| I vote 20 zeros for title and name of our first decade. Jim - Johnstown Twelve Newsletter Issues Email Format On Page With Your $10 One Time Tipjar Contribution But Requires a Tip Only So Visit Or Tip The Page Often For Further Updates and Messaging!  Smart Tip On Page! Vote-A-Buck! Now off with a past and on with the new millennium as we celebrate arrival participating in composition, and so we began while turning up "neo" neolithic anachronism subjecting "two ancient years (the recent "second" one even belonging to the previous millennium)," symbolical "Zero AD" which in discourse there it was not a year, and the neoclassic year 2000AD. Classifying centuries such as the 19th or 20th century "describes the decades from the nineteen hundreds first being 19 00's or 19 O's (nineteen zeros, or O's, aughts or naughts), 19 10s, 19 20s, 19 30s, 19 40s, 19 50s, 19 60s, 19 70s, 19 80s & 19 90s" whereas the 21st century which describes the decades being the 20 '00s and so on and forth! Now that the 1990s belong in vernacular to the 20th century and while the year 2000 belongs to the 1990s, you next hurdle across and see or say consistently that year 2000 "is in and does belong to" the 20th century!"  Looking linear at Zero we see its numeral character in algebraic calculations of minus numbers but the whole other meaning vertically is an "alphabetized noun" of Zero as a name and new numeric reference, which shows up "a natural" and as by definition quite probably is ideal and best whole number that exists as viewed the following way: First Decade, The Title "Twenty Zeros" Consider Double Meanings In The English Language From Gossip Columnist In LADear Randy, I tried getting into your document but could only get to first page, none of the highlighted subjects could be opened. Why don't you just briefly explain it to me. Thanks, Anita Talbert LA.Com Millennium Word From PublisherUntil Now without community campaigning on a certain project of our "Twenty Zeros Decade" and also without prior personal awareness of the name polling or prior also to my "pre-announcement online" dated July 25, 2000 of our decade titled "Twenty Zeros" then, about the question of "what to name the decade" facing scholars now awkwardly booking the new decade ahead by name, I titled a website the Twenty Zeros and included a number of companion sites. "The title will come clearer with use" experts now say. Selecting a good name or title is next then our research edit and production assigned priority until Twenty Zeros is accepted by officials as nearly final in least repect as is the forum which brought us to it and for the effort and time involved ... Because (at least according to some historians) the term "aughts" was mainly a retrospective term applied after the 1990's decade was over, and assuming that's true, there's no reason we should make the same mistake twice - says Writer Timothy Noah - Chatterbox/Slate ... This notion of easy numbers, I say, like zero, one or two here but poses a problem and is stressing us out somewhat. Maybe naturally so because counting begins with one which includes the "numeral symbol of zero" but rather because we together bog on the lack of a name with an alpha-numeric vernacular for such a decade increment for our decades number's (alpha-numeric), we somehow don't take importantly linguistic implementing, supposing someone across town will come up with the riddle answer. Counting where and when counting is a tabulating amounts of time as per say, from one date to another or next or to the nearest date from ordinal code is just remotely connected to the real matter here as I view it first, as first counting and names are clearly unrelated" together rationally speaking and though secondly as, January is such so the first month of the year and with "a year" one-tenth of a decade and both having a name-term incrementally as historically set out at the 4th day of creation in Genesis and yet neither as perfectly in alpha-numeric idiom and grammer as "Twenty Zeroes" and so is unmistakenly referenced under citation search. Third and for possibly a new beginning to solving the riddle presently bogging us take the words widely included by scholars and pollsters and put the two together for a simple name and term like "Twenty Zeros". Now for us who associate numbers still with their names in more endemic vernacular I offer you this; there are E X A C T L Y 20 zeros in our first decade if you care to count them which is the last connection I personally made to this title event and still only do see this count maybe as coincidental. Lastly the title "Twenty Hundreds" which also were nominated is lexicographically correct but "as the title for our 21st Century" and though not "this first or any" decade. More confusion which still had to be sorted out was a poll finalist "the Tens" which were nominated as a name for this decade which though "off this list it too must go" now because it should and WILL undoubtedly be called the "Twenty Tens" correctly so in the next decade of years during "2011AD through 2020AD". Count 10 numbers from symbolic zero as 1 (is one) and get to and "through 10" and then count 10 more numbers and you'll arrive precisely to the decade "the Twenties," at the first day of 2021 though instead of 2020. Now you still don't get it. Do you? Can you hear some folks in 60 or 70 years from now saying, "yeah this is the decade of the "two thousand seventies". Honestly, can you? Try "Twenty Seventies". Sounds much easier by a long stretch or easy shot. I could stake my life on this that, a "full run of a completed examination" on the name campaign of our "Twenty Zeros" will trip an audible alarm before your investigative trial is complete. There are too many indicators pointing there. I might add to be careful at first when writing or conveying Twenty Zeros as the 20 zeros ('0s) problem of still being a number and ONLY a number (or vice-verse, a name) gets in the way until we clear our new "vernacular way" from here. It's not yet an assigned number let alone "a name" until it's appointed so by lexicographers or linguists or expert forums such as Brittanica or the IRS. A day will come when Twenty-Zeros will be the name of a number but that day may not arrive for another thousand years when society then could say "well that's easy, we'll commentary "Twenty Zeros" AND NOW too "Thirty-Zeros" numbers and as the vernacular to their name, just why didn't they accomplish it a thousand years ago when they indeed HAD 20 zeros in their decade"? Don't we realize that we are in 20 years from now going to simply say "Twenty-Twenties" or would we say "Two-Thousand Twenties"? No way sorry but nope! We may just cite both. Every decade title has 2 words which are numbers and while are just words, but for the while philologists may linguistically choose correct lexicon structuring their paragraphs more interpretively. Is it any different for our decade here. Welcome comments and questions to Publisher@LA.Com Thursday 9-14-2000 Concerning a letter above on this page updated, revised and restated! What we are attempting to do first is assign "words and/or a term to 2 successive numerical characters" or to a number (in this case, the number two-thousands) as in the vernacular use other than a term as "the 2000's. There has not been a previous need to do so at any time in modern history. "Twenty Zero Zero" represents the year 2000 and can be spoken "Zero Zero" or "Year Zero" for short which is common in a casual manor and so on next to "Twenty Zero One" or casually "Zero One" (2001) etc. The term use of zeros in the title "Twenty Zeros" comes as needed and is consistent with that area of prefixed numbers located between and including 2001 and 2010 thus signifying importance of the 3 last characters and not just the last. Between (19)31 & 40 is the 30's or term "the thirties" if you look at the numbers and name. Correctly I recommend that whether or not you lexicographically prefer individual vernacular here in that, when structuring content as in above previous line we should be uncritical of where decade dates are "year off" as upon either single entries, such "as 1941 over 1940" and presume it is understood instead now to be as we've passed the critical hurdle. The assignment provides a "name-number term" to the words of this character numeral. For convenience just one word would do better however two is necessary to complete the meaning. Every other decade has held 2 words in their address title thus conformity here would be norm again. Welcome to the decade of the "Twenty Zeros" or can be spelled "Twenty-Zeros" or "Twenty Zeroes," 20 '00s, Twenty '00s or 20 zeros or too pronounced Twenty Os. A space only is required to enter. 10/09/2000 To LA.Com Gossip Column Dear Gossip Columnist at LA.Com, Here is what I'm posting at message boards today and suffice to guess or assume I'm getting somebody looking at our story. Maybe your staff have ideas for my direction at this interval. In time no doubt the search engines will spell everything and in fact I'm only one photo shot away from the finish line there with Google.Com search-phrase "decade name", "first decade" and or "decade title". Yahoo profiles the topic if you only search "first decade." "More later with that Inbox. 10-15-2000 Well Anita T it is sure pleasant to get some mail from "The Column" and I hope things are fine there in LA. I'll be back soon. We have only 2 1/2 months before the millennium countdown. Our story is intensifying as great multiples, (Genesis) expositions, and idiom anachronism come into reduction display of enigma about our "first decade's new name" and, including the "missing year zero" perplexity. For you and viewers I hope this picture is clearer than it is to me but even just today I thought of another aspect which gave my personal perception luminescence. Though rather simple and seemingly insignificant to the whole picture, this does so present a new set of questions to be asked to solve a mystery of the "Here In The Third Millennium Quandary", a syndrome which coincide to such real issues of "giving or birthing titles," as well depicting historical time as nearly so for the record if not yet such as for fact, as here "ages and numbering" are incomplete and so too unconnected by the alphanumeric code and then too consistently factoring entries popularly with numerical factors to the first year, decade, or centuries of the millennium with years "Zero One", Zero Two" (casual or short for "Twenty Zero Two), "Zero Three" and so on and so forth through "Twenty Ten." This is a fascinating discovery no less for me and presumably too for everyone with any literary interest as even officials gave up on and quit this project, now appearing to me as faltering. I suggest that I somehow in working around words and with personal exegesis and because of the new "0-1-10-100-1,000-2000" numeric aspect to vernacular' and also as there is no precedence for this new year and decade, repetitive actions propelled me toward much of this topic. While I was busy "sourcing dictionary" to define names for Dot Coms which I hobby, I decided to steer this project on course by going online. I watch increase value-lines with dot com's by Wall Street analysts. I too comfortably one day latched on to this name and thoughtfully guessed that I was probably first or maybe the only, individual to do so, so I began the in depth search. "Well now it's time to put some serious beliefs down on this" I then thought and "I'm nearly the perfect facilitator for the Twenty Zeros first decade name campaign as I don't possess any more than an outright copyright. I commented in an earlier dated post that civilization in 3000AD would more than likely go ahead and name the decade of years "3001Ad through 3010Ad" the "Thirty Zeros" and as continuing each and every 10th year of all decades after that "do appear" as now belonging to its succeeding decade(s), repositioned in lexicons with the preceding decade . This all gets back to my premise that we today have another question though insignificant prepositionally - of - do we consider again this year (2000AD) "as belong", to the Zeros or the Nineties. I suggest either way the Zeros clearly only run up until mid-nite new years eve 2010 and morning of 2011. I would comment that this year should be invited to the decade while not assume that it can so belong at least not until EVERYONE of us get on this issue. We might concede first that it all began the "first morning" of 0001AD or mid-nite of the last day of the year 12-31-0001BC. At midnight the calendar rolled (right across) "over zero" to 0001AD thus eliminating our most sought after year which by and with exception, could have been the only year in all of history to rightly belong to two and or both decades, centuries and millennium". 