Talk:1475: Technically - Revision history

141.101.99.163: Undo revision 365306 by 172.68.234.85 (talk) Seemingly random reversions/snippings? Can't see any good reasons for that.

2025-02-12T08:33:11Z

Undo revision 365306 by 172.68.234.85 (talk) Seemingly random reversions/snippings? Can't see any good reasons for that.

172.68.234.85 at 07:48, 12 February 2025

2025-02-12T07:48:00Z

42.book.addict at 19:36, 28 October 2024

2024-10-28T19:36:47Z

172.71.30.150 at 17:08, 3 September 2024

2024-09-03T17:08:49Z

Jordan Brown: Flag napkins are illegal only in Washington, DC

2023-10-14T03:14:56Z

Flag napkins are illegal only in Washington, DC

Nitpicking: zoology

2023-06-24T03:36:07Z

zoology

Sci0927 at 15:23, 15 February 2022

2022-02-15T15:23:30Z

108.162.237.87 at 15:50, 17 December 2021

2021-12-17T15:50:13Z

172.69.248.148 at 23:29, 14 January 2021

2021-01-14T23:29:06Z

108.162.237.226 at 04:54, 30 January 2017

2017-01-30T04:54:14Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Technically, it's poor form and rude to ignore someone based on *Clicks Random page* [[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 13:45, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
-It's also possible that Cueball is purposefully inviting another "technically" sentence by stating he's looking at a bug, since it's unlikely he's looking at a member of the order Hemiptera. 14:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
+It's also possible that Cueball is purposefully inviting another "technically" sentence by stating he's looking at a bug, since it's unlikely he's looking at a member of the order Hemiptera. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.85|108.162.216.85]] 14:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 Well, it seems that White hat is responding to being asked if he is taking drugs, and technically, any food item that is consumed only for its taste or other effect on the body and mind, such as chocolate, could be argued to be a drug by a combination of both definitions given in the explanation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.85|108.162.254.85]] 17:39, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 :If it's not labeled "My Hobby", it doesn't belong in that series. There are similarities, but they aren't exactly the same, and it's not labeled as part of the "My Hobby" series. [[User:NealCruco|NealCruco]] ([[User talk:NealCruco|talk]]) 03:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 ::I think it's rather an opposing behavior. In "My Hobby" it is usually Cueball driving others nuts, here he ignores someone else who is trying to drive him nuts. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.217|141.101.105.217]] 06:53, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
-techically,you can make a fruit salad with only tomatoes and cucumbers [[User:Sci0927|Sci0927]] ([[User talk:Sci0927|talk]]) 15:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
+:techically,you can make a fruit salad with only tomatoes and cucumbers [[User:Sci0927|Sci0927]] ([[User talk:Sci0927|talk]]) 15:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 Please explain what is meant by "third type" and "fourth type" in the current comic description [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.157|173.245.54.157]] 22:59, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
@@ Line 28: / Line 29: @@
 :Hey, look at this cool tree! --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.248.148|172.69.248.148]] 23:29, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 His sentence didn't start with "Technically"; it started with "Well". Does not compute. [[User:DouglasHeld|DouglasHeld]] ([[User talk:DouglasHeld|talk]]) 21:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
-His sentence didn't start with "Technically"; it started with "Well". Does not compute.[[User:DouglasHeld|DouglasHeld]] ([[User talk:DouglasHeld|talk]]) 21:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
+:"The title text starts to pedantically over-apply Cueball's rule to the comic panel, noting that technically White Hat's sentence started with the word 'well' instead of the word 'technically', and thus Cueball is wrong to have ignored it." Part of the joke is that there are a certain type of people who will pick apart every little detail of a statement or rule, and apply its 'technical' interpretation, rather than the spirit of rule. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 22:04, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
 "Whales are not fish" is a very poor example: it's not a technicality, but a very major and quite obvious difference. At least where I live, most people are aware of this, except for very small children or *extremely* uneducated persons. The other examples ("Peanuts are not nuts" and "Tomatoes are fruit") are *way* more appropriate. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.55|108.162.231.55]] 00:48, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 :I would disagree that its a poor example, and I would wager that the majority of people couldn't give the basic definition of a mammal. Whales and fish both swim in the sea, both look alike (albeit on different scales), and are markedly similar in other ways. I know that whales are mammals rather than fish, but I couldn't explain all the differences. I certainly wouldn't call someone extremely uneducated if they thought whales were fish, as to me it is a fairly logical conclusion to come to. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 17:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 ::Actually, the non-technical definition of "fish" is that it swims in water, does not walk on land, and breaths water. And any modern third grader knows that whales breath air, despite fitting the other criteria. Anonymous 20:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
-::: "Actually" is another zero-content indicator... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.226|108.162.237.226]] 04:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
+Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :) {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.87|15:50, 17 December 2021}}
-Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :)
+Technically, the comment about American flag napkins is correct only in Washington, D.C.  [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/3 4 USC 3] '''prohibits''' flag napkins in DC as a misdemeanor.  [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/8 4 USC 8] '''discourages''' flag napkins but does not criminalize them. (At least based on the law cited by the article, [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/chapter-1 4 USC Chapter 1]. State or local laws or other sections of the USC might say more.) [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 03:14, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Technically, it's poor form and rude to ignore someone based on *Clicks Random page* [[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 13:45, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
-It's also possible that Cueball is purposefully inviting another "technically" sentence by stating he's looking at a bug, since it's unlikely he's looking at a member of the order Hemiptera. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.85|108.162.216.85]] 14:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
+It's also possible that Cueball is purposefully inviting another "technically" sentence by stating he's looking at a bug, since it's unlikely he's looking at a member of the order Hemiptera. 14:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 Well, it seems that White hat is responding to being asked if he is taking drugs, and technically, any food item that is consumed only for its taste or other effect on the body and mind, such as chocolate, could be argued to be a drug by a combination of both definitions given in the explanation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.85|108.162.254.85]] 17:39, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 :If it's not labeled "My Hobby", it doesn't belong in that series. There are similarities, but they aren't exactly the same, and it's not labeled as part of the "My Hobby" series. [[User:NealCruco|NealCruco]] ([[User talk:NealCruco|talk]]) 03:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 ::I think it's rather an opposing behavior. In "My Hobby" it is usually Cueball driving others nuts, here he ignores someone else who is trying to drive him nuts. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.217|141.101.105.217]] 06:53, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
-:techically,you can make a fruit salad with only tomatoes and cucumbers [[User:Sci0927|Sci0927]] ([[User talk:Sci0927|talk]]) 15:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
