this post was submitted on 20 May 2025
1205 points (96.2% liked)

memes

15323 readers
4673 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment

Sister communities

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] capuccino@lemmy.world 23 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Why the 'IIII' insted of 'IV'?

[–] DarrinBrunner@lemmy.world 32 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Prevents confusion between the four and the six: III, IV, V, VI, when the watch is not held perfectly vertically for viewing.

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 2 weeks ago

Actually very common in watches with roman numbers iirc

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

i'm pretty sure that IV is a modern typographic thing

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 18 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

I've also heard that, because in Latin IV is the beginning of "IVPPITER" (Jupiter), there’s a theory that people avoided using "IV" as to not “disrespect” the god’s name. 🤷‍♀️

Also, on a 12 hour clock, 3 sets of four looks clean af I guess, e.g.:

  • I, II, III, IIII
  • V, VI, VII, VIII
  • IX, X, XI, XII
[–] Merva@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

Since the IIII usage is common in the Middle Ages and even into the Early Modern Period, when nobody believed in Jupiter, that is obviously just something somebody made up.

[–] NikkiDimes@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It could have also started from that and continued on despite people not knowing the reason, no? I do agree that it's quite silly and unlikely, though.

[–] Nerrad@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

May as well just go with VIIII then. Or maybe 9.

[–] Corn@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago