I am surrounded by DGI's

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Today, a co-worker was kidding another co worker about how many cans of tuna he had 'hoarded up' which in turn started a rash of statements about y2k. One person said many folks were going to feel very stupid come Jan. 1 when nothing happens. Most agreed with that. Out of 26 people only 2 (the tuna guy and me) believed nothing would happen. I feel so sad that none of these folks would at least read a few articles about y2k. They totally dismissed the whole idea as some sort hocus-pocus. The tuna guy and I quietly talked about our preparations among ourselves. What is so amazing is the fact that all of the 26 folks are electric power plant employees. Believe me no one here gets any information about y2k compliance other than what the public receives. The directors may have some real facts (I doubt it) but the employees receive no special in house facts.

real facts, but the employees have not been informed.

electric plant.

-- Carol (abc@abc.com), June 09, 1999

Answers

The tuna guy and I believe SOMETHING will happen. My computer keyboard has a mind of it's own today.

-- Carol (abc@abc.com), June 09, 1999.

Well that sort of makes sense... if the average human only uses 10% of his or her brain at any given time (we use it ALL but at one time or another but not all at once), then your 26 person office staff would have a percentage of 2.6 people using their collective brains. You say that it was only you and "tuna-guy". That is a shade under average but maybe you just overlooked someone. Just feel lucky your were granted the privledge of being one of the intellects representing your office.

-- (workathome@atl.ga), June 09, 1999.

I don't know if this wil help your mood, but you can look at your co-workers' attitude another way. They have identified themselves as among those upon whom you cannot depend if y2k turns out to be a significant event. Makes the job of eliminating possibles from your list of potential allies/partners during the worst days that much easier.

I have on my wall over the computer table, a reprint of a quote attributed to Einstein, that says,

"Against every great and noble endeavour stand a million mediocre minds."

Maybe it will help to remember that when you start to get frustrated.

All the best.

-- LP (soldog@hotmail.com), June 09, 1999.


We're all surrounded by DGIs. Here, you're surrounded by GIs who differ to some extent as to the severity of the situation. Of course, there are a few pollys, too, a minority of whom are intelligent and articulate.

Be thankful you're not surrounded by 24 pollys!

-- Doug (douglasjohnson@prodigy.net), June 09, 1999.


I have a few cans of tuna.......so there.....so no one here better ever refer to me as a DGI again.....I hereby wish to be referred to as a moderate tuna guy.

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), June 09, 1999.


I suspect peer-pressure was more prevalent than you'd think. I never started a Y2k discussion at work. I'm a contractor, so I don't start ANY conversations. I simply put my head down and work. However, one day at a local contract, the fellow in the next cubicle started discussing it with another of the employees. The listening employee nodded his head in agreement at everything said. I finally got up off my chair and walked over and said, "Well, I've got some food, water, etc. stored (just in case.)" The listening employee then nodded his head in agreement at my thinking also. Of course they'd so rarely heard me speak that I'm sure I threw them both off guard. (grin)

No one wants to be the oddball. You may VERY WELL find that there are other folks that take Y2k a bit more seriously, but knowing the opinions of the folks who speak the loudest, they would prefer not to engage in the conversation.

Gee...why does this last statement remind me of my feelings regarding this forum? {grin)

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), June 09, 1999.


"I have a few cans of tuna.......so there.....so no one here better ever refer to me as a DGI again.....I hereby wish to be referred to as a moderate tuna guy."

Craig - priceless. LOL

justme

-- justme (finally@home.com), June 09, 1999.


Allow me to type this little ditty while fighting my chronic priapism and disgusting urge to constantly masterbate. I can type with one hand now, but not as fast as with two, so bear with me.

Doug,

I would say if the 10% rule applied to the pollyanna's, why does it not pertain to the goone and doomers (GD's)? After all, the collective rule of statistics is based on grouping (being human, you are a member of the human race that suffers the 10% rule....).

I have three cans of tuna. Can I take Pollyanna out of my Email address now? And a blanket, and a flashlight. Damn! I'm set!

Carol,

As far as the workers only have information that the 'Public' has on Y2k, where are you getting your information from? 'Public' information is what's released publicly, hence, the name. If it wasn't released publicly, we wouldn't know about it.