+techically,you can make a fruit salad with only tomatoes and cucumbers [[User:Sci0927|Sci0927]] ([[User talk:Sci0927|talk]]) 15:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 Please explain what is meant by "third type" and "fourth type" in the current comic description [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.157|173.245.54.157]] 22:59, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
@@ Line 29: / Line 28: @@
 :Hey, look at this cool tree! --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.248.148|172.69.248.148]] 23:29, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 His sentence didn't start with "Technically"; it started with "Well". Does not compute. [[User:DouglasHeld|DouglasHeld]] ([[User talk:DouglasHeld|talk]]) 21:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
-:"The title text starts to pedantically over-apply Cueball's rule to the comic panel, noting that technically White Hat's sentence started with the word 'well' instead of the word 'technically', and thus Cueball is wrong to have ignored it." Part of the joke is that there are a certain type of people who will pick apart every little detail of a statement or rule, and apply its 'technical' interpretation, rather than the spirit of rule. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 22:04, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
+His sentence didn't start with "Technically"; it started with "Well". Does not compute.[[User:DouglasHeld|DouglasHeld]] ([[User talk:DouglasHeld|talk]]) 21:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
 "Whales are not fish" is a very poor example: it's not a technicality, but a very major and quite obvious difference. At least where I live, most people are aware of this, except for very small children or *extremely* uneducated persons. The other examples ("Peanuts are not nuts" and "Tomatoes are fruit") are *way* more appropriate. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.55|108.162.231.55]] 00:48, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 :I would disagree that its a poor example, and I would wager that the majority of people couldn't give the basic definition of a mammal. Whales and fish both swim in the sea, both look alike (albeit on different scales), and are markedly similar in other ways. I know that whales are mammals rather than fish, but I couldn't explain all the differences. I certainly wouldn't call someone extremely uneducated if they thought whales were fish, as to me it is a fairly logical conclusion to come to. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 17:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 ::Actually, the non-technical definition of "fish" is that it swims in water, does not walk on land, and breaths water. And any modern third grader knows that whales breath air, despite fitting the other criteria. Anonymous 20:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
-Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :) {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.87|15:50, 17 December 2021}}
+::: "Actually" is another zero-content indicator... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.226|108.162.237.226]] 04:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
-Technically, the comment about American flag napkins is correct only in Washington, D.C.  [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/3 4 USC 3] '''prohibits''' flag napkins in DC as a misdemeanor.  [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/8 4 USC 8] '''discourages''' flag napkins but does not criminalize them. (At least based on the law cited by the article, [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/chapter-1 4 USC Chapter 1]. State or local laws or other sections of the USC might say more.) [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 03:14, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
+Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 Technically, it's poor form and rude to ignore someone based on *Clicks Random page* [[User:Xseo|Xseo]] ([[User talk:Xseo|talk]]) 13:45, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
-It's also possible that Cueball is purposefully inviting another "technically" sentence by stating he's looking at a bug, since it's unlikely he's looking at a member of the order Hemiptera. 14:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
+It's also possible that Cueball is purposefully inviting another "technically" sentence by stating he's looking at a bug, since it's unlikely he's looking at a member of the order Hemiptera. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.216.85|108.162.216.85]] 14:21, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
 Well, it seems that White hat is responding to being asked if he is taking drugs, and technically, any food item that is consumed only for its taste or other effect on the body and mind, such as chocolate, could be argued to be a drug by a combination of both definitions given in the explanation. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.254.85|108.162.254.85]] 17:39, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 :Hey, look at this cool tree! --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.248.148|172.69.248.148]] 23:29, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 His sentence didn't start with "Technically"; it started with "Well". Does not compute. [[User:DouglasHeld|DouglasHeld]] ([[User talk:DouglasHeld|talk]]) 21:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
-His sentence didn't start with "Technically"; it started with "Well". Does not compute.[[User:DouglasHeld|DouglasHeld]] ([[User talk:DouglasHeld|talk]]) 21:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
+:"The title text starts to pedantically over-apply Cueball's rule to the comic panel, noting that technically White Hat's sentence started with the word 'well' instead of the word 'technically', and thus Cueball is wrong to have ignored it." Part of the joke is that there are a certain type of people who will pick apart every little detail of a statement or rule, and apply its 'technical' interpretation, rather than the spirit of rule. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 22:04, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
 "Whales are not fish" is a very poor example: it's not a technicality, but a very major and quite obvious difference. At least where I live, most people are aware of this, except for very small children or *extremely* uneducated persons. The other examples ("Peanuts are not nuts" and "Tomatoes are fruit") are *way* more appropriate. --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.231.55|108.162.231.55]] 00:48, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
 :I would disagree that its a poor example, and I would wager that the majority of people couldn't give the basic definition of a mammal. Whales and fish both swim in the sea, both look alike (albeit on different scales), and are markedly similar in other ways. I know that whales are mammals rather than fish, but I couldn't explain all the differences. I certainly wouldn't call someone extremely uneducated if they thought whales were fish, as to me it is a fairly logical conclusion to come to. --[[User:Pudder|Pudder]] ([[User talk:Pudder|talk]]) 17:21, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 ::Actually, the non-technical definition of "fish" is that it swims in water, does not walk on land, and breaths water. And any modern third grader knows that whales breath air, despite fitting the other criteria. Anonymous 20:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 :::"Actually" is another zero-content indicator... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.226|108.162.237.226]] 04:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
 :::Zoology major here: many fishes breathe air (armored catfishes, gouramis and paradise fishes, and [of course] lungfishes, to name three groups). Now ''technically'', if you use cladistic taxonomy, the fishes must include reptiles, which in turn includes the birds and mammals, but you didn't read this far. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
-:::: Hey, look at that cool plane! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.30.150|172.71.30.150]] 17:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
+Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :) {{unsigned ip|108.162.237.87|15:50, 17 December 2021}}
 Technically, the comment about American flag napkins is correct only in Washington, D.C.  [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/3 4 USC 3] '''prohibits''' flag napkins in DC as a misdemeanor.  [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/8 4 USC 8] '''discourages''' flag napkins but does not criminalize them. (At least based on the law cited by the article, [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/chapter-1 4 USC Chapter 1]. State or local laws or other sections of the USC might say more.) [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 03:14, 14 October 2023 (UTC)
-: Ooh, look at that cool spring!
+:Ooh, look at that cool spring! {{unsigned ip|172.71.130.150|17:08, 3 September 2024 (UTC)}}

