To Non-Techies: A Word About Hoff, Flint and Y2K Impacts

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

With three months to go before Y2K, don't pay any attention to Hoff or Flint. Simply complete any preps that are essential to your peace of mind about Y2K -- whether minor or major. Always remember that Flint himself ALREADY has a year of preps in place. Do you?

While Hoff makes good technical oints about a narrow dimension of the Y2K effort, he is profoundly myopic about business and software in-the-large. Don't forget that he views all of YOUR preps as either foolishly unnecessary or manipulated by Ed Yourdon/others.

Flint is a black hole who has dedicated himself obsessively to misreading and misapplying the statements of those of us who try to dialogue with him technically. Rest assured that he does NOT understand software development. If he proves correct about Y2K impacts, which I consider nearly impossible, it will be entirely accidental and coincidental. As for those of you who find his rationalist-ic method "appealing", or perhaps intimidating, more power to you.

Remember, this thread is for NON-techies. For those techies who believe that Hoff and Flint are interested in "learning", I'm ROFL, but you're adults. If you've got time to waste .....

My point to the non-techies is: the die is cast. Y2K impacts, whether BITR or TEOTWAWKI are now certain. We just don't have the luxury of jumping the time path ahead of the events to determine which it will be. Don't be a deer frozen in the headlights -- FINISH YOUR PREPS.

Flint has said repeatedly that this forum, for him, is entertainment. Fine. Some people watch soap operas. Flint watches himself. Personally, apart from issues of life and death that are still on the table with Y2K, I find Y2K (and Flint especially) stupendously boring. I can't wait for Y2K to be over, whether Feb. of 2000 or Feb. of 2010.

Flint and those of you who admire him will be glad to hear I am not going to respond to Flint's posts any longer, except to link to this thread if I become terminally frustrated from time to time. Unlike Flint, I don't generate personal energy by feeding off of people on this forum who are seeking real answers to a real crisis.

To those of you without the discernment to recognize that Flint has, I believe consciously, manipulated this forum to focus on himself, nothing I say will persuade you that this isn't an unwarranted "attack" on Flint. Go ahead and flame here -- I won't respond.

To those of you who understand what I'm saying, it's my small contribution to closing down the black hole. I hope YOU won't post here either and, again, I won't respond. I'm not looking for an "amen chorus" and I sincerely regret that this will be ANOTHER thread that gives Flint the attention he craves.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), September 27, 1999

Answers

Plonked Flint et all long long time ago. Yeah Y2K is stoooooopendous but not at all boring. Do wish it were over. But it'll never be over; it will change ppl's attitudes. These are the good ole days; savor what's left.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), September 27, 1999.

And I can hear faint sounds from forum regulars sounding much like the British parliament's sounds.....yeahhhhhh, here here, urghhmmm, heyyyyyy.

-- BB (peace2u@bellatlantic.net), September 27, 1999.

Thanks! I needed that.

Bob

-- bob (janebob99@aol.com), September 27, 1999.


Good show, BigDog. You couldn't have said it better. Though many of us don't post often, it is patently obvious who and who doesn't have their heads screwed on straight.

-- Elskon (elskon@bigfoot.com), September 27, 1999.

Flint who?

-- Greybear (greybear@home.com), September 27, 1999.


My point to the non-techies is: the die is cast. Oh-so-correct, BD. Y2K really is over. What's gonna happen is virtually predetermined at this point, right here, right now. Non-techs and newbies: consider what impact Flint thought likely in January here.

Then also see where Milne may have hit a bulls-eye here last September.

His writing ALWAAYS indicates that he is preparing and then goes a long way to detract others form doing the same. He talks out of both sides of his face.

I think it is also instructive to understand that Flint lives in a heavily populated area. He will not or can not move away. This colors his thinking. He MUST believe that he will be OK in that situation, therefore the problems CANNOT be so bad.

Typical pollyanna thinking. And masterful fence sitting. - Paule Milne Then decide who's duplicitous around here.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), September 27, 1999.


I just ignore them.

-- Mike Lang (webflier@erols.com), September 27, 1999.