OOOOOOHHHHHHH YYYYEEEEEAAAAAHHHHH......The friend of a friend who has an unidentified source somewhere in the FCC who says that the telephone companies are covering up their Y2k failures.

Watch out...I also heard from a friend of a friend who received an anonymous letter from the US Health Dept. to be aware of AIDS infected needles left in movie house seats and coin return slots for pay phones.

I'm having a flashback to the 50's: nuclear bomb shelters, geiger counters and communists infiltrating our society threatening our way of life....

ACK! I suddenly have this desire to slick my hair down, wear flannel suits, and smoke a pipe while reading the paper. Gads.

So much for the dreaded Evil Empire, eh?

-- JAW (clueless@pollyanna.com), June 09, 1999.


Sure the 10% applies to D&G people. For every ten people in the world say one is a D&G kinda person. One in ten is also a pollyanna, the rest are woefully, and doomedly uninformed. Prove me wrong, I dare you. You know just like me 1% of the our country alone controls 99% of the wealth and therefore power. For the sake of us "rabble" I used a more accurate scale of 10%. After all , what the 1% doesn't control is constantly being fought over by the top 10% of the other 99%. Tell me I'm wrong, go ahead, I'll admit it if your right.

-- (workathome@atl.ga), June 09, 1999.

Well, last I saw, there hasn't been any statistical information regarding what % of the population is "anna"s and D&Gs. So you are speculating on the percentages (notice I didn't say "pulled them right out of your butt").

What you are doing is coming up with SWAG stats then begging me to prove them wrong, when there is nothing out there to prove them right.

Sorry, I'm not taking the bait. I was pointing out flaws in your logic, not disputing SWAG stats.

I don't have any idea how many people there are that are Pollyanna's, and either do you. Speculation is all either one of has here on the % argument.

Go ahead. I dare you to prove that we know the numbers. Go head. Do it. I double dog dare ya.

-- JAW (clueless@pollyanna.com), June 09, 1999.



I'd never take a double dog dare, I'm just not into gambling. I think Carol was refering to the people in her office that do in fact take chances. By the way JAW, are you preparing for anything?

-- (workathome@atl.ga), June 09, 1999.

Well, I guess the line is drawn in the sand. I've got to show my hand.

I'm not preparing for anything big. I have camping supplies already. I have canned food that's already in my closet. But I am not buying a generator, nor stocking with a food supply good for several months.

I don't think that the fabric of our society will change, but on the other hand I could accept that.

But what gets me are people who KNOW that the world will go to shit. We don't know that. It's reasonable to expect that we'll have some trouble. Similar to trouble with winter storms and such (I don't think the Red Cross is that far out of line).

Call me a Polly, if you will. I like crackers (Hell, I AM a Cracker).

Do I know what will happen? No.

Do I believe public news? Yep.

Is there a governmental conspiracy to Mislead the American People into Being Lead to the Sea Cliff Like Lemmings? Nope.

Am I prepared for minor inconveniences (so what if UPS runs a little late)? Sure.

Remember when UPS went on strike? Some people were worried because of the volume of packages they carry. Small business would fail. Hearts would stop beating. Millions will spontaneously combust (I like that!). Okay, I'm exagerating.

But the point is, my life, and many millions of Americans, didn't change. Same with the railroad failures going on now. Sucks, but we'll get through it. By the way, that story on the RR also quoted another previous "disaster" with the RR. I don't recall that changing our society.

We'll get throught it. We have no choice. That I know.

-- JAW (clueless@pollyanna.com), June 09, 1999.


JAW

You are clueless, just like your address indicates. Did businesses go under during the relatively short UPS strike? You better believe it. What if the same thing happens on a larger scale? The Post Office, UPS again, FedEx?

But there is no point in engaging you. You are here to disrupt, not have a discourse.

-- Dog Gone (layinglow@rollover.now), June 09, 1999.


"You better believe it"

I'm not into just believing factoids passed as true facts. What business failed? How many? Where were they? What % of the GNP did they constitute? Show me the newspaper article.

Small failures here and there? So what businesses fail everyday for a variety of reasons. And we are still here. (And yes, I can prove that small business do fail with statistics).

I guess if by challenging suppositions passed around as facts makes me a disruptor, maybe I need to change my handle.