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 :If it's not labeled "My Hobby", it doesn't belong in that series. There are similarities, but they aren't exactly the same, and it's not labeled as part of the "My Hobby" series. [[User:NealCruco|NealCruco]] ([[User talk:NealCruco|talk]]) 03:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
 ::I think it's rather an opposing behavior. In "My Hobby" it is usually Cueball driving others nuts, here he ignores someone else who is trying to drive him nuts. --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.217|141.101.105.217]] 06:53, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
-techically,you can make a fruit salad with only tomatoes and cucumbers [[User:Sci0927|Sci0927]] ([[User talk:Sci0927|talk]]) 15:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
+:techically,you can make a fruit salad with only tomatoes and cucumbers [[User:Sci0927|Sci0927]] ([[User talk:Sci0927|talk]]) 15:23, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 Please explain what is meant by "third type" and "fourth type" in the current comic description [[Special:Contributions/173.245.54.157|173.245.54.157]] 22:59, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
@@ Line 42: / Line 43: @@
 :::Zoology major here: many fishes breathe air (armored catfishes, gouramis and paradise fishes, and [of course] lungfishes, to name three groups). Now ''technically'', if you use cladistic taxonomy, the fishes must include reptiles, which in turn includes the birds and mammals, but you didn't read this far. [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 03:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)
 Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :)
 Technically, the comment about American flag napkins is correct only in Washington, D.C.  [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/3 4 USC 3] '''prohibits''' flag napkins in DC as a misdemeanor.  [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/8 4 USC 8] '''discourages''' flag napkins but does not criminalize them. (At least based on the law cited by the article, [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/chapter-1 4 USC Chapter 1]. State or local laws or other sections of the USC might say more.) [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 03:14, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:14, 14 October 2023
Line 44:		Line 44:

	Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :)		Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :)
		+
		+	Technically, the comment about American flag napkins is correct only in Washington, D.C. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/3 4 USC 3] '''prohibits''' flag napkins in DC as a misdemeanor. [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/8 4 USC 8] '''discourages''' flag napkins but does not criminalize them. (At least based on the law cited by the article, [https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/4/chapter-1 4 USC Chapter 1]. State or local laws or other sections of the USC might say more.) [[User:Jordan Brown\|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown\|talk]]) 03:14, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 03:36, 24 June 2023
Line 40:		Line 40:

	::: "Actually" is another zero-content indicator... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.226\|108.162.237.226]] 04:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)		::: "Actually" is another zero-content indicator... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.226\|108.162.237.226]] 04:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
		+
		+	:::Zoology major here: many fishes breathe air (armored catfishes, gouramis and paradise fishes, and [of course] lungfishes, to name three groups). Now ''technically'', if you use cladistic taxonomy, the fishes must include reptiles, which in turn includes the birds and mammals, but you didn't read this far. [[User:Nitpicking\|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking\|talk]]) 03:36, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

	Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :)		Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :)

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:50, 17 December 2021
Line 39:		Line 39:

	::: "Actually" is another zero-content indicator... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.226\|108.162.237.226]] 04:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)		::: "Actually" is another zero-content indicator... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.226\|108.162.237.226]] 04:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
		+
		+	Oh my gosh, a Sandra Boynton reference! Those are rare (aardvark quote is from her book Philadelphia Chickens) :)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:29, 14 January 2021
Line 25:		Line 25:

	Technically, does it make a difference if there is a comma behind the word technically? (see examples) I never really understood English punctuation rules ... --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.217\|141.101.105.217]] 06:53, 28 January 2015 (UTC)		Technically, does it make a difference if there is a comma behind the word technically? (see examples) I never really understood English punctuation rules ... --[[Special:Contributions/141.101.105.217\|141.101.105.217]] 06:53, 28 January 2015 (UTC)
		+	:Hey, look at this cool tree! --[[Special:Contributions/172.69.248.148\|172.69.248.148]] 23:29, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
		+

	His sentence didn't start with "Technically"; it started with "Well". Does not compute.[[User:DouglasHeld\|DouglasHeld]] ([[User talk:DouglasHeld\|talk]]) 21:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)		His sentence didn't start with "Technically"; it started with "Well". Does not compute.[[User:DouglasHeld\|DouglasHeld]] ([[User talk:DouglasHeld\|talk]]) 21:34, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:54, 30 January 2017
Line 35:		Line 35:

	::Actually, the non-technical definition of "fish" is that it swims in water, does not walk on land, and breaths water. And any modern third grader knows that whales breath air, despite fitting the other criteria. Anonymous 20:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)		::Actually, the non-technical definition of "fish" is that it swims in water, does not walk on land, and breaths water. And any modern third grader knows that whales breath air, despite fitting the other criteria. Anonymous 20:16, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
		+
		+	::: "Actually" is another zero-content indicator... --[[Special:Contributions/108.162.237.226\|108.162.237.226]] 04:54, 30 January 2017 (UTC)