So it's hard to believe, but in 3 short years a new decade will begin. This got me thinking about what it is we should consider acceptable for submissions of all types with regard to years. At what point do we feel that 2000 - 2005 is acceptable... if ever? What about 2000 - 2010? I think planning ahead for any changes is a smart thing. Let us all know your own opinions.
RetroDaze
I'm on
the naughty
list.
the naughty
list.
OFFICIAL
RETRORATING: 12
CONTEST WINNER!
Forum » Writer's Block » Setting Retro Parameters
|
|
|
You love this signature.
|
|
It should be important to remember that what is considered "retro" depends on the demographic of the site, and if the average age changes, so will the definition. Already there are kids who consider the PS1 and Dreamcast to be old school. If I had to define retro, I'd say anything at least 20 years old. That should be a big enough timegap so we won't get people writing about anything that would be considered "modern". The women of New Vegas ask me a lot if there's a Mrs. New Vegas. Well, of course there is! You're her. And you're still just as perfect as the day we met.
|
|
when i planned to submit my first "2000s" article on retrojunk, some users thought that 2000-2005 should be the limit on how far a 2000s article should go. granted when i plan on writing my cartoon/art retrospective i'll be starting it off from 1994 to 2011, when i created gilda, so it's hard for me to say, really. i'll likely just make it a smurf photog article. besides, transformers: the movie took place in the year 2005, so it could count as retro xD Nintendo Network ID: Benjamillion
PSN account ID: benjanime YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@benny.bros./featured |
|
I agree with jkatz
20 years is a good rule of thumb for what is retro. Once we reach 2020, we should open the vaults for the 2000's |
|
I feel like 80s kids were the first generation to become nostalgic simultaneously as the internet developed.
|
|
I'm guessing for a guy my age the early 2000's would be included in mine. I would try to stick with pre-2000's, but I would say up until 2005 would be good. 2005 to me was when any resemblance to the 90's part of my childhood died off. After that everything is too "modern".
*Insert funny signature here*
|
|
Hard to say. If you've ever seen the episode of Bojack Horseman that takes place in 2007... they did a good job with that and it feels as dated as 1997. Or with technology... remember when camera phones were a big deal? Positively ancient now!
 This thing was The Bomb Dot Com in 2006 But overall, I'd agree that 20 years is a good guideline. |
|
I think 15 years would be the absolute lowest cutoff point that would be reasonable. That would mean that everything up to 2002 would count as retro right now and that everything up to 2005 would count as retro in 2020.
|
|
I'm with jkatz in that 20 years is a good length of time. 80s and 90s are still such deep goldmines that I can't see 2000s nostalgia eclipsing the nostalgia of anything prior to the internet age.
'80s Kid. '90s Grad. '00 Dad.
|
|
|
It's cool to see so many people agree with me
 How strict do you guys feel this rule should be? I think 19-18 years old is fine; 15 would be pushing it. The women of New Vegas ask me a lot if there's a Mrs. New Vegas. Well, of course there is! You're her. And you're still just as perfect as the day we met.
|
|
20 years or longer
50s, 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s |
