*seximal*for the base is rather inadvisable). It also has a nomenclature page:

{6} default senary

0 zero

1 one

2 two

3 three

4 four

5 five

10 six

11 seven

12 eight

13 nine

14 ten

15 eleven

20 twelve

21 dozen one

22 dozen two

23 dozen three

30 thirsy

31 thirsy one

40 foursy

50 fifsy

100 nif (from Ndom, a senary language)

115 nif eleven

200 two nif

300 three nif

1000 six nif

5555 fifsy five nif fifsy five

10^4 unexian

10^12 biexian

10^20 triexian

10^24 quadexian

10^32 pentexian

10^40 unnilexian

10^44 ununexian

10^52 umbiexian

10^100 untriexian

10^104 unquadexian

10^112 umpentexian

10^120 binilexian

The powers of 10000 are named by using a IUPAC-like scheme for the power (which is why 10^100 = 10000^13 gets

*untri*exian), with non-IUPAC elision rules (

*un*before

*bi*or

*pent*becomes

*um*;

*quad*or

*pent*in front of everything but

*un*becomes

*quada*or

*penta*respectively).

{a} default decimal

Other pages are accessible from the menu in the top-right corner. The author interestingly seems to consider centovigesimal to be just as good as senary, while considering dozenal inferior to even decimal(!) mostly due to its poor treatment of fives and sevens. (Some of the thought expressed there seems to have proceeded along similar lines to ours at the forum, as is natural given that anyone considering other bases will come across these considerations.) Another part of his or her case for senary is the triviality of its arithmetic, which optimises things for an already decimal society by minimising the number of things that have to be relearned, along with the finger-counting advantage. Hexatrigesimal is suggested as a means to alleviate the low concision of senary. An admittedly very incomplete system of measurement with some units is also offered, along with a multiplicative system for naming other bases.