'New Decade'

evercloserunion

barbarians wrote: »

But see there are actually many people who agree with me.

Anyway if we're going to have this "different point of reference", does that not basically end the debate as "everyone is entitled to their opinion" ?

Well, everyone is entitled to their opinion, but that's not really what I'm saying. I'm simply saying that, through usage over time, the term "decade" has assumed a meaning that is different to the one you are insisting we all use. So, technically, I suppose this does come down to each of us being entitled to our opinion and neither of us being "wrong" as such. But I would think that, in a normal social context and not a conversation specifically about how many decades have elapsed since the calendar began, measuring decades as 0-9 rather than 1-0 is more "right" than doing things the other way around.

MyKeyG

The Gregorian calender recognises the first year AD as 1 the tenth year AD, and final year of the first Gregorian decade, as 10. Anybody who claims decades and millenium respectively end with the year xxx9 while keeping with social convention are officially wrong, it's as simple as that.

The fact of the matter is the whole world doesn't seem to be bothered about the conventional way so even though I think it's wrong majority gets the vote. The fact that this is being debated so vehemently on a Saturday night doesn't say much for 'The Saturday Night Show'.

evercloserunion

MyKeyG wrote: »

The fact that this is being debated so vehemently on a Saturday night doesn't say much for 'The Saturday Night Show'.

Or the Irish pub/nightclub scene.

rubadub

barbarians wrote: »

For society it is neater and easier to say 2000-2009 was the 'noughties' decade.
Logically and in reality it was really from 2001-2010.

I would say logically this is incorrect. Logically 1970 does not have any number 6X in it so should not be in a decade named the 1960's, logically the first number in a decade called the 1960's would be 1960. The "noughties" is inferring 0X numbers, so would start with 2000, as 00 is not part of the 9X's.

Now if people were saying "the 197th decade started in 1960, with the first decade being 1-11..." then your logic would hold -but they are not calling it that.

In a similar way many people will say in the 1700's to avoid confusion about which century they are talking about, since when people hear 18th century 1800's may spring to mind.

You have already said

barbarians wrote: »

technicalities are what matter.

So YOU are wrong to call them "wrong" -since you already admitted

A decade is any period of ten years. Technically, every day is the start of a new decade. -You can use this if you want to be the ultimate pedantic pr!ck and really rub people up the wrong way.

remember technicalities are important :rolleyes:

barbarians wrote: »

Just because it's more convenient one way doesn't make that way right.

It makes far more sense to me, and by your own admission it is not wrong. Very few are talking about "201st decade" etc. If the first decade did begin in year 7, then using your logic/terminiology 1966 was in "the 50's"

dxhound2005

greenprincess wrote: »

So would you call 1970 part of the 60's?

It is just a stupid little thing that annoyed me! I have seen a few sale signs over in various places over the past few weeks saying it was a new decade when clearly it isnt!

The 1960's were the 7th decade of the 20th century. It's just all too confusing and annoying.

MyKeyG

rubadub wrote: »

I would say logically this is incorrect. Logically 1970 does not have any number 6X in it so should not be in a decade named the 1960's, logically the first number in a decade called the 1960's would be 1960. The "noughties" is inferring 0X numbers, so would start with 2000, as 00 is not part of the 9X's.

The expression the 60's refers to a 'select' period of ten years not a calender decade. It's nothing to do with logic it's reality over convention. The Gregorian calender indicates its first year as 1 it's tenth and final year of the first decade AD as 10.

Officially and scientifically any year xxx0 is the final year of any given calender decade the next decade begining with xxx1 like it or not, it's scientifically accepted. However for convenience people have chosen the convention and I don't see anything wrong with that either if that's what does it for you.

All this talk about getting annoyed and at being at each others throats over the matter is quite frankly pathethic.

D1stant

You all deserve a decade in jail for this tripe. FFS

MyKeyG

D1stant wrote: »

You all deserve a decade in jail for this tripe. FFS

Yes but would that be from 2011 to 2021?

D1stant

Sure. As in starting now