4 ms·
The usual answer to the date controversy is that since there wasn't a year 0, each decade must be 1-10, so the 10s start in 2011. I'm comfortable with saying,
by randallsquared 16y ago
The usual answer to the date controversy is that since there wasn't a year 0, each decade must be 1-10, so the 10s start in 2011.
I'm comfortable with saying, instead, that the first decade had 9 years and the first century 99 years, and so on, but other people seem to object more. :)
- corin_ 16y agoPerhaps overly ironic given my pedantic tags before, but the year 0 issue is something where I see no point being technical. As far as the population of the world is concerned, 2000 was the start of the new millenium, etc. Either way: while you can claim that 2011 is the start of the next decade, 2010 is definitively the start of "the 10s". I was born in `90, I would listen to an argument that I was born in the same decade as someone who was born in `85, but to say I was born in the eighties would be undeniably incorrect.
- dtby 16y agoThat is ridiculous. You can say that the the second decade of the 21st Century started in 2011... but to pretend that the 201x decade started in 2011 is not even wrong.