We don't need a term for that decade now, because we can just say 'the last decade'. It's ten or twenty years from now, when people looking back over recent history want to talk about the trends that happened in that decade as opposed to the ones in the surrounding decades, that they'll start needing a less relative name for it.
(Which doesn't contradict your point, of course, that we can ignore the question for now and let people worry about it as and when it actually becomes a problem for them.)
True, good point, but I guess my point is (a) if there were a widely acceptable name, we would probably have found it by now, as people have been asking the question on and off all decade and so (b) it's probably less effort to muddle through than to look for a decent answer. I think that's roughly what we did a hundred years ago?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
(Which doesn't contradict your point, of course, that we can ignore the question for now and let people worry about it as and when it actually becomes a problem for them.)
no subject
no subject