But if you can't handle a debate with facts, provable, then don't engage me in debate.

-- JAW (clueless@pollyanna.com), June 09, 1999.


to Anita who wrote:

"I suspect peer-pressure was more prevalent than you'd think. I never started a Y2k discussion at work."

"No one wants to be the oddball. "

Your comments are only 'generally correct and they are correct only of the following types:

1. Spineless gutless wimps. 2. People who would not know a conviction if it bit them on the ass. 3. People who are more concerned about how they 'appear' to others than the truth. 4. people who would rather selfishly cover their own asses than put their neck on the line.

I have been fired from two jobs in the last year , directly related to my refusal not to discuss Y2K.

some of the details:

Asked not to discuss Y2k. Refused not to. Never spoke on company time. Only on breaks or lunch or after or before work. Head of department calls me at home and makes veiled threats. Cites 'long standing' complaints which were never discussed before. Aske dwho made the complaints and nature of complaints. Told none of my businesss. Told him to go **** himself. Fired.

Next company. Chnaged tactics a bit. More socratic. Fellow employee brings in three newspaper articles and US News An World report Story on us. Identified as 'troublemaker'. Was read the riot act. told him to go **** himself. fired.

Go figure.

I will not be censored. I will not be cowed. I will not hestiate for a New York second to stand up for my convictions. Oh, And I will tell you to go **** yourself, too. That seems to annoy some people, principally employers.

-- Paul Milne (fedinfo@halifax.com), June 09, 1999.



JAW Paul Milne has been flooding this BB with articles and facts. That is why there is so much traffic here and at the other y2k discussion groups. There is sufficient evidence there is somthing to be worried about. Gee, now I'm sounding like a government PR guy. Hell, if you don't believe me , take it from THEM. There is a great link of TFletcher's thread about the FAA's history of CYA (cover your ass) and general lies that is by any standard a little unsettling. No not catastrophic, but like the FAA is pround of saying "there have been no millenial bug failures on our systems"... of course it isn't new year's yet either.

I think there is more than enough reason to suspect not only cover up but that the bump-in-the-road theory is just plain bad long term thinking. I mean, you can always admit defeat when nothing happens but I'd rather take the suspicion seriously until I know for sure. Don't like it, so sue me? Nobody is going to go on any spending sprees taking my word on it. But people might very well stop preparing when they hear you talk. It's easy, almost effortless, to get talked into apathy.

-- (workathome@atl.ga), June 09, 1999.


More for Anita:

Your observation is well understood by pollsters. People tend, on the whole, to want to be agreeable. This means they are more likely to answer "yes" to yes-or-no questions. Consider the poll question: Will you be taking money out of the bank? You will get mostly yes answers. Now ask: Will you be leaving your money in the bank? You will get mostly yes answers!

Crafting the wording of poll questions is a fine art. Often, neutral- sounding questions are qualified by pre-testing them on fairly large samples of people, and the subset of questions is selected that tend to solicit the desired results. The 'final' poll consists of only these questions. And the pollsters themselves may not understand why certain wordings tend to get different answer patterns. But that's not important, so long as the poll results themselves meet the spec.

Whenever someone uses survey results as the 'facts' to support their opinions, it's critically important to investigate the motivations of whoever funded the survey. Methodological techniques (like the ones I mentioned and thousands more) you're never likely to discover. Often, they're proprietary.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 09, 1999.


In response to countless idiots like JAW: who wrote..

"I'm not into just believing factoids passed as true facts. What business failed? How many? Where were they? What % of the GNP did they constitute? Show me the newspaper article. "

This is just one of a myraid of tactics used by the weak of mind. I should say scared shitless. They must pretend in their minds that they are being resonable. A reasonable person would ask for some degree of documentation. Then they proceed to concoct a wish lish that is impossible to satisfy. Therefore, their paradigm will not be shifted. by facts, evidence or otherwise.

They are very sneaky and dish up a sneaky mixture of resonable request with unreasonable ones to cath the unwary off guard.

"I don't believe in the holocaust. Prove that ANY Jews were killed. Now give me their names and addresses."

Cess Poole uses the very same tactic.