If Big Dog really believes what he's saying, why doesn't he wander over to the debunker fora to do his preaching to those who need it? I'm here because I preach to those *I* feel need to be converted, and I'm willing to take the abuse this brings as a result.

Big Dog is only willing to post where the applause will pour in. A LOT of good that does, if he's right. I guess his purpose is only to feel self-righteous, since it serves no other.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 27, 1999.


Oh for God's sake, BD. Who is the one craving attention? (Or is this just an exercise in polly-baiting?)

One couldn't ask for a better example of the church vs school analogy for this forum than your posting. "Verily, true believers, do not listen to the infidel...." Puh-leeeze.

In essence, you are telling your flock to disregard those with whom you do not agree ("don't pay any attention to Hoff or Flint"). There are a few pollies who troll and bait and use inflammatory language, but Flint (and Hoff) can't be included in their number. Ninety-nine point nine percent of the time they don't resort to personal attacks, unlike a number of their doomer counterparts.

I don't care if you or any of your acolytes think I'm writing this becasue pollies need to gang-up and defend one of their number. Flint can ably defend himself. Flint approaches Y2K from a rational perspective, something most in the Church of Doom cannot abide.

PS Lisa "Y2K really is over" - so, are you agreeing with Hoff?!

PPS Lisa - I never heard back about that Superbowl thing.....

-- Johnny Canuck (j_canuck@hotmail.com), September 27, 1999.


Is this the same "BigDog" who claimed pride in keeping an open mind?

By all means fellow "non-techies", we should avoid reading dissenting opinions at all costs! (As we all know, there can only be ONE interpretation of all the issues surrounding Y2k.) In the event you stumble across one of Flint's or Hoffmeister's posts, take your lead from BigDog - avert your eyes, cover your ears, stomp your feet and make loud noises. This way the danger of learning something new will soon pass and you can return to your normal programming.

Sorry BigDog, but your post sounds to me more like a cry of desperation rather than a legitimate attempt to "help" us poor dumb non-techies.

-- CD (not@here.com), September 27, 1999.



Oh, and Flint's a '6', BTW. Or he was.

See?

-- Uno Mas (lisa@work.now), September 27, 1999.


Methinks the doomers doth protest too much . . .

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain . . just prep prep prep"

All together now . . "PREP-OMMMMMMMMM . . PREP-OMMMMMMMMM"

Sad to watch so many people with so much invested in the limb theyve gone out on that theyve become totally unable to see the truth even with their leaders and experts deserting the ship like so many rats.

Sad.

-- Keep repeating . . (OMMMMMMM@OMMMM.COMMMM), September 27, 1999.


more Flint nostalgia

-- memoirs... (lisa@work.now), September 27, 1999.

Flint quits smoking

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), September 27, 1999.

Why can't you just admit it, Big Dog, Flint's irritates you down to your bones for one reason only, and its nothing to do with whether or not his case supports or undermines the 'get your stash together' cause. And that reason is Flint's effortless superiority compared to anything you yourself have ever written. I've fought Flint on numerous threads, but this guy is awesome in sorting the wheat from the chaff on this forum. If you won't respond to Flint, then admit the real reason - it's because you cannot. He's pushed you, many of us, to the limits of our rational intellectual capacity in our efforts to defend our positions, and in doing so we've ended up asking ourselves uncomfortable questions about whether we've really got a grip on this thing. But maybe that's what you are afraid of, that people might doubt, might begin to waver from the remorsless binary thinking that characterises so much Y2K prognostication. In this thread (which BTW I think you will ignore via other handles), you reveal yet again that old (and, I'd hoped long buried) Rottweiler tendency to growl out any attempts at 'incorrect' thinking.

I almost hope this isn't really you. You may not, IMO, be in the same league as Flint (or Milne, the only person who can get Flint to blink) but you have shown flashes of brilliance in so many threads, asking the difficult questions and catalysing so many enlightening discussions. Deal with it, for chrissake!

