255 réponses à ce sujet

[ColdbringeR]

Ferretinabun wrote...

ColdbringeR wrote...

Yes. 1AD would be the BC equivalent of year zero, and yes year zero would obviusly mean something different in both contexts. You would not need to refer to either of these as "year zero" however. Simply call them by their respective names (1BC and 1AD).

Umm, okay. So the first year of the first decade AD was 1BC?

Yep. 0AD = 1BC.

[ColdbringeR]

(double post)

Modifié par ColdbringeR, 12 mars 2011 - 06:36 .

[Ferretinabun]

GregoriusMaximus wrote...

Ferretinabun wrote...
That's semantics. The definition of a word IS what people use it to mean. This is not the same with maths. Maths works on brute facts. It is entirely possible for everyone in the world to be 'wrong' about a mathematical fact.

The only mathematical 'fact' relating to the word 'decade' is that it must be 10 years in length. There is nothing else about the term that means that it is tied to the Gregorian calendar in the manner you suggest. Its relation to the calendar is historical, not mathematical. Not to mention the fact that there was no Gregorian calendar in 0/1 AD

The term was used by a game review mag. PRAY TELL: which version of 'decade' do you think he meant? The common sense version or the ludicrous pseudo-intellectual pedant version?

Do you pedants really consider the 1960s to have ended at the beginning of 1971? Did you all celebrate the millennium in 2001? Lmaooo

Lol!
I'll be the first to admit this argument has got way out of hand. Yes, it's true, I am being pedantic. But the thing about pedants is that usually technically correct...
I do realise that most people consider 'the sixties' to be 60-69. And I live occordingly.
I just think it's wrong, that's all.

[Ferretinabun]

dp

Modifié par Ferretinabun, 12 mars 2011 - 06:41 .

[Ferretinabun]

ColdbringeR wrote...

Ferretinabun wrote...

ColdbringeR wrote...

Yes. 1AD would be the BC equivalent of year zero, and yes year zero would obviusly mean something different in both contexts. You would not need to refer to either of these as "year zero" however. Simply call them by their respective names (1BC and 1AD).

Umm, okay. So the first year of the first decade AD was 1BC?

Yep. 0AD = 1BC.

So the last decade BC went 9BC - 1AD.
And the first decade AD went 1BC to 9AD.

That means the years 1BC and 1AD are in two different decades simultaneously...

Modifié par Ferretinabun, 12 mars 2011 - 06:45 .

[Fiery Phoenix]

GregoriusMaximus wrote...

Ferretinabun wrote...
That's semantics. The definition of a word IS what people use it to mean. This is not the same with maths. Maths works on brute facts. It is entirely possible for everyone in the world to be 'wrong' about a mathematical fact.

The only mathematical 'fact' relating to the word 'decade' is that it must be 10 years in length. There is nothing else about the term that means that it is tied to the Gregorian calendar in the manner you suggest. Its relation to the calendar is historical, not mathematical. Not to mention the fact that there was no Gregorian calendar in 0/1 AD

The term was used by a game review mag. PRAY TELL: which version of 'decade' do you think he meant? The common sense version or the ludicrous pseudo-intellectual pedant version?

Do you pedants really consider the 1960s to have ended at the beginning of 1971? Did you all celebrate the millennium in 2001? Lmaooo

:lol:

This post. It's win!

[Ascorius]

I think we have gone completely off topic, and it was relieving that someone brought the decade debate back on topic.

EDIT: Fun debate though.

Modifié par Ascorius, 12 mars 2011 - 06:49 .

[Zkyire]

Chewin3 wrote...

DAII: Best RPG of this decade? Says PC Gamer

This is 2011. So being the best game so far is hardly an accomplishment. Maybe they should wait until 2019 before saying things like that?

[oldmansavage]

Sadly, New Vegas with all its problems, glitches and quriks is a far superior rpg to this dragon age imposter.

[Ferretinabun]

Ascorius wrote...

I think we have gone completely off topic, and it was relieving that someone brought the decade debate back on topic.

EDIT: Fun debate though.

Seconded.
Odd that it was such a flippant remark too. 'Best game of the decade' this far into it (however you measure it) is clearly like calling your only nephew your 'favourite nephew'.