" How do you know that embedded systems will fail? Give me the model numbers of all those that will"

Anything that they don't want to believe is a 'factoid'. It is then said to be 'passed off'. They always ask for excruciating detail in the manner of one who would straw out the gnat and swallow the cammel.

It is one thing to ask for evidence and facts. It is another to ignore the major elements to squabble over the minutiae.(sp)

Venezuela reported it needed $1 BBBILLION dollars. It flatly stated the previous government had done nothing, It plainy stated that they were in serious trouble because they were very very behind.

Poole, flint, JAW et all, need to 'appear' to be reasonable. If they are not, their entire psychological construct collapse in their own mind. They are very very careful not to disturb their mental house of cards.

So, they ask what does it prove that Venezuela is very very behind, in serious trouble, needing $1 Billion dollars prove in relation to shipping Oil.

Actually, nothing by way of necessity. But DO NOT construe this as any kind of admission on my part. I said by necessity. Necessity would be defined, more or less as EMPIRACALLY provable. But it is not.

HOWEVER. BIG however........

This is the real world where we have thirty years of exceedingly carefully calculated IT METRICS. Tens of thousands of hours of study on the performance of the IT industry.

It is not NECESSARY to be absolutely empiracal in order to have an exceptional good picture of the outcome. In other words, we do not need a letter from God.

The bottom line is that the real purpose of JAW's posting is NOT to gain information. Nor is it to help anyone else. It is to solidify his own position in his own mind by virtue of the failure of anyone else to answer unecessary questions that he styles as necessary.

It is a monument to his cognitive dissonance.

He is a rube. And most of the rubes pass through here on their way to the Darwinian ash heap of their own construction.

-- Paul Milne (fedinfo@halifax.com), June 09, 1999.


Paul:

Capers Jones, who defined and collected many of those metrics, himself admits that they cannot be applied to remediation projects. This is partly the case because they weren't collected from such projects, and partly because y2k is quite unique in programming annals.

While it's true that such metrics give us insights into programming projects of various sizes generally, the misapplication of development metrics to what is mostly a maintenance task (for which metrics have been neither defined nor collected) deprives those metrics of their predictive value.

Basing your expectations on the application of the wrong tool guarantees inaccuracy. Kind of like using a hammer to cut down a tree because a saw hasn't been invented. Predicting the time required based on how long it takes to pound a nail just doesn't work.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 09, 1999.


Most folks are running incognito. Do your thing and forget these bozos.

As for the other "No one knows" and "Where are the facts?"...

FACTS?

I KNOW at least 4 couples who have collectively cashed out over a million bucks from the market in the last 30 days. Yeah, those 20-30% returns have been awesome, but why take a chance? Your choice is whether the tax consequences will be more or less than the drop in value.

2 bought/paid for houses, the others are moving to more liquid forms.

Let me guess, this isn't a FACT. Of course you need names and addresses. Screw you. The "market run" is already on and there is only one chair for every 100 players. Yeah, sit on your ass and wait...(insert Milne quote here "BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA"). I suppose your "FACTS" would include names, addresses, etc.

-- br14 (br14@bout.done), June 09, 1999.


Carol:

Virtually all of us are amid DGIs (and a lot of DWGIs!). Even in the information technology group where I work, there are a surprising number of DWGIs...which is a good part of the Y2K problem in the first place.

I have started to cut back the number of Y2K conversations in the workplace...except in the Y2K committee meetings and with known GIs.

-- Mad Monk (madmonk@hawaiian.net), June 10, 1999.


Dear Mad Monk, This is known as "periscope down", and GI's I know are whispering to each other lest the DGI's make a mental list of who to visit and plunder. I wonder how many of Carol's co-workers are GI's but just don't want to be on someone's plunder list...... Nobody

-- (nobody@nowhere.com), June 10, 1999.

My workplace is full of DGI's too, but there are also GIW's ("get it wrong's") The other day I was informed by a completely serious person that on Sept. 9th the lights would go out, maybe for about 3 weeks. They were sure of this, it wasn't a "maybe" statement. I told them I had read extensively on Y2K and hadn't seen anything to lead me to believe that. They were unshaken in their conviction. It was my first in-person experience with this, though I have read plenty of stuff that seems GIW. I hope I've "gotten" a few things wrong too, because I don't like what I "got".

