Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Tobiah Tobiah is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 666
Default NY

On 1/17/20 1:38 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 09:10:38 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:28:05 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

So what was the first year of the first decade in our current CE
reckoning? No need to bring mythical figures into it - straight
question.


The first year was year 1, making the first decade span the years
1 through 10, the second decade starting at year 11. Or is there
a trick to your question?

No trick. You make my point perfectly. Decades start on the year that
ends in a 1, not a 0.

So when I was 10 years old, I had not lived a decade, because
"Decades start on the year that ends in a 1" whereas
my first decade started with a year that ended in 6.

I'm just saying that when someone refers to the 50's say, it's
as arbitrary as saying "the evens". It's a description that
we can use to group some of the past years together so we can
easily agree on which ones we're talking about.


I blame the schools lousy maths skills. When you were ten years old
you had lived a decade. Just you were one year old you had lived a
year.

d


And that is what happens when you post before you are awake. Let me
try again...
I blame the schools for lousy maths skills. When you were ten years
old you had lived a decade, just as when you were one year old you had
lived a year.


You are reiterating my point. I may have failed to convey the irony in my
earlier reply. The first decade of our current calendar may have ended on
the first day of year 11, but a decade per se has an arbitrary start point.
I'd even venture to say that it need not begin at the start of a calendar
year.


One popular dictionary's entry:

1) a period of ten years: the three decades from 1776 to 1806.
2) a period of ten years beginning with a year whose last digit is zero:
the decade of the 1980s.
3) a group, set, or series of ten.
  #42   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Don Pearce[_3_] Don Pearce[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,417
Default NY

On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 08:34:32 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

On 1/17/20 1:38 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 09:10:38 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:28:05 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

So what was the first year of the first decade in our current CE
reckoning? No need to bring mythical figures into it - straight
question.


The first year was year 1, making the first decade span the years
1 through 10, the second decade starting at year 11. Or is there
a trick to your question?

No trick. You make my point perfectly. Decades start on the year that
ends in a 1, not a 0.

So when I was 10 years old, I had not lived a decade, because
"Decades start on the year that ends in a 1" whereas
my first decade started with a year that ended in 6.

I'm just saying that when someone refers to the 50's say, it's
as arbitrary as saying "the evens". It's a description that
we can use to group some of the past years together so we can
easily agree on which ones we're talking about.

I blame the schools lousy maths skills. When you were ten years old
you had lived a decade. Just you were one year old you had lived a
year.

d


And that is what happens when you post before you are awake. Let me
try again...
I blame the schools for lousy maths skills. When you were ten years
old you had lived a decade, just as when you were one year old you had
lived a year.


You are reiterating my point. I may have failed to convey the irony in my
earlier reply. The first decade of our current calendar may have ended on
the first day of year 11, but a decade per se has an arbitrary start point.
I'd even venture to say that it need not begin at the start of a calendar
year.


One popular dictionary's entry:

1) a period of ten years: the three decades from 1776 to 1806.
2) a period of ten years beginning with a year whose last digit is zero:
the decade of the 1980s.
3) a group, set, or series of ten.


Of course, decade is a word with many usages - those are just some of
them. But in the context we were discussing we know which it was: A
defined period of ten years beginning with a year that terminates with
a one. The first decade is the years 1 to 10 - continue counting from
there. And at no point do you get to slip in a nine year decade.

d
  #43   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Tobiah Tobiah is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 666
Default NY

One popular dictionary's entry:

1) a period of ten years: the three decades from 1776 to 1806.
2) a period of ten years beginning with a year whose last digit is zero:
the decade of the 1980s.
3) a group, set, or series of ten.


Of course, decade is a word with many usages - those are just some of
them. But in the context we were discussing we know which it was: A
defined period of ten years beginning with a year that terminates with
a one. The first decade is the years 1 to 10 - continue counting from
there. And at no point do you get to slip in a nine year decade.



The original post said:

It's the next decade here already.


This fits with all three of the definitions I pasted here.
The only reason I can see to force a count from year one,
is to highlight the fact that one understands a mathematical
technicality.
  #44   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Ralph Barone[_3_] Ralph Barone[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default NY

Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 08:34:32 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

On 1/17/20 1:38 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 09:10:38 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:28:05 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

So what was the first year of the first decade in our current CE
reckoning? No need to bring mythical figures into it - straight
question.