To any non-techies who want to go beyond the Doomer or Polly dogma on Y2K, then you have a duty to yourselves to dig up the threads involving Flint, Hoffmeister, Decker AND Yourdon, Big Dog, Milne etc.

-- Question everything, even yourself (who_cares@anywhere.com), September 27, 1999.



I KNEW it!

Made a bet with myself that Flint would not be able to refrain from posting.

Thanks, Big Dog, for writing what I've been wanting to say for awhile. You put it in a much nicer way than I would have.

Flint needs to 1) Take up smoking again (those patches are really hard to light and keep lit, huh?), 2) Take up a hobby where a good deal of physical exertion is required (good for what ails ya' -- makes you feel good when you achieve an endorphin rush), 3) Determine why, exactly, he has an overwhelming need to always be right/have the last word.

I suggest #3. Whatever the future holds for any of us, surely we are all better off when we interact with our fellow man without the "mask" or "armor" of superiority.

Masks and armor are used to hide and protect people from things they fear can harm them.

-- Wilferd (WilferdW@aol.com), September 27, 1999.


Hah Wilfred, you witless jerk. Where I'm laughing, it's 8.00 in the evening. I guess if I'm Flint, I'm hanging out with the other UN guys in Geneva, plotting the next phase in the spin campaign.

...surely we are all better off when we interact with our fellow man without the "mask" or "armor" of superiority.

Like ...uhm ...the forum should be dumbed down, right? So that you and any other simpletons don't have to squint and Big Dog gets to retain his title as forum intellectual. Hah ...friggin' hah

-- Question everything, even yourself (Who_cares@anywhere.com), September 27, 1999.


Big Dog started this thread by saying...

With three months to go before Y2K, don't pay any attention to Hoff or Flint. Simply complete any preps that are essential to your peace of mind about Y2K -- whether minor or major. Always remember that Flint himself ALREADY has a year of preps in place. Do you?

Flint on September 25, 1999:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001ST1

I agree, preparation is important. I've done a lot of it, about a year's worth, and I continue to do it. It's only prudent and sensible to prepare for the worst you can afford that you think is possible at all. But just because you are insured, doesn't mean you are guaranteed to NEED that insurance. So I also try to understand the probability of various kinds of problems. And like most insurance, it's against a high impact, low probability event.

This thread (and this forum) is about various personal Y2K fallback contingency plans:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/policy.tcl?topic=TimeBomb%202000%20% 28Y2000%29

Big Dog is strongly suggesting that we complete our preps. Time is short. If you are an "optimist" about Y2K, please state what you consider to be a reasonable amount of preparation for an uncertain Y2K future next year.

I'm sure that there are some newcomers reading this thread who haven't made any preparations at all for Y2K. General comments by "optimists" to the effect that "Y2K will not be as bad as you think" might persuade some not to make any kind of preparations at all. If you disagree with Big Dog, mentioning what kind of personal contingency plans you believe are prudent would be helpful to newcomers.

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), September 27, 1999.


If someone is ONLY concerned with preparing for "the BIG One", why spend so much time here? There's the Prep forum, for getting ready for it, and the Humpty-Dumpty forum for discussing how to put all the pieces back together. THIS forum is a great big free for all, where the anything that has even the most vaugue, tenuous thread of interconnectedness, is fair game for discussion. This forum is more about changing people's world view, than it is about preparing for Y2K.

Everyone has a stake in how the majority of people view life as we slide into the disaster ahead. No one wants to be the odd man or woman out, if people start to get intolerant and cranky, because of the stress. So you get lots of heavy lobbying for each position.

I can understand being frustrated with your communication with a particular individual. I have certain people that I just won't engage with anymore, because my BP just doesn't need the boost. But these public declarations of "divorce", turning it into some sort of holy Jihad, are frankly a more than a little tacky.

-- Bokonon (bok0non@my-Deja.com), September 27, 1999.


Dear Readers,

I am Big Dog. I am big-headed, and have a big pride.

Now listen to me. Don't listen to Flint or Hoff. Whenever they write a post, ignore it. Simply close your eyes and skip to the next one. Especially ignore Flint. His intelligence burns, particularly through the flimsy intellectual facade I acquired at a fancy college. Therefore, because I or you cannot refute Flint, ignore him.