-- Gus (y2kk@usa.net), June 10, 1999.

I think there are a lot more people preparing than we know. I think a lot of so called DGI's are anything but. We had to have the well company come look at our well. Y2k was mentioned, and he was worried about what he could and could not afford. He said the number of people calling about hand pumps was extremely high (this is a mostly rural area, lots of wells around here). If you were to ask people in this area what they thought of y2k , they would wave you off with a laugh. But evidently they aren't laughing about their water!

-- Dian (bdp@accessunited.com), June 10, 1999.

I think *everyone* I work with is a GI in terms of the issue.

But most do nothing because they make so little money, and they feel helpless. They expect that the powers that be will get the situation back on course after a month or two, and as "little guys" they are mentally prepared to suffer for a month or two until the situation gets back to normal.

I think the term DGI applies to people who could do something if they wanted to. People who don't make a living wage have so little control over their lives that they feel helpless about all things, so see no point in being the ant.

-- GA Russell (garussell@russellga.com), June 10, 1999.


JAW,you can take the polly out of the e-mail but it's the getting your head out of your ass that will be the problem.

-- Tony C. (yo7@bellsouth.net), June 10, 1999.

JAW

Interesting. You have a closet stocked with food, yet you are a "polly"

Be more specific:

How many weeks of food have you stocked? Do you plan to add to it? And exactly how many weeks of food does one make the transition from polly to doomer?

-- Hawthorne (20@00.com), June 10, 1999.


Thanks for all the feedback. Some replies I didn't understand at all, but most was informative. So many different opinions! How diverse we all are. I am really scared about y2k though.

-- Carol (abc@abcn.net), June 10, 1999.

Carol,

don't be scared - you are "here" for a purpose, you've "been" here before, and you may or may not be back again... you know, in 600 AD TCPTB (Christian) banned the concept of reincarnation, it was originally in the "bible" [the grouping of various writings that were deemed acceptable "over the years"] - fact is - it is the way things are - toodle pip! see you on the other side...:)

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), June 10, 1999.


I am currently working y2k projects but I have NEVER heard any employee other than myself mention preparedness. INCREDIBLE!

Got denial?

-- MidwestMike_ (midwestmike_@hotmail.com), June 10, 1999.


Andy, I will have to research your information. Sounds interesting. P.S. I

-- Carol (abc@abc.com), June 10, 1999.

....1. Spineless gutless wimps. 2. People who would not know a conviction if it bit them on the ass. 3. People who are more concerned about how they 'appear' to others than the truth. 4. people who would rather selfishly cover their own asses than put their neck on the line. ....

PAUL - have we worked together? You must have been peeking in my office to come up with this description.

ROFLMAO

justme

-- justme (not@home.com), June 10, 1999.


"GIW" describes many of the people I talk to, whether at work or on the local Y2k forum.

For an example, see the last half of this thread. Start with the post dated 6/9.

-- Steve (hartsman@ticon.net), June 10, 1999.


Paul:

You wrote:

"1. Spineless gutless wimps. 2. People who would not know a conviction if it bit them on the ass. 3. People who are more concerned about how they 'appear' to others than the truth. 4. people who would rather selfishly cover their own asses than put their neck on the line.

I have been fired from two jobs in the last year , directly related to my refusal not to discuss Y2K.

some of the details:

Asked not to discuss Y2k. Refused not to. Never spoke on company time. Only on breaks or lunch or after or before work. Head of department calls me at home and makes veiled threats. Cites 'long standing' complaints which were never discussed before. Aske dwho made the complaints and nature of complaints. Told none of my businesss. Told him to go **** himself. Fired.

Next company. Chnaged tactics a bit. More socratic. Fellow employee brings in three newspaper articles and US News An World report Story on us. Identified as 'troublemaker'. Was read the riot act. told him to go **** himself. fired.

Go figure"

My CONVICTION at the workplace, Paul, is to give the client a dollar's work for the dollar they pay me. It is my CONVICTION that I assure that my client is happy with my work AND my work ethics. In this way, I can assure myself that I will either be called back for another project, or be given a glowing review when I require a reference. This CONVICTION is the one that supports my family.

