Even though we've only just started the 210th decade of the Anno Domini, we've definitely been out of the noughties since 2010 reared its ugly head. Otherwise surely 2000 was in the 90s, which is silly as the word 90s implies there's a 9 in the title.
I mean, when you hit 30 you're in your 30s...you're certainly not in your 20s.
I remember a link some while back saying the same thing that swung my vote. You can start a decade whenever you like. Just because the first decade began with the year 1, doesn't mean you have to start counting all future decades from that. A decade is just a serial grouping of 10 years.
The 201st decade, not the 210th decade, which will be 2091-2100. But yes, the period from 2000 to 2009 was a decade, although it wasn't the 201st decade.
Aye, we make this time up, so we can largely decide what we want. These days, for years, I tend to count by significant digit, so when we went from 2009 into 2010, new decade right there. No-one ever tried to claim 1990 was in the 80s...
Two of the questions in the poll were "Now that they're over, the previous decade will be referred to as..." and "Question 3 was a year late" implying that it was questionable as to whether the noughties (or whatever you chose to call it) ended as we hit Jan 1st 2010 or 2011.
If it ended on Jan 1st 2011 then that would imply 2010 was in the noughties, which would be ridiculous as that would imply that 1990 was in the 80s (or 2000 wasn't in either decade or the time span dictated by the noughties wasn't 10 years).
60% of people (at time of replying) have said No to question 4, implying that 2011 is the turn of the decade. 53.8% of people suggested that the decade was called the noughties, which means at least 13.8% of people (probably more) think that 2010 was in the noughties. In which case the noughties spanned 11 years or 2000 was in the 90s (or not in any decade), pushing 1990 into the 80s.
I'm sure if you asked them if that's what they thought they'd answer "no", but it was strongly implied :)
You can indeed start a decade whenever you like. I like to call the 90's the years 1990-1999, since they are the years with the word "ninety" in them. The year 2000 does not contain the word "ninety", and therefore is not part of the "90s". Anything else in entirely arbitrary, since there is no actual significance in the numbers we use. You could say the Tony Blair decade, 1997-2007 (okay, almost a decade).
Following on from this, any claims that the new millennium started in the year 2001 are silly for three reasons: 1) our numbering system is arbitrary, 2) we didn't start using the present system until well after it was defined to have started, and 3) the most important reason of all gets its own paragraph:
3) Since everything is arbitrary, the only interesting thing about a new year is that lots of digits change at once. At the end of the year 1999, all 4 digits changed. At the end of the year 2000, only 1 digit changed. All 4 digits are not going to change for another thousand years. This is the only reason why it's worth celebrating the new millennium, and why it should be celebrated on the year 2000, not 2001.
I agree with your point 3, although I also agree that 2001 is the start of the second thousand years since some mythical fellow was born. Then again, does that mean that Jesus was born on the 25th of December 1 BC? Seems a bit weird he lived for a week before it went all Anno Domini.
Either way, I'm happy to say both are right, but I get more excited when the big numbers all change at once.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
I mean, when you hit 30 you're in your 30s...you're certainly not in your 20s.
I remember a link some while back saying the same thing that swung my vote. You can start a decade whenever you like. Just because the first decade began with the year 1, doesn't mean you have to start counting all future decades from that. A decade is just a serial grouping of 10 years.
no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
Must remember that to divide by ten you remove the lowest value 0, not just any random one of your choosing.
no subject
no subject
If it ended on Jan 1st 2011 then that would imply 2010 was in the noughties, which would be ridiculous as that would imply that 1990 was in the 80s (or 2000 wasn't in either decade or the time span dictated by the noughties wasn't 10 years).
60% of people (at time of replying) have said No to question 4, implying that 2011 is the turn of the decade. 53.8% of people suggested that the decade was called the noughties, which means at least 13.8% of people (probably more) think that 2010 was in the noughties. In which case the noughties spanned 11 years or 2000 was in the 90s (or not in any decade), pushing 1990 into the 80s.
I'm sure if you asked them if that's what they thought they'd answer "no", but it was strongly implied :)
no subject
Following on from this, any claims that the new millennium started in the year 2001 are silly for three reasons: 1) our numbering system is arbitrary, 2) we didn't start using the present system until well after it was defined to have started, and 3) the most important reason of all gets its own paragraph:
3) Since everything is arbitrary, the only interesting thing about a new year is that lots of digits change at once. At the end of the year 1999, all 4 digits changed. At the end of the year 2000, only 1 digit changed. All 4 digits are not going to change for another thousand years. This is the only reason why it's worth celebrating the new millennium, and why it should be celebrated on the year 2000, not 2001.
This is my theory, and I'm sticking to it ;)
no subject
Either way, I'm happy to say both are right, but I get more excited when the big numbers all change at once.