http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/01/01/MN621BB41U.DTL

[the above article, which explains why we should be saying "twenty-ten" led to this email]

Ms. Asimov:

You just made my day, weekend, and year! I've been interested in this topic for the better part of the decade. In the 20th century, discussing the future (whether in movies, news, etc), people always referred to it as "Twenty-_____". However, they failed to consider the impact of the year 2000; people had to say "Two Thousand". And "Two Thousand and One" obviously comes after Two Thousand.

I waited with bated breath to see how 2010 would turn out. I wondered out-loud to friends who, if anyone, from our society was powerful enough to switch back to Twenty. Would it be entertainers on TV? Newscasters (dear God, anyone but Fox News)? Or maybe this was the change President Obama had in mind.

Never in my wildest dreams would I have guessed the Grammar Police would be leading the revolution! Before even finishing, I forwarded your article to all of my friends, telling them that our long nightmare was finally over. Thus, I'm sure you can appreciate my panic when I finally got to the paragraph titled "Maybe not". Was all my excitement premature? Was this article going to leave more questions than answers? I breathed a sigh of relief when I realized that your inclusion of Professor Lakoff's so-called "expert" opinion only hurt the oppositions' creditability. I heartily laughed as you brought the Linguistic professor to his knees using his own words against him.

Nevertheless, Lakoff predicted, " 'Twenty-ten' is gonna take over. It's shortest. It's easiest to understand." (emphasis added). I'm 'gonna' take Lakoff's opinion with a huge grain of salt!

Anyway, I just wanted to thank you again for your fantastic article. It might be a little premature, but you may have already written the most informative piece of the decade. The bar has definitely been raised for the "Twenty-Tens".

Cheers