accounts. The rate of spam has definitely dropped significantly ever since we switched to confirmEdit. '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 05:42, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::We've just had a surge of pure griefer spam. Anons who don't insert any links, they're just throwing spam at us out of malice. Could you make anonymous users have to pass through confrimEdit to create pages? Thanks. On a side note, what's the ratio in terms of file size between current explanation pages to logs and diffs? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::Wow those suck. Wiping out whole pages with anon edits. I can't change the settings from here, but I'll do it when I get home. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by filesize? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 15:51, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::Eh, how much space do explanations and images take up on your hard drive when compared to the space that log files and diffs take up? '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:01, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::::Click a thing, check out the URL. I be posting this here instead of DMs because somthing like this has been requested for a pretty long time. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:55, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::: I'm confused. There's a lot going on in this thread. Want to break it out into its own header? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:48, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
::::::::::::::Mkay '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 19:47, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

== Promote Davidy22 ==

:''Breaking this discussion out from where it was, because it merits its own section. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]])''
I'll just hijack this thread and ask: Isn't it time Davidy22 got admin tools? It's long overdue. And please promote lcarsos‏‎ to bureaucrat, so he can make new admins if needed. And seconded: <code>/wiki/</code> ! --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 02:39, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

:'''Heartily Agree''' on promoting Davidy22, he's almost always more on top of spam patrol than I am these days (burn-out for the lose). I'm not sure I can speak for my own promotion without sounding self-serving and power-hungry. However, in my few spare moments this semester I am looking closely at getting a bot up and running to automate the clean up of spam (mostly because manual spam patrol is the most soul-sucking and disheartening activity I've ever done), so it would be nice to be able to get a bot account promoted to bot status without misrepresenting it as my account. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 18:13, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
:: Davidy22 is up to admin (honestly, I thought he was already one, so no issue there on my end.) and lcarsos has been updated to bureaucrat because we should have more redundancy there. Also, create a bot account and let me know what it is and i'll give it bot rights. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 18:36, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
:: Or now, you can do it! :) --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 18:41, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
:::WOO, power! '''[[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 05:42, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

== Small ConfirmEdit change ==

Can you change the line:
<pre>$wgCaptchaTriggers['create'] = false;</pre>
to true? I think this would solve most of our bot vandalism/griefing problems. [[User:Lcarsos|lcarsos]]_a ([[User talk:Lcarsos|talk]]) 21:19, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
:: {{done}} I changed 'edit' to true as well since we've seen a bunch when editing user's talk pages. We will see if I have to move that back to false. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:16, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

== DeleteOldRevisions ==

There's a script built into mediawiki called DeleteOldRevisions.php that seems to have deprecated the deletehistory plugin. A link to the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:DeleteOldRevisions.php manual page.] A hard drive upgrade would be apt for the future though. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|purple|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:15, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
: I'm looking into it. I'm not sure how the wiki got back up and running without me running the update. I'll try the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:DeleteHistory] and see if that can help in the meantime. The expanded HD might be a no-go, but I'll see on that too. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 01:27, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

