On Thu, 21 May 2026 at 13:44, Kirk Wolak <wolakk@gmail.com> wrote:
From my perspective, I like management asking "It's 2032... Why are we on PG 28 still?"
The only question it raises is if it should be PG 2026? because in about 1,000 years it could get confusing.
And I know the PG crowd likes to think ahead...
I like this because it makes it very clear that there has been a change in numbering scheme. Skipping 7 numbers could be due to almost anything, in the long term, but no one will think PG2026 is just 2008 versions after PG18. Also, I agree that while most likely no one on this list will be worrying about this in 2100, it would be nice to know that nobody has to worry about what comes after PG99.
