Decimate means to reduce a body of things (usually people) by one-tenth. Example: If you have fifty people in a company and five of them get laid off, then decimate is appropriate. If you're playing Starcraft and your main army is nearly wiped out by a Zerg rush, decimate is entirely inappropriate.

Decimate does not mean the same thing as, for example, destroy, or obliterate, or vastly reduce. It means quite the opposite, as a decimated body of population is 90% of its original size.

So stop misusing it.

That is all.

Most recent blog posts from Will Roy...
Will's Reaction to Playing Amnesia Fucked His name was Marauder Shields

Feedback
	honestgamer - March 28, 2010 (10:38 PM) I'd be more worried about the many people who don't get that "a couple of" means two, not 5 or 7 or 13 or 3. If I say "A couple of customers walked out of the store while waiting for service," I'm not talking about throngs. I'm saying two customers left. People do not get this. If I meant more than two, I would have said "several." Decimation, by the way, is being used properly by the people you bemoan. Their use matches the definition of the word as it appears in dictionaries. The word has more than one precise meaning, after all. My gripe with couple, on the other hand? There's no room there for debate. That likely won't remain the case for long, though. Enough morons use it to mean three or five or any single-digit number they like that in the near future, that'll be considered the standard meaning. Words and their definitions evolve and we just have to deal with it.
	Genj - March 28, 2010 (11:02 PM) I bet the Romans are very happy that you're uploading upholding the integrity of their execution methods for mutinous legions.
	WilltheGreat - March 29, 2010 (12:10 AM) Jason: That usage of "decimate", while commonly accepted, is not universally accepted. I'm one of a dwindling minority that's trying to hold on to the "proper" meaning of the word. But you're absolutely right about "couple", that one also irks me. Oh, and "bemused".
	wolfqueen001 - March 29, 2010 (07:24 AM) How do people misuse bemused? Do they mean it as amused? If so, that is kind of annoying. I actually agree with Jason, though, on both words he cites. To me, "destroy" or "greatly reduce" doesn't sound as powerful as "decimate" even if technically it's not supposed to. Truthfully, I didn't even know decimate had this "proper" meaning until you whined about it. XD The "couple" misusage, though, is definitely strange to me. I always mean "two" when I use it.
	bloomer - March 29, 2010 (07:29 AM) Couple absolutely means two, and nothing else! Is there something wrong with all the people where you live?! Sounds like your population needs decimatin'!
	radicaldreamer - March 29, 2010 (03:27 PM) Flagrant/blatant is worse.
	zigfried - March 29, 2010 (05:21 PM) This just in: "a couple" is now synonymous with "a few". YOU HEARD IT HERE FIRST Good info on decimate, though. //Zig
	espiga - March 29, 2010 (05:58 PM) I like your blog background.
	zippdementia - March 29, 2010 (10:24 PM) I don't like it when people use the word "gay" to describe something bad. That one makes no sense in any dictionary north of Texas.
	zigfried - March 30, 2010 (06:42 PM) I'm from Texas. //Zig
	randxian - March 31, 2010 (09:02 PM) Jason: That usage of "decimate", while commonly accepted, is not universally accepted. I'm one of a dwindling minority that's trying to hold on to the "proper" meaning of the word. If words had to be universally accepted to have meaning, then we never would get anywhere. I don't think there are too many words that are "universally" agreed upon. Definitions are determined by how the population uses said word. There is no law or whatever that says any given word must have on definition for all eternity. Jason is right; words can have multiple meanings.
	WilltheGreat - April 01, 2010 (04:13 AM) That same logic could be applied to phrases such as "could of" or "could care less", hence the objection.