Comment on Cum

thr0w4w4y2@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

• 4am@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  ha ha your mom hock my cum every night thru my jorts lol gottem

  source
• lapes@kbin.social ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Correlation_does_not_imply_causation#

  source

  • nahuse@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    In this case, then, it would be pro hoc, since the crankiness comes after the not eating.

    source

    • CTDummy@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      I though it was post hoc, ergo propter hoc? After the fact, therefore because of the fact?

      source

      • nahuse@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

        Yeah, that’s what I mean.

        The person I was responding to was comparing it to cum hoc which means that the two events being considered simultaneously, which I don’t think is correct.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• Quik@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  I think you might mean “post hoc…” which is a more specific case of “cum hoc…” and sets focus on time/order of events

  source