Difference between revisions of "Talk:1475: Technically"
| 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) | 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. 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) | 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) | ||
Along the same lines as the "bug" statement, does "a rock with a fossil in it" invite any sort of technical correction? I wouldn't know, personally, but there might be some people out there who would argue that since the fossil was a rock, or some other quibble about the phrase? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.192|108.162.238.192]] 20:19, 19 January 2015 (UTC) | Along the same lines as the "bug" statement, does "a rock with a fossil in it" invite any sort of technical correction? I wouldn't know, personally, but there might be some people out there who would argue that since the fossil was a rock, or some other quibble about the phrase? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.238.192|108.162.238.192]] 20:19, 19 January 2015 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 20:59, 19 January 2015
Technically, it's poor form and rude to ignore someone based on *Clicks Random page* 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)
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. 108.162.254.85 17:39, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Along the same lines as the "bug" statement, does "a rock with a fossil in it" invite any sort of technical correction? I wouldn't know, personally, but there might be some people out there who would argue that since the fossil was a rock, or some other quibble about the phrase? 108.162.238.192 20:19, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