==Server Hardware==
The website is getting really slow and throwing internal errors all over the place, and it looks like both the main page and the page for the newest comic [[1190: Time]] are climbing rapidly in views. If one ambiguous comic is hitting us like a DDoS, we're going to get it in the shorts if Randall ever actually acknowledges our existence directly, or some other geeky media outlet posts a link to us. Is there a donate button anywhere? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|purple|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 05:18, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
: We certainly can get a Donate button. We may need to migrate the server to get it upgraded. This is one of those big days, I guess. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 12:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
:: How about a Kickstarter or Indiegogo campaign? --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 12:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
:::Kickstarter and Indiegogo are one-time things. No good for this. I recommend modifying the donate button so that there is a PayPal "Subscribe" button near it so people can also do small monthly subscriptions. I recommend a dropdown with $1, $2, $5, $10, $20 options.
:::Does 1&1 give you stats like how much bandwidth (or rather how much data) you are using. That could have an effect on where is best to get the new hosting; Rackspace Cloud, Linode, AWS, or even a real server with access to other network options like paying for actual Mbps bandwidth with unlimited data.
:::When you get a server I'd like to properly set it up with varnish, nginx, apc (or Zend_Optimizer+ considering it's going to be part of php 5.5), memcached, and perhaps php-fpm instead of mod_php. Varnish will allow anonymous pages to be cached hopefully reducing the load issues. And nginx should serve out static things better than Apache. [[User:Dantman|Dantman]] ([[User talk:Dantman|talk]]) 05:23, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
:::: Regarding the Paypal button, besides the subscribe option, I would recommend removing the credit card logos, as they make it too wide for the sidebar and not fit the design well. Besides, I personally think they give it kind of a corporate feel; instead, a simple "donate" button, while still recognizable as paypal's, feels simpler and more "personal", for lack of a better word.
:::: Also, I think you should place it above the AdSense block, since that makes it more visible, and prioritizes a form of supporting the site that people have direct, active control over, rather than the passive, choice-less (modulo AdBlock) AdSense.
:::: And also capitalize "donate" in the section title, to match the other titles ("Navigation", "Toolbox", etc.)
:::: Since we're at it: maybe more donation options would make sense: [//flattr.com Flattr], [//gittip.com Gittip], [//tiptheweb.org/ TipTheWeb], and possibly [//bitcoin.org/ Bitcoins].
:::: Finally, is it possible to make the AdSense background transparent, or at least the same as the site background of #F3F3F3? --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 14:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
:::::Is it possible to add the ad and donate buttons without including a section title? Minimizing unused space is gooood. Also, I noticed that you installed the deletehistory plugin, but it's trying to use another version of PHP that's installed on the server. deleteoldrevisions.php in the maintenance folder oughta work fine, though it'd probably be apt to run it over the weekend when we're not expecting absurd floods of visitors like we are now. We may need it too, after we've filled up the hard drive again with archives of Time.'''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|purple|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 14:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
:::::: Yes, it is possible for me to edit, I will have to go into the settings for each since I used extensions for them. I hate the credit card things too. Will take a look at all options tonight.
:::::: The Deletehistory plugin doesn't work, sadly because of the PHP version. Hopefully, when we migrate, it will be on a newer version and that will work. Hopefully, we will have more disk space too... --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]])
::::: Hey Jeff. Could you change the width of the paypal donate button so that it matches the google ads and the bitcoin donate button? Maybe using a custom button rather than the paypal-provided one?
::::: Also, any news regarding the possibility of changing the background of the google ads? --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 17:21, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
:::::: It did not work out with Google ads for a reason they will not disclose to me, but I'll work on the buttons and the banner ad. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:11, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

== Everything's good ==

Except for the (currently) occasional server error, I have no problems.

I've turned on HotCat and Popups, imported wikEdDiff and my HideTopContribs, all of which make me fairly efficient at watching changes.

A minor request would be the Redirect toolbar button.

[[User:Markhurd|Mark Hurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) 17:13, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

:When you turn off enwiki's "Enable enhanced editing toolbar" all of the toolbar buttons explainxkcd has are in the same order (it skips Math) and the very next one is Redirect #R. It seems to be defined at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Common.js/edit.js&action=edit
:I've tried adding just Redirect #R myself [[User:Markhurd/common.js|here]], but something's going wrong. (And I should be sleeping!)
::Seeing as it is only one button I wanted, I simplified the code down to calling addButton directly and it is now working fine. [[User:Markhurd|Mark Hurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) 13:07, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

:Re being an Admin: Yes, please, as long as you note this would be my first actual Admin bit. (I'm a Bureaucrat on another MW wiki so I could give myself Admin rights whenever I wanted.) [[User:Markhurd|Mark Hurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) 19:39, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

== Sidebar ads ==

Hi, we're having a discussion about the sidebar ads on [[Talk:Main Page#sidebar ads?]]. --[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 08:42, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

== Economic transparency ==

Hi! I made a request on economic transparency on the proposals page. –[[User:St.nerol|St.nerol]] ([[User talk:St.nerol|talk]]) 22:05, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

==Thumbnails are not working==
I'm relatively new here but I think each picture should get it's proper thumbnail when the original is to large to embed. Mediawiki is using some applications in the background maybe not available here. But there are some workarounds. And since "onlinehome.us" is well secured I still do even not know what OS is running in the background. But whatever the OS is, it should be solvable.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:13, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

== Last missing page ==

Hi, I'm hoping you don't mind about my adds to Natalie Dee. I was working on that at the same time.
BTW: Can I help you on that thumbnail issue? I really would be happy if it could fixed here.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:42, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
:: No problem on the Natalee Dee comic, I was just working on it because it was the last one, edit away. What's the thumbnail issue? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 21:43, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
:::Thanks for your reply. I am still talking about this: [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Errors_and_symptoms#Image_Thumbnails_not_working_and.2For_appearing Image_Thumbnails_not_working]. I am sure there is a need to fix the [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/LocalSettings.php LocalSettings.php]. Maybe some paths are wrong or it's just using wrong image tools. I can help on any OS except Apple computers.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:07, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

== Congratulations! ==

You just created the last unexplained comic of ''xkcd''! [[User:Greyson|Greyson]] ([[User talk:Greyson|talk]]) 23:38, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
: Thanks Greyson! --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 03:04, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