The first year was year 1, making the first decade span the years
1 through 10, the second decade starting at year 11. Or is there
a trick to your question?

No trick. You make my point perfectly. Decades start on the year that
ends in a 1, not a 0.

So when I was 10 years old, I had not lived a decade, because
"Decades start on the year that ends in a 1" whereas
my first decade started with a year that ended in 6.

I'm just saying that when someone refers to the 50's say, it's
as arbitrary as saying "the evens". It's a description that
we can use to group some of the past years together so we can
easily agree on which ones we're talking about.

I blame the schools lousy maths skills. When you were ten years old
you had lived a decade. Just you were one year old you had lived a
year.

d

And that is what happens when you post before you are awake. Let me
try again...
I blame the schools for lousy maths skills. When you were ten years
old you had lived a decade, just as when you were one year old you had
lived a year.


You are reiterating my point. I may have failed to convey the irony in my
earlier reply. The first decade of our current calendar may have ended on
the first day of year 11, but a decade per se has an arbitrary start point.
I'd even venture to say that it need not begin at the start of a calendar
year.


One popular dictionary's entry:

1) a period of ten years: the three decades from 1776 to 1806.
2) a period of ten years beginning with a year whose last digit is zero:
the decade of the 1980s.
3) a group, set, or series of ten.


Of course, decade is a word with many usages - those are just some of
them. But in the context we were discussing we know which it was: A
defined period of ten years beginning with a year that terminates with
a one. The first decade is the years 1 to 10 - continue counting from
there. And at no point do you get to slip in a nine year decade.

d


Considering how mankind has royally f$#*ed up calendars over the ages,
including the estimation of when Jesus was born, I dont see why we
couldnt slip a 9 year decade in there somewhere. After all, September,
October, November and December arent the 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th months
anymore.

  #45   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
geoff geoff is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,812
Default NY

On 18/01/2020 6:17 am, Tobiah wrote:
One popular dictionary's entry:

1) a period of ten years: the three decades from 1776 to 1806.
2) a period of ten years beginning with a year whose last digit is zero:
Â*Â*Â* the decade of the 1980s.
3) a group, set, or series of ten.


Of course, decade is a word with many usages - those are just some of
them. But in the context we were discussing we know which it was: A
defined period of ten years beginning with a year that terminates with
a one. The first decade is the years 1 to 10 - continue counting from
there. And at no point do you get to slip in a nine year decade.



The original post said:

It's the next decade here already.


This fits with all three of the definitions I pasted here.
The only reason I can see to force a count from year one,
is to highlight the fact that one understands a mathematical
technicality.


Maybe I should have said "It's the decade of '20s here already". Unless
somebody wants to claim 2020 is really still in the decade of the '10s
.... ;-O

geoff


  #46   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Don Pearce[_3_] Don Pearce[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,417
Default NY

On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 19:19:05 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 08:34:32 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

On 1/17/20 1:38 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 09:10:38 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:28:05 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

So what was the first year of the first decade in our current CE
reckoning? No need to bring mythical figures into it - straight
question.


The first year was year 1, making the first decade span the years
1 through 10, the second decade starting at year 11. Or is there
a trick to your question?

No trick. You make my point perfectly. Decades start on the year that
ends in a 1, not a 0.

So when I was 10 years old, I had not lived a decade, because
"Decades start on the year that ends in a 1" whereas
my first decade started with a year that ended in 6.

I'm just saying that when someone refers to the 50's say, it's
as arbitrary as saying "the evens". It's a description that
we can use to group some of the past years together so we can
easily agree on which ones we're talking about.

I blame the schools lousy maths skills. When you were ten years old
you had lived a decade. Just you were one year old you had lived a
year.

d

And that is what happens when you post before you are awake. Let me
try again...
I blame the schools for lousy maths skills. When you were ten years
old you had lived a decade, just as when you were one year old you had
lived a year.

You are reiterating my point. I may have failed to convey the irony in my
earlier reply. The first decade of our current calendar may have ended on
the first day of year 11, but a decade per se has an arbitrary start point.
I'd even venture to say that it need not begin at the start of a calendar
year.