10/10/2000 Dear LA.Com Columnist, It was brought to my attention yesterday by one expert viewer that "a decade" by definition has ten years." Therefore since from the beginning of calendar records, the very first decade (see copy below for detail of this) completed at end of 0010AD and each consecutive decades began "as with and as does" 0011 through 0020 (delivering not the year 0020AD as first year of and for the 3rd decade but again 21 and so on and so forth). So my correction as final (as "I once" had online posts describing our decade only through the year 2009 as did dictionary opinions also) for our decade is that this year belongs to the last decade, that of the Nineteen Nineties and not this Twenty Zeros. I haven't looked at this real hard and long this morning but at first look it seems pretty conclusive. Upon completion of our (LA.Com Columnist) email conference on the "Twenty Zeros Decade story name" and subsequently while in route to interviewing a TV talk show host in Ft Wayne, Indiana I counted the zeros ('0s) in the 10 years of our decade and "is it or is it not coincidental" that there ARE EXACTLY "20 Zeros" in OUR DECADE. I am therefore broadening the campaign to appeal for title acceptances of the "Ten Zeros" (years 1001ad - 1010ad) and decade "Thirty Zeros" (years 3001ad through 3010ad) as we here in the "Twenty Zeros" are more able representatives of this entire count of the "20 '00s," as then in 1000AD publicans had not 10 '0s in their "Ten Zeros" first decade and also they will not have thirty zeros (30 '0s) a thousand years from now again but a still faltering "20 '0s (twenty zeros) count episode" of the "continuing on" in another and further 1,000 year "search for a title" for "The Zeros first decades" for centuries and millenniums. On some final note, the V E R Y first post millennium-decade BC/AD was the the "Zeros or Unies (see Zeb's comments in T.O.C)" with the first year then being simply "Zero One" or "Millennium Year Zero One etc." Plain "Year Zero" or "Zero Year" did NOT EXIST unless, before Genesis 1 vs 14! While the first ten decades of the "very first" century AD could be and or could have been grammatically used, the first decade of the Second Century AD all the way through 9 Centuries and "the 9th Century-AD" (singling out first decades, only of each Century, except of and for the actual entire first century) were uneasily identified in vernacular as because poor information were available and present. The year 1001AD begins the first decade and first century of the second millennium and is the "Ten Zeros." At last, it's not difficult to say "Twenty" as one of the two words of a sought for two word title for "our decade." It even gets easier when we countdown from 21, as "21st century," to the 1st Century AD, for example 800 AD. The 1st decade here would be the "Eight Zeros," etc. Now since as the Aughts and Naughts were the clear 1999 poll winners followed by the Zeros, for naming the first decade, it may as simply well be a given that "the Zeros" for a title, and titling the 2nd word of our first decade phrase-term. What I see as difficult is titling the first decade of the second century the "One Zeros". Should we? Do we have to? Right On Time Randy Frushour Publisher@LA.com Viewer Zeb Writes: "I want to promote my Unies for the years 2000 - 2009 first decade" AND (Zeb) ... "Well then in your argument how do they get away with using the nineties?" I mean you said 2000 is included in the nineties (which i don't believe it is) but they (meaning the entire US) used the nineties... View Zeb's entire commentary in the TOC at top of page. Surely while Dave O's comment is analogous, we should note "periods of time under one year are plainly referred to as months, weeks, days, hours, minutes and seconds." Dave O Writes: Hi Randy, This is Dave O, the author of the dictionary-by-phone extension on Tellme. I did not write the definition of "twenties" as referring to the period of time from 1920 to 1929, namely that it should instead refer to 1921 through 1930 If I'm reading you correctly, you're basing this on the fact that there was no zero year, so the first decade in the AD time era was year 1 to year 10. The second was year 11 to year 20. The third was year 21 to year 30, and that is the period you would call the "twenties", is that correct? You're right when you surmise that I am only providing an interface to a dictionary and that I do not control the dictionary's content. It is in fact Merriam Webster's online dictionary, found at M-W.Com. You should probably direct your concerns to them. However, I would have to say that I disagree with you. A decade, of course, is a period of ten years. And the first year of the AD period really was 1, so the first decade really did run from 1 to 10, then 11 to 20, then 21 to 30. But... Finish reading Dave O's dictionary commentary TOC above. End Of Church Age Registry Timeline 11.15.2005 by Matthew T Sussman Blog Critics |
 Sign Guestbook |
 View Guestbook |
| United States Publisher |
 |
  |
|
. |
| Visitors: 00050 |
| zerOs home | Beginner Forum | Genuine Unies Viewer Zeb | Dictionary Comment | Last Half First Decade | Exposition | Multiparty |