==Math==
A lot of comics have formulae in them. Could you set $wgUseTeX = true in LocalSettings.php? That lets us use latex in pages. It'd be useful for comics like yesterday's. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 09:12, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
:Yeah, this would be nice. But you have to install an extension, LaTex must be available, then compile something, and at least adjusting the LocalSettings.php config file. We also sill do not have all image features here. But I can help, Windows or Linux.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 13:55, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
:: I'll look into it. Let me know if you find an extension that will do the trick. Send me some links to anything that would help and I can get them set up. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 14:44, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
:::Go here [http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Math Extension:Math] and read the installation instructions first, it's not easy. For Fedora (Linux) there is a package called "mediawiki-math.x86_64" available. I will test this at my own computer.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 15:57, 11 July 2013 (UTC)
::::It's the hell, but I got a first crappy version at my local installation. I have had to install ''latex'' and ''ocaml'' packages and now its working, but it still renders many lines before the <nowiki><math></nowiki> tag, So it's still not usable for this site.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:35, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
===Seeing injected banner ads?===
I'm seeing banner ads (viewing on my iPad) that cover the actual banner of the site and never scroll out of view. It's as if they've been infected by a downstream server (ISP?). Anybody else? I'm in Wisconsin using TDS. Jeff M.
: That's terrible, I've got to fix that. bah. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 18:36, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
:: Is there a place I can email some screenshots? Jeff M.{{unsigned ip|69.130.242.120}}

== Full cache kills this page ==

Hi, it seems this page was not reachable for 15 hours again. The cache here has to be cleared sometimes, but since I can do it with my account I will create a script running once per day. 15 hours outage are bad, I try to avoid this in the future. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 15:50, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
:Which page was dead? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:11, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
::The entire site was dead. Look here: [[Special:RecentChanges|Special:RecentChanges]]. My last post was at 23:44 yesterday, no actions here after my reset at 14:54 today. The site was dead. I'm not a hacker, but I'm a programmer and I used this base of knowledge to fix this problem. If you do need more details, please send me an email. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:25, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Agreed. Tried to visit yesterday PM, but a lot of pages were spilling guts: user pages, category pages, no comic explanations (as far as I could tell with my limited browsing.) A chron-job script to keep that at bay would be good medicine, assuming it didn't have other side effects. [[User:IronyChef|IronyChef]] ([[User talk:IronyChef|talk]]) 03:19, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
I will set up a cron job running once per day. Maybe this entry at the config file [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:LocalSettings.php LocalSettings.php] would be the better solution:
$wgMainCacheType = CACHE_NONE;
I'm using the MidnightCommander (Linux) for editing this file.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
:::: Cache_None is already set in the LocalSettings. I believe this is usually a database error that we are getting. It usually resolves itself as I'm not able to resolve it myself. I believe that we are getting hit with a brute force attack at our database during those times because the database is totally unreachable. I'm working on moving to a new host where the database will be better protected. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 12:16, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::Cache_None or CACHE_NONE? This should be case sensitive. Nevertheless I did purge the cache and the site was instantly available again (after approx. 15 hours). Also Davidy22 explained that he did clear the cache to bring the site back. The error messages are misleading and not showing the real problem.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:43, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::: Yes, CACHE_NONE, sorry, I was typing fast. I've ran my clear cache script a few times when I've had that same problem and haven't seen results, so I'm glad we at least have something that's working. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 15:18, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::::You are doing a great job, I feel I just have to say thanks! When the next outage does happen I will activate a small script, but for now I just try to avoid unnecessary traffic to this server.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 16:15, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: Thanks Dgbrt! --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 18:07, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

== New host ==

Great job, but please check this link: <code>/wiki/</code>. I can browse the entire folder and more. It seems that "htaccess" should be renamed to ".htaccess".--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 08:32, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
: Oh geez. That's bad. Thanks! --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 12:02, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:: Should be good now. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:45, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