One popular dictionary's entry:

1) a period of ten years: the three decades from 1776 to 1806.
2) a period of ten years beginning with a year whose last digit is zero:
the decade of the 1980s.
3) a group, set, or series of ten.


Of course, decade is a word with many usages - those are just some of
them. But in the context we were discussing we know which it was: A
defined period of ten years beginning with a year that terminates with
a one. The first decade is the years 1 to 10 - continue counting from
there. And at no point do you get to slip in a nine year decade.

d


Considering how mankind has royally f$#*ed up calendars over the ages,
including the estimation of when Jesus was born, I dont see why we
couldnt slip a 9 year decade in there somewhere. After all, September,
October, November and December arent the 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th months
anymore.


Jesus? Well if you are going to try to use the fictional birth of a
mythological being, then yes, all bets are off.

d
  #47   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
None None is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default NY

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Of course, decade is a word with many usages - those are just some of
them. But in the context we were discussing we know which it was: A
defined period of ten years beginning with a year that terminates with
a one. The first decade is the years 1 to 10 - continue counting from
there. And at no point do you get to slip in a nine year decade.


In the context we were discussing, the OP was clearly discussing the decade
of the 2020's, which began on the first inst. In a year ending in zero. A
decade whose start was marked and celebrated worldwide. In the context we
were discussing, we know exactly which decade we were discussing. The one
that began at the beginning of this year, which ends in zero. Nobody is
slipping in a nine-year decade, although you seem to be trying, and reveling
in your failure, having vanquished a straw man of your own device.

It was you who promptly _changed_ the subject to decades beginning in years
ending in one. Such decades have no practical use other than pedantic
posturing. When such a decade begins next January 1, it will only be marked
by the posturing pedants. Nobody else will care.

  #48   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Don Pearce[_3_] Don Pearce[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,417
Default NY

On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 11:08:49 -0500, "None" wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...

Of course, decade is a word with many usages - those are just some of
them. But in the context we were discussing we know which it was: A
defined period of ten years beginning with a year that terminates with
a one. The first decade is the years 1 to 10 - continue counting from
there. And at no point do you get to slip in a nine year decade.


In the context we were discussing, the OP was clearly discussing the decade
of the 2020's, which began on the first inst. In a year ending in zero. A
decade whose start was marked and celebrated worldwide. In the context we
were discussing, we know exactly which decade we were discussing. The one
that began at the beginning of this year, which ends in zero. Nobody is
slipping in a nine-year decade, although you seem to be trying, and reveling
in your failure, having vanquished a straw man of your own device.

It was you who promptly _changed_ the subject to decades beginning in years
ending in one. Such decades have no practical use other than pedantic
posturing. When such a decade begins next January 1, it will only be marked
by the posturing pedants. Nobody else will care.


Too boring.

d
  #49   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Ralph Barone[_3_] Ralph Barone[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default NY

Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 19:19:05 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 08:34:32 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

On 1/17/20 1:38 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 09:10:38 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:28:05 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

So what was the first year of the first decade in our current CE
reckoning? No need to bring mythical figures into it - straight
question.


The first year was year 1, making the first decade span the years
1 through 10, the second decade starting at year 11. Or is there
a trick to your question?

No trick. You make my point perfectly. Decades start on the year that
ends in a 1, not a 0.

So when I was 10 years old, I had not lived a decade, because
"Decades start on the year that ends in a 1" whereas
my first decade started with a year that ended in 6.

I'm just saying that when someone refers to the 50's say, it's
as arbitrary as saying "the evens". It's a description that
we can use to group some of the past years together so we can
easily agree on which ones we're talking about.

I blame the schools lousy maths skills. When you were ten years old
you had lived a decade. Just you were one year old you had lived a
year.

d

And that is what happens when you post before you are awake. Let me
try again...
I blame the schools for lousy maths skills. When you were ten years
old you had lived a decade, just as when you were one year old you had
lived a year.

You are reiterating my point. I may have failed to convey the irony in my
earlier reply. The first decade of our current calendar may have ended on
the first day of year 11, but a decade per se has an arbitrary start point.
I'd even venture to say that it need not begin at the start of a calendar
year.