IMHO, your refusal to discontinue your discussion (which was obviously upsetting your employer's other employees) reflected both immaturity (as in "I will do whatever I want."), as well as a lack of responsibility to your family, as they now had no money for support. Whether you engaged in these discussions during free periods is meaningless if these discussions occurred AT your workplace. It would be a whole different story if your employer objected to what you said/did OUTSIDE of the work environment.

Your response to your employer demonstrated AGAIN a lack of maturity, as well as an inability to control your anger. Companies are VERY unwilling to keep employees unable to control their anger. They have no idea when they might "go postal."

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), June 10, 1999.


To the ASS anita: you wrote:

My CONVICTION at the workplace, Paul, is to give the client a dollar's work for the dollar they pay me.

And that is what I do. Are you merely making the unwarrented assumption that I do not?

It is my CONVICTION that I assure that my client is happy with my work AND my work ethics.

All were 'happy' with my work ANDE my ethics, you asshole. NEITHER was under question.

In this way, I can assure myself that I will either be called back for another project, or be given a glowing review when I require a reference. This CONVICTION is the one that supports my family.

IMHO, your refusal to discontinue your discussion (which was obviously upsetting your employer's other employees)

No, it was not. They refused to confront me with a vomment from ANY fellow employee.

reflected both immaturity (as in "I will do whatever I want."), as well as a lack of responsibility to your family, as they now had no money for support.

Another unwarrented assumption. withing 24 hours of both cases I was fully employed again.

Whether you engaged in these discussions during free periods is meaningless if these discussions occurred AT your workplace.

On the contrary. Whay I discuss on MY time is MY business and NONE of anyone else's. If an individual does not care to discuss the subject, all they must do is say, "I'd rather not talk aboput it and the matter is closed. But not ONE operson did this and virtually everyone participated in the discussions.

What IS at issue is my first amendmenbt rights.

It would be a whole different story if your employer objected to what you said/did OUTSIDE of the work environment.

Our break time IS outside the work environmnet. Can they say, no discussions about football? No. Can they say, do not talk about this or that? NO. And they can not under any circumstances curtail my right to talk about Y2K.

Your response to your employer demonstrated AGAIN a lack of maturity, as well as an inability to control your anger.

wrong again. I gladly tell anyone who infringes upon my rights to **** off.

Companies are VERY unwilling to keep employees unable to control their anger.

Who said I was angry, you shit head. I told them to *** off in the most dulcet of tones. No faces, no raised voices, just 'It is none of your business, **** off.'

They have no idea when they might "go postal."

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), June 10, 1999

You are a typical ass anita. You think that an employer can inhibit your speech in ways that HE wants. I have news for you.

**** off!

-- Paul Milne (fedinfo@halifax.com), June 10, 1999.


Anita:

Maturity is an epiphenomenon, in large part a side-effect of learning from your mistakes. But you can't learn from your mistakes if you can't admit you make any.

My younger brother suffered from this syndrome. Endless problems, none of them ever his fault. Couldn't hold a job long, all of his bosses were mean bastards who had it in for him, for reasons unknown. Had no respect for high-assed authorities, nor for high-ass-kissing fellow grunts. And for good reason, every time. The stories I could tell -- cases where the other guy was obviously wrong, later the roles were exactly reversed and the other guy was *still* obviously wrong. He nearly killed us both once when I pointed this out (he was driving, and forgot he was driving).

Finally, one of someone else's mistakes killed him. And nobody else was around at the time. He died never having been wrong in his life.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 10, 1999.


Flint:

My oldest daughter went through the same syndrome. She lost three jobs because she couldn't accept an authority figure. Fortunately, she learned her lesson, however, before she was 17.

Sorry to hear about your brother.

Anita

-- Anita Spooner (spoonera@msn.com), June 10, 1999.


often,we're forced to say or do things we would not normaly say or do,that is called diplomacy.paul,you were fired for telling your your boss to fuck off.had you said something to the effect of "I only speak of Y2k on my own time"not only would you still have your job,but they'd be liable for wrongful termination.saying that you've been fired over y2k when you obviously were fired for telling your boss to fuck off makes you look like you see yourself as a victom,and that makes you look in other peoples eyes like an ass hole.we've all got room to grow,don't give up.peace.

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), June 11, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