I found an other serious issue belonging to DNS entries:
Name: explainxkcd.com
Address: 108.162.198.131
Name: explainxkcd.com
Address: 108.162.199.131
This works fine because 108.162.'''198'''.131 is correct. But most DNS servers showing up with this result:
Name: explainxkcd.com
Address: 108.162.199.131
Name: explainxkcd.com
Address: 108.162.198.131
This just leads to the old server at 108.162.'''199'''.131. Check Google DNS server 8.8.8.8 with nslookup, the wrong IP is shown first.
--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 19:34, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
: Weird... I'll research. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 19:35, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::Yes, it's weird. After I discovered this I did enter an entry for this at my local "/etc/hosts" file. But it seems most people can not access the new site.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:20, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::One more: The logo on the left top is broken. ''style="background-image: url(/wiki/skins/common/images/explainxkcd.png)'' does not exist.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:53, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::: Yea, what happened to that logo... it was there this morning. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 20:56, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
::::Oh, after a computer crash I'm back. Right now even the editor is broken here. I don't know if I can send this message. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:22, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::Ok, it does work, but all images for short cuts on top of the editor are also broken now. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:26, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::: The editor works fine for me, I'll research the images. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 21:27, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::::It seems all links like "/wiki/skins/common/images/button_bold.png" are gone. Additionally I'm getting an JavaScript error "TypeError: document.getElementById(...) is null". http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/skins/common/images/button_bold.png redirects me to http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page. Maybe you still get some content, maybe cache, from 108.162.199.131? Or is the real site now on that IP? Remember, I have had to restart my computer; most of my cache is gone and I'm just seeing the real page.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 21:48, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::::: I fixed the images. I did that stupidly through the htaccess page. I've got to figure a better solution for what I'm trying to do to solve another problem. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 21:58, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::Looks great right now. So that DNS glitch seems to be the most worse problem right now.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:08, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::: I think DNS is still propagating with the updates from yesterday. Not every one has the correct information yet... those two DNS IPs are the load balancers, I believe. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 22:09, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
:::::::::::Strange "load balancers", but it's working now on both IPs. Many thanks again for your hard work, you must have invested many hours on this migration. Let's see tomorrow if other users will be able to find this site again.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:30, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

== Please remove subaddressing from my account email [[user:tbc]] ==

Hi Jeff,

I requested a password reset, but I forgot that my account still has an old email registered: timc+explainxkcd@divide.net. My ISP, pcisys.net née divide.net, disabled subaddressing during an email upgrade earlier this year. If you will update that email to remove the plus sign so my account email is timc@divide.net, I will be able to reset my password. I was logged in from my iPad to write on the [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Admin_requests#Please_remove_subaddressing_from_my_account_email_user:tbc|community portal]] page, but since I needed my password, which I have forgotten, to change it, I got stuck. – ''[[User:Tbc|tbc]] ([[User talk:Tbc|talk]]) 30 Oct 2013''
: You should be good to go now. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:07, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
:: I am. Thank you! – ''[[User:Tbc|tbc]] ([[User talk:Tbc|talk]]) 05:32, 8 November 2013 (UTC)''

== Forbidden ==

You don't have permission to access /wiki/ ([http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/ http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/]) on this server. I think a simple redirect would be a better solution.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 23:45, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
: Yup, that's on my list to work on. If you are knowledgable about htaccess files, feel free to send me an email. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 13:48, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
::The first great point is: The error doesn't show the server, version, etc... A hacker can't figure what exploits are available.
::At my local test installation (Apache, Linux) it's covered by the general server configuration. And each folder simply does contain a proper "index.php" file from mediawiki doing the correct redirects.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 20:19, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
::: Fixed. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:02, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
::::Great job, thanks.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 22:18, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

== Re: the latest puzzle ==

I don't know how to contribute in the discussion section on the page, so I'm throwing ideas at you.

Just quick thoughts.
I feel like Cpl klinger and the water type kingler is too solid a connection to ignore even though I can't really use it.
Kingler was owned in the series by Ash.
Ash is a three letter word and the last three letters of the phrase monstermash.
Monsterm=8 letters so the first block ash=3 letters in the second block.
Monsterm is about the monster.com thing, therefore purloined. It's a double reference, the .co has been purloined from the purloined website.
Then blastoise -3, or rather blastois3 - 3 (mocking the common password meme of replacing letters with numbers)
So the last password, which is super hard to guess and well chosen even with the clue is, blastoisash? It's a feasibly memorable password that would not be quickly forgotten by a pokemon fan while still being hard to guess.
Can you think of a way to check it? Maybe go into the old command line xkcd and try it as a password?

==URLs==
I made them marginally shorter. Can you spot the difference? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 19:47, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
: Uh, I can't. Does that make me a bad person? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 22:17, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
::If you go to any page, you should see that it says index.php/<page name> instead of index.php?title=<page name>. Small change, I'm trying to kill the index.php bit too, but I think I suck at regexes. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 22:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
::: Regexes are the WORST --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 22:45, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
::::Regexes are great, but they are hard to implement for a specific solution. But Goooogle helps. And a question to Davidy22: Why you do not present your enhancement here? --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 23:10, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
:::::I set $wgUsePathInfo to true in mediawiki settings, and here's our lines for redirecting URLs in general:

RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !(\.png|\.jpg|\.gif)$ [NC]
# RewriteRule ^/wiki(/.*)$ %{DOCUMENT_ROOT}/wiki/index.php$1 [L]