One popular dictionary's entry:

1) a period of ten years: the three decades from 1776 to 1806.
2) a period of ten years beginning with a year whose last digit is zero:
the decade of the 1980s.
3) a group, set, or series of ten.

Of course, decade is a word with many usages - those are just some of
them. But in the context we were discussing we know which it was: A
defined period of ten years beginning with a year that terminates with
a one. The first decade is the years 1 to 10 - continue counting from
there. And at no point do you get to slip in a nine year decade.

d


Considering how mankind has royally f$#*ed up calendars over the ages,
including the estimation of when Jesus was born, I dont see why we
couldnt slip a 9 year decade in there somewhere. After all, September,
October, November and December arent the 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th months
anymore.


Jesus? Well if you are going to try to use the fictional birth of a
mythological being, then yes, all bets are off.

d


OK, so we all agree that the transition from BC to AD was so bolloxed up
that starting decades on the zero is just fine now.

  #50   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Don Pearce[_3_] Don Pearce[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,417
Default NY

On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 19:32:09 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 19:19:05 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 08:34:32 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

On 1/17/20 1:38 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 09:10:38 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:28:05 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

So what was the first year of the first decade in our current CE
reckoning? No need to bring mythical figures into it - straight
question.


The first year was year 1, making the first decade span the years
1 through 10, the second decade starting at year 11. Or is there
a trick to your question?

No trick. You make my point perfectly. Decades start on the year that
ends in a 1, not a 0.

So when I was 10 years old, I had not lived a decade, because
"Decades start on the year that ends in a 1" whereas
my first decade started with a year that ended in 6.

I'm just saying that when someone refers to the 50's say, it's
as arbitrary as saying "the evens". It's a description that
we can use to group some of the past years together so we can
easily agree on which ones we're talking about.

I blame the schools lousy maths skills. When you were ten years old
you had lived a decade. Just you were one year old you had lived a
year.

d

And that is what happens when you post before you are awake. Let me
try again...
I blame the schools for lousy maths skills. When you were ten years
old you had lived a decade, just as when you were one year old you had
lived a year.

You are reiterating my point. I may have failed to convey the irony in my
earlier reply. The first decade of our current calendar may have ended on
the first day of year 11, but a decade per se has an arbitrary start point.
I'd even venture to say that it need not begin at the start of a calendar
year.


One popular dictionary's entry:

1) a period of ten years: the three decades from 1776 to 1806.
2) a period of ten years beginning with a year whose last digit is zero:
the decade of the 1980s.
3) a group, set, or series of ten.

Of course, decade is a word with many usages - those are just some of
them. But in the context we were discussing we know which it was: A
defined period of ten years beginning with a year that terminates with
a one. The first decade is the years 1 to 10 - continue counting from
there. And at no point do you get to slip in a nine year decade.

d


Considering how mankind has royally f$#*ed up calendars over the ages,
including the estimation of when Jesus was born, I dont see why we
couldnt slip a 9 year decade in there somewhere. After all, September,
October, November and December arent the 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th months
anymore.


Jesus? Well if you are going to try to use the fictional birth of a
mythological being, then yes, all bets are off.

d


OK, so we all agree that the transition from BC to AD was so bolloxed up
that starting decades on the zero is just fine now.


However ********ed up it may have been, we still recognise it as
starting at one, so no.

d


  #51   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Ralph Barone[_3_] Ralph Barone[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 60
Default NY

Don Pearce wrote:
On Sat, 18 Jan 2020 19:32:09 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 19:19:05 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Barone
wrote:

Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 08:34:32 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

On 1/17/20 1:38 AM, Don Pearce wrote:
On Fri, 17 Jan 2020 09:10:38 GMT, (Don Pearce) wrote:

On Thu, 16 Jan 2020 13:28:05 -0800, Tobiah wrote:

So what was the first year of the first decade in our current CE
reckoning? No need to bring mythical figures into it - straight
question.


The first year was year 1, making the first decade span the years
1 through 10, the second decade starting at year 11. Or is there
a trick to your question?

No trick. You make my point perfectly. Decades start on the year that
ends in a 1, not a 0.

So when I was 10 years old, I had not lived a decade, because
"Decades start on the year that ends in a 1" whereas
my first decade started with a year that ended in 6.

