For a long time, there's been this knack of claiming some portions of a generationfir neither one generation or the other and fit some kind of halfway mark between the transitions between of generations. For some reason, these don't seem to coincide with the middle of the the current generation, where you'd expect an X.5 generation to begin but typically seem to be 2 or so years before the start of the next generation regardless of how long the current generation has been going on. The best example would be gen 2.5:
Gen 2: 2004-2011
Gen 2.5: 2012-2013
Gen 3: 2013+
Well, actually it wouldn't because depending on who you ask 2.5 can range anywhere between 2010 and 2014.
I believe that this .5 label makes no sense to add for the following reasons:
1) Generations as currently defined don't make sense to apply a .5 label. If you define generations by group debuts, then there's never really a strong case for how to determine which group debuts cause a shift to an X.5 rather than an X+1. If you define it in some other sense, then what is the strong basis for not just labeling it X+1.
2) The .5 marker doesn't denote any strong musical or cultural change between the two sets of generations usually. These groups are active between both generations, but so are plenty of groups that precede them in terms of generations.
3) This is obviously a bandage for the vague transitions already present in generation discussions. It's no secret that labeling generations is a sign at the crossroads of different company media play, but it is an unnecessary bandage.
K-pop fans needs to move towards re-framing of how they view the history of K-pop, away from company-centric "generations." At present time, the companies shape the industry in all ways, but it doesn't need to be that way. We should instead look at larger trends in music, technology, and audience that may better define generations in K-pop.
Am I the one only who has these thoughts in the middle of the day? 