:::::Followed and preceded by htaccess commands that do other things. The broken line is commented out because it doesn't work. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 23:32, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
::::::Uhh, it seems I still do not understand the secret. [http://www.xkcd.com/1301] to [http://www.explainxkcd.com/1301] works fine for me, but I do not understand that [NC] here so far:
:::::::RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !(\.png|\.jpg|\.gif)$ [NC]
::::::maybe
:::::::RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI} !(\.png|\.jpg|\.gif)$[NC]
::::::is better. But this means every request not matching those three image extensions would fit that rewrite rule. This is just haaardly regex. The second line is just a comment you probably did remove. I can't see the rewrite rule. And testing for a simple number x, xx, xyz, or xyzz would be better.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 00:23, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
::::::::That's an entirely different rewriterule that does actually work and was deployed long ago that I didn't print here. I'm talking about a general-purpose rewrite that redirects from explainxkcd.com/wiki/<page name>, which I attempted to create in the commented-out line. The image exclusion is to stop image display requests from also being redirected, and I don't think you quite get how rewrite rules work. Not *every* page is fitted to every rewrite rule; the first half of the rule describes the conditions in which the rule should be applied. And yeah, just plugging in page names works, but I kinda don't want to hard-code every possible page redirect into our htaccess file. That's what the regex is for. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 00:51, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

== /r/xkcd sitenotice ==

Could you please remove the sitenotice linking to and promoting /r/xkcd? [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]] added it to the sitenotice and cross-posted to reddit. Unfortunately, h/r/xkcd sub is controlled by /u/soccer, who links to racist, xenophobic and misogynistic content regularly. [http://www.reddit.com/r/anonymous123421/comments/1w8aie/petition_to_reinstate_uwyboth_as_a_mod_of_rxkcd/cezp63m Randall has spoken in support] of a petition for /u/soccer to be removed as a mod. /r/xkcdcomic is a non-hateful alternative, one that Randall supports, and it has more users than /r/xkcd.

I did comment on Davidy22's talk page, but I thought I should drop you a line as well. Thanks, [[User:LadyMondegreen|LadyMondegreen]] ([[User talk:LadyMondegreen|talk]]) 13:55, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
: Hi LadyMondegreen did he change it already? I didn't touch it yet, but it shows /r/xkcdcomic for me. I agree with you completely and I'm sorry if we linked to the wrong subreddit, even momentarily. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 14:50, 2 May 2014 (UTC)
::It never linked to /r/xkcd. I think LadyMondegreen misread it or something. '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:41, 3 May 2014 (UTC)
:::Yeah, that was my bad. Someone pointed it out to me on IRC and I guess I didn't look closely enough. Sorry about that. [[User:LadyMondegreen|LadyMondegreen]] ([[User talk:LadyMondegreen|talk]]) 19:36, 6 May 2014 (UTC)

== MediaWiki question ==

Out of curiosity, do you ever have a plan to add other skin options, like Monobook? [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 21:40, 31 July 2014 (UTC)
:A fair number of other skins were cut because they broke our sidebar, and others were cut cuz they were ugly and no one used them. If there's demand for them, they could be brought back though; you just want Monobook? '''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:06, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
::Mainly, yes. From a personal standpoint, I find Vector fairly ugly. CologneBlue and Modern aren't much better. Monobook is my preferred alternative. I can't speak for majority of users on explainxkcd, but I do know there are a number of people who prefer Monobook to other skins. [[User:Schiffy|Schiffy]] ([[User_talk:Schiffy|Speak to me]]|[[Special:Contributions/Schiffy|What I've done]]) 21:56, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
:::Fair enough. Monobook is back. Tell me if anything is wonky with our customisations, and I'll fix it.'''[[User:Davidy22|{{Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 01:56, 4 August 2014 (UTC)

== IP Address glitch ==

There appears to be a problem with the way that this site fetches users IP addresses! My IP address, as confirmed by whatismyip.com and other wikis, is 24.15.68.186! However, this site believes it to be 108.162.237.130! When I look up the incorrect IP address, it appears to be registered to CloudFlare. Is there anything you can do to resolve the situation? I don't want to get confused with a spambot and accidentally blocked! Thank you! [[User:The Wikiator|The Wikiator]] ([[User talk:The Wikiator|talk]]) 00:26, 19 April 2016 (UTC)
:This is a [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Technical#Wrong IP address shown|known issue]]. [[User:Markhurd|Mark Hurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) 11:06, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

== Crash ==

Cool, I was worried for a bit that Explain Xkcd was down. By the way, I found the URL for a [http://c.xkcd.com/random/comic random comic] and a [http://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Random random explained comic]. [[User:SilverMagpie|SilverMagpie]] ([[User talk:SilverMagpie|talk]]) 16:48, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

== A problem with a thing ==

Hi, I'm a new user on this site, and for some reason I can't make my own user page because I don't have permission. Plz help me!