I'm just saying that when someone refers to the 50's say, it's
as arbitrary as saying "the evens". It's a description that
we can use to group some of the past years together so we can
easily agree on which ones we're talking about.

I blame the schools lousy maths skills. When you were ten years old
you had lived a decade. Just you were one year old you had lived a
year.

d

And that is what happens when you post before you are awake. Let me
try again...
I blame the schools for lousy maths skills. When you were ten years
old you had lived a decade, just as when you were one year old you had
lived a year.

You are reiterating my point. I may have failed to convey the irony in my
earlier reply. The first decade of our current calendar may have ended on
the first day of year 11, but a decade per se has an arbitrary start point.
I'd even venture to say that it need not begin at the start of a calendar
year.


One popular dictionary's entry:

1) a period of ten years: the three decades from 1776 to 1806.
2) a period of ten years beginning with a year whose last digit is zero:
the decade of the 1980s.
3) a group, set, or series of ten.

Of course, decade is a word with many usages - those are just some of
them. But in the context we were discussing we know which it was: A
defined period of ten years beginning with a year that terminates with
a one. The first decade is the years 1 to 10 - continue counting from
there. And at no point do you get to slip in a nine year decade.

d


Considering how mankind has royally f$#*ed up calendars over the ages,
including the estimation of when Jesus was born, I don’t see why we
couldn’t slip a 9 year decade in there somewhere. After all, September,
October, November and December aren’t the 7th, 8th, 9th and 10th months
anymore.

Jesus? Well if you are going to try to use the fictional birth of a
mythological being, then yes, all bets are off.

d


OK, so we all agree that the transition from BC to AD was so bolloxed up
that starting decades on the zero is just fine now.


However ********ed up it may have been, we still recognise it as
starting at one, so no.

d


For certain values of €śwe€ť, sure...

  #52   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
None None is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default NY

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
However ********ed up it may have been, we* still recognise it as
starting at one, so no.


* For extremely small values of "we."

Nonetheless, we're in the 2020's, a decade that began less than three weeks
ago. It's a real decade, as were the 1960's, the 1920's, and the 1890's. You
can choose do deny that, of course.

  #53   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Don Pearce[_3_] Don Pearce[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,417
Default NY

On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 00:36:08 -0500, "None" wrote:

"Don Pearce" wrote in message
...
However ********ed up it may have been, we* still recognise it as
starting at one, so no.


* For extremely small values of "we."

Nonetheless, we're in the 2020's, a decade that began less than three weeks
ago. It's a real decade, as were the 1960's, the 1920's, and the 1890's. You
can choose do deny that, of course.


Now stop! I've already pointed out that the 1960s did not start until
1963.

d
  #54   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
John Williamson John Williamson is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,753
Default NY

On 19/01/2020 08:53, Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 00:36:08 -0500, "None" wrote:

Nonetheless, we're in the 2020's, a decade that began less than three weeks
ago. It's a real decade, as were the 1960's, the 1920's, and the 1890's. You
can choose do deny that, of course.


Now stop! I've already pointed out that the 1960s did not start until
1963.

(Sorry, politics. Feel free to ignore.)

And in the UK, the great depression of the 2020s will start on the 31st
of January at 23:00 GMT when we leave the EU.



--
Tciao for Now!

John.
  #55   Report Post  
Posted to rec.audio.pro
Don Pearce[_3_] Don Pearce[_3_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,417
Default NY

On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 11:21:43 +0000, John Williamson
wrote:

On 19/01/2020 08:53, Don Pearce wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2020 00:36:08 -0500, "None" wrote:

Nonetheless, we're in the 2020's, a decade that began less than three weeks
ago. It's a real decade, as were the 1960's, the 1920's, and the 1890's. You
can choose do deny that, of course.


Now stop! I've already pointed out that the 1960s did not start until
1963.

(Sorry, politics. Feel free to ignore.)

And in the UK, the great depression of the 2020s will start on the 31st
of January at 23:00 GMT when we leave the EU.


Sadly true. But Johnson, Rees-Mogg, Farage and co can feel smug right
up to the point where they file for bankruptcy.

d
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:01 PM.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AudioBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Audio and hi-fi"