- 1. frum the Jag list (score: 1)
- Author: "Arthur H. Smith" <arthurhsmith@compuserve.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 13:52:00 -0500
- A Y2K thread was going along with the Jag list but then it changed to what do we call the new decade. I had sugested the zeroies but said it sounded weak. Then some one said the aughties, some said t
- /html/spitfires/2000-01/msg00101.html (7,572 bytes)
- 2. RE: frum the Jag list (score: 1)
- Author: "Bowen, Patrick A RP2" <PABowen@sar.med.navy.mil>
- Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 14:10:01 -0500
- The only problem with that whole conversation is that the decade does not actually start till next year, along with the millenium it starts at 1 not 0. Patrick A Y2K thread was going along with the J
- /html/spitfires/2000-01/msg00103.html (8,012 bytes)
- 3. RE: frum the Jag list (score: 1)
- Author: "Simmons, Reid W" <reid.w.simmons@intel.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2000 13:56:16 -0800
- Actually, 2001 will signify the END of the first year of this the third millennium A.C.E. (or AD). Any date from 1/1/2000 until 2001 is a fractional part of the first year of this millennium (i.e. as
- /html/spitfires/2000-01/msg00109.html (7,799 bytes)
- 4. Re: frum the Jag list (score: 1)
- Author: "Bradley D. Richardson" <brichard@us.oracle.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Jan 2000 16:10:25 -0600
- Yet you know that by sending it, you've started it Reid. Brad
- /html/spitfires/2000-01/msg00113.html (6,813 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu