01:02:03 04/05/06
i like your gum fortune. 
--FoSO Wed Apr 5 10:51:41 2006
One of my LJ friends noticed the same email, I guess, and I let her know that at a more reasonable hour this morning, it was 04/05/06 07:08:09.

Also, let me save the trouble of some foreigner to point out that it happens next month on the 4th of May: 04/05/06 (in the European fashion)
--LAN3 Wed Apr 5 12:36:21 2006
Yeah, like I said, I'm not a big fan of mm/dd/yy. As you can see on the site, YYYY.MM.DD is ordered correctly, and as far as I know nobody uses yyyy-dd-mm, so logic can win over tradition.
--Kirk Wed Apr 5 13:10:05 2006
yyyy-dd-mm is good for archiving but impractical for daily use, unless your computing.
If somebody asks me for the date, I give them the day. They should know the year and month.
--xoxoxo Bruce Wed Apr 5 19:52:48 2006
yyyy-dd-mm? Or yyyy-mm-dd?
--Kirk Wed Apr 5 21:58:37 2006
yyyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss is the ISO standard. Largest/most significant to least significant. Thus 3AM May 4th is a better representation of an interesting timestamp. Or 6AM June 6th.
--ericball Fri Apr 7 12:02:39 2006
What a joy to find such clear thinking. Thanks for pstoing!
--Topher Sat Sep 10 05:38:56 2011

Comments Disabled... (Thanks Dirty Rotten Spammers)
Feel free to write kirkjerk at gmail dot com!