[[User:Timeflow X|Timeflow X]] ([[User talk:Timeflow X|talk]]) 10:52, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

: Weird - it works for me. I edited your user page, see if you can edit it now that its created? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 12:44, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

== LocalSettings.php ==

Please set "$wgUseInstantCommons = true;" in LocalSettings.php. We have still pictures with red links here. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 15:39, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
: Done --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 00:40, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
::Thanks, but it's not working as expected: [[File:Button sig.png]]. It should show this picture: [https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Button_sig.png https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Button_sig.png].--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:44, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
::: Ok, I'll take a look again when I can, is there anything else I need to do? Like add an extension? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 02:32, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
::::Are we on MediaWiki version 1.16 or later? If not "$wgForeignFileRepos" would be the solution. But if the version is ok it's probably an https related problem: [https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/InstantCommons#HTTPS InstantCommons#HTTPS]. Maybe this helps.--[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:39, 1 August 2017 (UTC)
:::::'''Solved.''' As you can see above. I've had to update the ca-certificate package. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 23:56, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

== Email coming from a non-existent domain ==

The "confirm email" button sends email from "expla0@vps.explainxkcd.com". The vps.explainxkcd.com domain doesn't exist (according to CloudFlare's DNS servers). Some email servers (including sendmail's default configuration; see https://www.sendmail.org/~ca/email/doc8.12/cf/m4/features.html#accept_unresolvable_domains) will reject such emails. I haven't tested password recovery emails, but I wouldn't be surprised if the same problem exists there too. In my case, I've added "vps.explainxkcd.com" to my access database, but whom should I talk to about fixing the sent email? [[User:Piquan|Piquan]] ([[User talk:Piquan|talk]]) 02:44, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
: The emails that I get when someone edits my talk page are: explain@explainxkcd.com and both settings in the localsettings.php are set to:$wgEmergencyContact = "explain@explainxkcd.com";$wgPasswordSender = "explain@explainxkcd.com"; but there might be a third one that catches those types of emails so I added $wgNoReplyAddress = "explain@explainxkcd.com"; Let me know if that fixes it. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 02:58, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
::I've send you an email from here: [[:Special:EmailUser/Jeff]]. I also requested a copy to me and that was more than two hours ago. But nothing happened and I'm sure you also didn't receive a mail. By having access to the log-files I'm sure I would figure out the problem. BTW: My last mail from here was in February. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:55, 13 April 2018 (UTC)
Ok, problem partly solved; my mails went into the Spam folder eventually meaning no notification to me. The reason is in fact what [[User:Piquan|Piquan]] has told in the initial comment. The mails are delivered via a mail server "vps.explainxkcd.com with local (Exim 4.80.1)" (belonging to Lunar Pages/Cloudflare) while the MX entry for explainxkcd.com is "mail.explainxkcd.com". There are two possible solutions, but the first is highly recommended:
*Lunar Pages/Cloudflare have to change the rewriting rules at their Exim message transfer agent to an existing domain name. This would be in this case "mail.explainxkcd.com".
*The name "vps.explainxkcd.com" must resolve to the IP 67.210.100.50 (we must hope that will not change in the future) AND there must be a second MX entry in the name registry for "explainxkcd.com" to "vps.explainxkcd.com". But I predict this would cause new problems in the future.
The FROM line in the mail header (e.g. From: Dgbrt <my.name@mail.com> or something like <explain@explainxkcd.com>) is irrelevant because only the message agents needs a proper configuration. My former mail servers also rejected those corrupt mails; google mail just puts it into a spam folder. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 18:43, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

== ReCaptcha v1 is going away ==

As I was posting an earlier comment, the reCAPTCHA told me:
"V1 UNSUPPORTED - Please direct siteowner to g.co/recaptcha/upgrade". (I typed "V1 UNSUPPORTED" in the box and it worked.) It looks like the reCAPTCHA that's currently being used by the wiki is sunsetting on 31 March 2018 (in a month and a half, as of this writing), and so they're currently sending a small percentage of requests that notice instead of a CAPTCHA challenge. Thought I'd let you know. [[User:Piquan|Piquan]] ([[User talk:Piquan|talk]]) 02:55, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

Someone else has already mentioned that in the admin forum, but no one replied. I really think we should create a new forum for requests like that, as not many people visit that forum now. And at the time of this comment the CAPTCHA has expired. [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 07:40, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
: That's on me, I'm working on it. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 12:03, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
::That's great, please also fix the email issue (section above). --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 12:15, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Please reactivate the corrupt captcha or disable IPs from editing. We already have vandalism (see history at [[1031]])! --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 14:58, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
: Well, that was stupid. It's back on now. I'm going to fix it, but I can't fix it right now so I'll leave the broken one on. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 15:20, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
::Thanks, a day or one more are not a problem yet. But maybe you should change the Sitenotice on top so that others can see that work is in progress. Nevertheless I would talk to you about some general issues here, so when you have time please contact me on my talk page. Maybe you remember that I've had a test-wiki at home to test my BOT. --[[User:Dgbrt|Dgbrt]] ([[User talk:Dgbrt|talk]]) 15:58, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

== A Couple of Issues ==

1. Google seems to have changed something in AdSense again, and the ads have been appearing in random positions again since December, 2019. [https://wpadvancedads.com/adsense-in-random-positions-auto-ads/ This page] might have a solution? It's been quite a while, and the ads are still broken.
2. New site called xkcd.wtf is blatantly stealing/scraping explanations from our site and posting it with a new theme. Not sure if it's a mirror or just Ctrl+C Ctrl+V. Is this even legal? [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 09:32, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
: Google keeps killing me with these. I'll see what I can do. Not sure about the page copying. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:32, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
:: looks like xkcd.wtf at least links to us and references us at the bottom since all of our stuff is CC licensed. Pretty friendly all things concerned. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:54, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

== Randall's NYT Columns ==
Hi, In June I posted a proposal on the community portal ([[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals#New_page_for_Randall.27s_regular_column_in_the_New_York_Times |New page for Randall's regular column in the NY Times]]) and I was sort of hoping to get feedback. The proposal does include a script for the page.

I'm not sure where the page would go or be linked from, but it would be similar to our page about [[whatif|what if?]]. Perhaps the see also sections of the [[Randall Munroe]] page and the [[xkcd]] page.

BTW Jeff, our own links to our [[whatif|what if?]] page don't work, because the page name ends with a question mark, which messes up the browser (or maybe the Wiki software). The link I gave in the previous sentence does work, but when you get to the page and ask for what links here, that fails. ([https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere?target=what_if%3F&namespace%3D This, however] does work as an external link.) Probably need to rename the page to not include a question mark. But anyway. [[User:JohnB|JohnB]] ([[User talk:JohnB|talk]]) 16:54, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
:Every mod has LANCBed (leave and never come back). Nothing can be fixed. — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 14:25, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
::SlashMe is still active, but he doesn't have server access. I think Dgbrt has server access as well, and I left a comment on his talk page in the hopes that he'll reply (but he hasn't been active in a while). [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 02:16, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
::: Sorry guys. I'm here. I can take a look at this for you. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:32, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
:::: Keep commenting here guys, because this notifies me. Life is nuts right now so my time is crazy. Send anything you need done. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 16:40, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
::::: Thanks so much Jeff, this is very appreciated! Re: the "what if" errors, if it's at all helpful:
:::::: * The "<code>No input file specified</code>" error seems to happen for pages that end in question marks or have special characters like "é" in their name. A list of such pages is [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Technical#Known broken pages|here]].
:::::: * A possible solution is mentioned [[mw:Manual talk:Short URL/Page title -- Windows & Apache without 403 on Special Pages|here]] in the MediaWiki manual talk pages, involving [https://www.php.net/manual/en/ini.core.php#ini.cgi.force-redirect CGI settings in php.ini] (for IIS) or [https://httpd.apache.org/docs/current/mod/mod_rewrite.html#rewriterule mod_rewrite settings in .htaccess] (for Apache). (Not sure if that's valid, or if there are any security/stability side-effects/consequences of that.)
:::::: * As a workaround in the meantime, [[User:Sqrt-1]] has moved/renamed the "[[what if?]]" page to "[[what if]]" to make it easier to get to.
:::::: * (If you're interested, there's a whole section about it in the Technical community portal [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Technical#Unable to view "what if?" page|here]].)
::::: – [[User:Yfmcpxpj|Yfmcpxpj]] ([[User talk:Yfmcpxpj|talk]]) 17:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

: Re: Randall's New York Times columns, just a note that [[User:JohnB]] has created a page for this at [[New York Times: Good Question]]. – [[User:Yfmcpxpj|Yfmcpxpj]] ([[User talk:Yfmcpxpj|talk]]) 17:41, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

== Main page ==

Hi!