[Oliver Sudden]

Ferretinabun wrote...


I'll be the first to admit this argument has got way out of hand. Yes, it's true, I am being pedantic. But the thing about pedants is that usually technically correct...
I do realise that most people consider 'the sixties' to be 60-69. And I live occordingly.
I just think it's wrong, that's all.

"The Sixties" is just another name for the ten year span from 1960-1969, a way to easily refer to that ten year period. The fact that a ten year span is also a decade is what's confusing.

[darklordpocky-san]

no

just, no

[Recon Member]

This thread turned out quite ineresting. Luckly, the devs don't lockdown threads just by changing the subject a little. If that would be the case, this forum would be very strict:bandit:

Modifié par Thekill_3, 12 mars 2011 - 07:07 .

[ColdbringeR]

Ferretinabun wrote...

So the last decade BC went 9BC - 1AD.
And the first decade AD went 1BC to 1AD.

That means the years 1BC and 1AD are in two different decades simultaneously...

These are labeling methods that would have to overlap in order to make any sense of them now. There is nothing fallacious about labeling the year before 1AD as 0AD though. One less than one does not magically become negative one. It is zero. Unfortuantely, someone already decided to label that year 1BC. It's not my fault that Pope Gregory XIII didn't understand the concept of zero.

Modifié par ColdbringeR, 12 mars 2011 - 07:12 .

[VienxInq23]

ArmeniusLOD wrote...

It's a play on words to get media attention because as many have stated, we're only in the third month of this decade so far (there was no year zero, so don't even start with me ).

Decades start at 0 and go to 9. The twentieth century started at 2000, right ? So 2000 - 2009 is the first decade. Second is 2010 - 2019 .Get the hint.

Modifié par VienxInq23, 12 mars 2011 - 07:17 .

[ColdbringeR]

VienxInq23 wrote...

ArmeniusLOD wrote...

It's a play on words to get media attention because as many have stated, we're only in the third month of this decade so far (there was no year zero, so don't even start with me ).

Decades start at 0 and go to 9. The twentieth century started at 2000, right ? So 2000 - 2009 is the first decade. Second is 2010 - 2019 .Get the hint.

Unfortuantely, the gregorian calendar considers 1, not zero, the starting point of.. whatever. Therefore, we are to interpret every decade since then as starting at integers ending in 1, not zero. And because it was presented by the pope, we must abide by this.

Modifié par ColdbringeR, 12 mars 2011 - 07:22 .

[Recon Member]

Why don't people get it? Decades start at 0. For example, the 80s is around 1980-1989

[Csec_2]

Thekill_3 wrote...

This thread turned out quite ineresting. Luckly, the devs don't lockdown threads just by changing the subject a little. If that would be the case, this forum would be very strict:bandit:

Subject? Did you thought this was a discussion of how PC Gamer don'tknow a sh*t?

[accessd]

Lol. That reviewer have lost all his credibility.

Wonder how much he got paid.

[xYOSSARIANx]

oldmansavage wrote...

Sadly, New Vegas with all its problems, glitches and quriks is a far superior rpg to this dragon age imposter.

For real. FO-NV was a very good if flawed RPG. DA2 is just flawed.

[Sir Edric]

Thekill_3 wrote...

Why don't people get it? Decades start at 0. For example, the 80s is around 1980-1989

There's a 6 page about this. It has been discussed and dismissed.

[Recon Member]

Csec_2 wrote...

Thekill_3 wrote...

This thread turned out quite ineresting. Luckly, the devs don't lockdown threads just by changing the subject a little. If that would be the case, this forum would be very strict:bandit:

Subject? Did you thought this was a discussion of how PC Gamer don't know a sh*t?

I see your point

[Recon Member]

Vrex_12 wrote...

Thekill_3 wrote...

Why don't people get it? Decades start at 0. For example, the 80s is around 1980-1989

There's a 6 page about this. It has been discussed and dismissed.

Well people are quite strange to discuss 6 pages on something that is quite clear

[Flunkorg]

Ehhh, if you consider 2011 the beginning of the decade. Sure, but it won't keep that title for very long xD