I don't care if I'm being irrational. I want to have my temper tantrum and walk away. And I will! I don't intend to read anything that anyone has posted here in response to my tantrum. I don't give a damn.

Won't read. Won't listen. Won't respond. Won't think. And don't intend to, ever.

I'm not interested in learning. I'm not interested in debating. I'm merely interested in shutting down opinions that differ from my own. If I can rationally refute a stupid fellow, though, I will.

Get it?

-- Big Dog (big@dog.com), September 27, 1999.


///

To say that a man is vain means merely that he is pleased with the effect he produces on other people. A conceited man is satisfied with the effect he produces on himself.

///

-- no talking please (breadlines@soupkitchen.gov), September 27, 1999.


Flint said:

If Big Dog really believes what he's saying, why doesn't he wander over to the debunker fora to do his preaching to those who need it?

That is SO funny! I've lurked over there for quite a while; there seem to be only about 4 or 5 people there, and these post an onging series ridiculing ANYONE who doesn't EXACTLY agree with their collective opinion.

What a hoot! (and a COMPLETE waste of bandwidth!)

-- Dennis (djolson@pressenter.com), September 27, 1999.


Big Dog declared the argument on Y2K over months ago. Do you remember the hit single, "We Started Too Late?" How about the "B" side, "The Code is Broken?" Boths songs are rather repetitive, but apparently, you can dance to them. I think we'll have enough for a Greatest Hits album soon. While not a favorite yet, "Don't Listen to the Pollies" has all the marks of another Big Dog hit.

I thought the preparation forum existed for the folks who have decided the Y2K argument was over. Why not simply encourage folks to come over to the preparation forum, Russ? Asking folks not to listen to what are often well-reasoned arguments... AHA!

For months I've thought Big Dog sounded familiar. I have finally placed Big Dog... William Jennings Bryan from the famous Scopes Monkey Trial. Why, I'm tempted to rent "Inherit the Wind" tonight. Hmm... I can see Hoff in the role of Clarence Darrow. Not sure where you fit in, Flint. (laughter)

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), September 27, 1999.


C'mon, Deck.

How could you forget that golden-oldie, that climbed the stacks of wax so long ago:

Y2K CANNOT BE FIXED!

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), September 27, 1999.


Insight into the Pollyanna mind

Decker on Y2k and risk

-- (as@df.jk), September 27, 1999.


Question everything,

Well, dumbing down the forum *might* be useful for people of your intellectual caliber. Your post makes NO sense. Maybe you should lay off trying to smoke the patches or whatever else you might be trying to smoke; it's interfering with your stream of consciousness.

People wear armor and masks when they are fearful something may hurt them.

Is this *your* problem also?

-- Wilferd (WilferdW@aol.com), September 27, 1999.


Flint is a genius of his genre.

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), September 27, 1999.

Ken:

I'm willing to be H. L. Mencken, OK?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 27, 1999.


Flint's statements speak for themselves:

Y2K will be insignificant.

Y2K has the potential to be a terrible disaster (see Lisa's ref.)

Banks are fine.

I know its a bad thing for the system, but all my money is coming out of the bank.

We are already seeing [in Aug 99] a higher rate of failure than we will se during or after the rollover.

The TB2000 forum is dying [June 99].

Flint is a confused man. He seems to have a bipolar disorder.

Note that his logic is now being used by Koskinen. Its called doublespeak.

-- a (a@a.a), September 27, 1999.


Oh I almost forgot:

The FAA is not lying. They're being delibertly misleading.

Flint is quite a specimen...

-- a (a@a.a), September 27, 1999.


A lot of you folks take things way too personally.

-- Forrest Covington (theforrest@mindspring.com), September 27, 1999.

Lighten up, Forrest, you take things way to seriously and blow them all out of proportion.

Hoffmeister: I regret to inform you that your use of my copyrighted logo is in violation of law. My attorney will be contacting you in the morning.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.~net), September 27, 1999.

