[nSLUG] Reminder: Jan. 5 meeting @ Just Us! Spring Garden, Halifax

Joshua B. juggins at gmail.com
Sun Jan 3 03:25:05 AST 2010


I'm so glad you guys are talking about this. I've brought it up with others
recently and I just get blank stares

On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 12:44 AM, David Payne <david at payneful.ca> wrote:

> Nineteen oh five and the like I figured was normal.  I figured two
> thousand five was an exception.
>
> On 1/3/10, D G Teed <donald.teed at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 3, 2010 at 12:02 AM, Mike Spencer <mspencer at tallships.ca>
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> > It is time to switch back to the more conventional "twenty ten",
> >> > just as we had "nineteen ten", etc., for all years in the previous
> >> > century.
> >>
> >> All?  Cough...except those *before* 1910, eh?  Back in ought-six, when
> >> my dad was 11 years old, we used to say..... ;-)
> >>
> >> Well, all along, I thought the decade whould have been called The
> >> Naughties, encouraging a certain frivolous and decadent tilt.  Silly
> >> me.  I can't think, off hand, of a clever alternative word that
> >> captures it but in retrospect, maybe the Global Neo-Null Bock Decade?
> >>
> >
> > I've heard many people say "nineteen-oh-seven" and the like.  Seemed the
> > norm to me.  The nought word is too British to spread.  Given all the
> crap
> > that went down and the way documentaries came into mainstream with lots
> of
> > bad news, I thought the decade could be called the "oh-ohs".
> >
> _______________________________________________
> nSLUG mailing list
> nSLUG at nslug.ns.ca
> http://nslug.ns.ca/mailman/listinfo/nslug
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nslug.ns.ca/mailman/private/nslug/attachments/20100103/d1db4867/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the nSLUG mailing list