Gentoo Archives: gentoo-desktop

From: Theo Chatzimichos <tampakrap@g.o>
To: gentoo-desktop@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-desktop] Re: Gentoo KDE meeting, 22 March 2012
Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2012 12:03:18
Message-Id: CAPDe-1Poy4wfnUu1j=DCKKcZX__3Lu_zAa3k7xEa-31ViqtCWw@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-desktop] Re: Gentoo KDE meeting, 22 March 2012 by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
1 On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 6:06 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote:
2 > Theo Chatzimichos posted on Mon, 19 Mar 2012 10:30:07 +0100 as excerpted:
3 >
4 >> Again, the meeting is for 2012 (What's wrong with me??)
5 >
6 > LOL!  So I'm not the only one that finds himself doing fine the first
7 > couple months (well, after about the third day anyway) while the new year
8 > is still new enough to be thinking about, but then come March and April
9 > when he's no longer thinking about it, finds himself writing the OLD year
10 > again!
11 >
12 > Not to worry /too/ much.  In another several weeks you'll finally get
13 > your fingers trained to write 2012, and then you'll be OK... until next
14 > year when it happens all over again!  Here, I'm usually about finished
15 > with the adjustment by mid April, tho there's been a few years where the
16 > problem has triggered a time or two in June, even.  But I don't recall
17 > having the problem after June, ever.
18 >
19 > =:^\
20 >
21 > Unfortunately, I had a similar Y2K triggered problem... with a cycle time
22 > in years.  For some reason, about 2008 or so, I suddenly found myself
23 > writing 199... again!  The only explanation for THAT I can think of is
24 > that it actually TOOK that long for the novelty of writing 200... to wear
25 > off.  I didn't have so much problem with 201... but based on that, I
26 > won't, either, until 2016 or 2018.
27 >
28 > =:^\
29
30 No, the Qt meeting's date was a mistake because at the same time I was
31 writing some 2011 reports at work, and the KDE meeting's mail was a
32 copy-paste of the Qt one, where I didn't correct all the dates