Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (52641)	7/8/2002 11:09:23 AM
From: jlallen	Respond to of 82486

Of course it is. JLA

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (52641)	7/8/2002 1:05:30 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

If they had said "the year of the Lord," you might be right. But saying "the year of our Lord" is different. Just ask X.whether she would ever say "the year of my Lord."

To: Lazarus_Long who wrote (52641)	7/8/2002 5:05:57 PM
From: goldworldnet	Respond to of 82486

You reminded me of a remarkably simple calendar idea I once read of. The calendar was broken into 13 months of 28 days each for a total of 364 days. To this would be added New Year's Day for a total of 365 days, but New Year's Day would not be assigned a month or day of the week and would fall between day 364 and day 1. New Year's wouldn't be in January or on a Tuesday or any other day of the week. The day would simply be New Year's Day and what ever year it was. By doing this any given date would be on the same day of the week each year since 364 is divisible by 7 for 52 weeks. Leap Day would be added each four years after New Year's Day and would be handled the same as New Year's. Very cool! Alas, such an alteration will never be done since we have so much history invested in the calendar we use. * * *