You might have accidentally vandalized the main page.

https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page&type=revision&diff=205838&oldid=158337

--[[Special:Contributions/162.158.238.8|162.158.238.8]] 20:28, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
:That literally made me jump out of my seat. Like, what the hell just happened here?! — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 13:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
::I just realised, the main page has been this way for 3 days?! — [[User:Sqrt-1|The 𝗦𝗾𝗿𝘁-𝟭]] [[User talk:Sqrt-1|talk]] [[Special:Contributions/Sqrt-1|stalk]] 13:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
::: Reverted. Whoops, I must have read that one wrong. That's what I get for reading too fast. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 14:41, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

== Two issues that may need to be solved ==

Few more issues that may need to be solved:

1. Google ads are still appearing in random locations on wiki pages. Have you tried the [https://wpadvancedads.com/adsense-in-random-positions-auto-ads/ potential solution] I mentioned earlier? (It seems to be the most plausible explanation for the broken ads, and the time the changes happened was when the ads started appearing in random locations and breaking the pages.) If the previous solution I mentioned above didn't work, would it be possible to turn off the ads until there's a solution? The ads have been running rampant for more than a year in staggering amounts, the generated revenue should be enough to cover server costs until we can figure out a way to fix it, right?

2. Another editor mentioned a potential problem regarding the MediaWiki version in the community portal:
This wiki is [[Special:Version|currently]] on [[mw:MediaWiki 1.30|MediaWiki 1.30.0]] ([[mw:Release notes/1.30|release notes]]), the first of three releases of a version of MW that reached end-of-life in June of 2019 ([[mw:Version lifecycle]]). It's thus missing multiple important security updates from 1.30.1 and 1.30.2, not to mention the two years' worth of security updates since 1.30.x reached end-of-life. Even 1.31.x will be reaching end-of-life in just over a month.
If the sysadmins here update to [[mw:MediaWiki 1.35|MediaWiki 1.35.2]] ([[mw:Release_notes/1.35|release notes]]), that version will be maintained till September of 2023, with only a few security updates in the meantime. I would '''strongly''' encourage y'all to update to 1.35.2; to promptly update if there's a .3, .4, etc.; and to make sure you switch to the next LTS release (which will presumably be 1.39) well in advance of September of '23. (Note that this will also require updating to PHP 7.3.19 or later.) [[User:PinkAmpersand|PinkAmpersand]] ([[User talk:PinkAmpersand|talk]]) 07:17, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! [[User:Herobrine|Herobrine]] ([[User talk:Herobrine|talk]]) 04:54, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
: Google ads should be reverted to one (or turned off), either way I turned off the annoying "auto ads" that jump all over the place. Not sure how that got turned on in the first place. I agree we are way behind on versions. If you or anyone knows PHP and Mediawiki upgrades better, let me know - because I don't have the time to apply to this currently. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 13:45, 10 May 2021 (UTC)

== RenameUser extension ==

Hi Jeff! Long time no talk :)

[[#I am really dumb|A while ago]] I suggested that the [[mw:Extension:RenameUser|RenameUser]] extension could be helpful to have installed in the wiki. Since then I happened to perform a username unification across my online accounts, including changing my Wikipedia username from "Waldir" to "Waldyrious" (thus matching my Twitter, GitHub, etc.). Would you consider installing the extension so that my username (and others, like [[User:.mau,]] above and [[User:Nk1406]] [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Admin requests#Altering Username|here]]) could be changed? --[[User:Waldir|Waldir]] ([[User talk:Waldir|talk]]) 12:31, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

== Lost Account ==

Hi, Jeff. I was directed to you by Davidy22 in regards to my issue as it seems you have the ability to view the backend.

I joined this site in 2013 IIRC, I made a few edits/posts and then forgot about the account for a good 9 years. I came back and attempted to login but of course by now I forgot my password and I went through a few computers, browsers, and OSs so it wasn't saved. I've also been through a number of email addresses, most of which are still active and secondary under my current address. I was hoping I could provide you a list of emails I had used around that time and maybe I can regain access to the account that way.

My username here is PheagleAdler.

== Vandalism ==

Yo - Not sure if your talk page gets any special alerts, but in case it does: front page has got a good ol' vandal war goin' on. --[[User:SgtLion|SgtLion]] ([[User talk:SgtLion|talk]]) 21:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)
: What do you need? I'll grant the rights. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 00:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
::Another vandal war going on, this time there's a guy going around with IPs putting gore images on everything./ [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 00:48, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

== You've got mail ==

Hi Jeff.

I just sent you an email via the "Email this user" function, and I wanted to let you know in case you miss it, or it gets filtered out since I am a new user.

Thanks, --[[User:DanielWTQ|DanielWTQ]] ([[User talk:DanielWTQ|talk]]) 19:45, 2 April 2023 (UTC)

: What do you need? Let me know. Sorry didn't get the email. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]]) 00:45, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Template:xkcdmeta

2023-07-26T00:23:40Z

84596Gamma: Turns out that my prediction was correct. :D

<indicator name="xkcd">[[File:xkcdFavicon.png|25px|link=xkcd]]</indicator>
<noinclude>This is not an empty template; see the top right of the page. Useful for denoting meta pages that talk about xkcd being something other than comic pages.</noinclude>