Maybe the bitch-slaps would work better over here on this thread?

-- flora (***@__._), September 27, 1999.

Flora, let me go round up WC and the gals, be right back...:-)

Jack, we too are offended.

-- Lilly (homesteader145@yahoo.com), September 27, 1999.


Perhaps you would find it more revealing to think about the TITLE chosen for this thread. To NON TECHIES??? AHEM. The implication is pretty clear that the techies know who to believe. Check out the techs you know, c'mon, everyone know a half dozen or more of us geeky types. Ask THEM what THEY expect from Y2K. So far, the only tech types I have met that expect more than the famous BITR, have been on this forum.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), September 28, 1999.

From Anita:

Paul:

My experience IRL is the same. I've worked in IT all my adult life (longer than BD because I didn't do the seminary stint), and I don't know ONE person in IT who's concerned about the unfolding of Y2k. BD has told me offline (and I wouldn't think I'm betraying a confidence to mention it here) that he can't see how anyone in IT couldn't be TERRIFIED of the unfolding of Y2k.

Lisa:

I reviewed the two threads you presented. I oftentimes wondered what Flint said before I began lurking here (May or June of this year?) What some of you see as inconsistency, I see as consistency on his part. In January, 1999 (the posting you referenced), he stated that he felt that folks should UPDATE their picture of the unfolding of Y2k based on progress made. He never had a problem with preparation for possible failures. He made that clear. The only problem he had was with folks who decided in 1996/1997/1998 that Y2k would unfold in THIS way, made up their mind at that time that was the truth, and have been unbendable in that mindset since. Moving further ahead (and I'm MUCH too lazy to look up the thread), I read Flint expressing frustration that the 1999 dates that the "experts" stated would demonstrate the truth of their predictions were met with very few noticeable failures. I wouldn't presume to put words in Flint's mouth, but I think he re-evaluated his stance on Y2k's unfolding when it became clear that the "experts" that prompted him to engage in much of his preparedness and even many of his beliefs were incorrect so far. This is rational thinking. We make decisions based on data captured at a moment in time and our interpretation of that data. I've got a pantry stocked with non-perishables, water, a source of cooking, etc. I don't have as much food as Flint, yet have more than Old Git. These purchases were prudent for me in summer and fall of 1998, yet the evidence for my locale now indicates that these purchases will most likely not be required. Because I have food, water, money, etc. set aside, does it mean that I'm talking out of both sides of my face if I acknowledge remarkable progress in remediation? I don't think so, and I'm pretty damn proud to have played a role in that remarkable progress. I notice that you state your profession as systems' analyst or something like that, yet I've never heard you discuss YOUR role in Y2k in some of the threads that discussed systems' work.

Bigdog:

I'm really disappointed that you continuously throw out these "Flint Bashing" threads. I found this one particularly disappointing as you discussed how Flint and Hoff either have no or limited software experience. We discussed this in a previous thread when you confessed to having absolutely NO remediation experience yourself. You stated therein that you felt that this experience was not needed, pointing to your educational experiences at Seminary, experiences in Europe, etc. to give you a better "complete picture" than others who had this experience. I'm by no means a historian, but I understand quite well the ploy used by Hitler when he united a people in a common goal (HIS goal) by dismissing others as inferior, and indeed rallying the people's energies upon fear/hatred of those he stated were inferior.

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.xxx), September 28, 1999.


From Jon Williamson:

Paul:

We each move in our own circles. I'm a recruiter. I always ask my candidates who mention Y2K related work on their resumes what they see happening next year. I attempt to ask this in a neutral manner, as I truly do want THEIR information/opinion, not a reflection of mine.

This year, the significant majority have given me answers along the lines of:

I think it's going to be a real mess next year (Electrical engineer, worked on embedded and control systems).

It is going to cause a lot of problems. It won't be the end of the world, but a lot of the stuff that goes wrong will never be fixed. (30 year programming veteren, mostly as a contractor)

I think transportation is going to kill us. (contract programmer/analyst)

If we had put in a company wide MRP (software to control scheduling, purchacing, invoicing, all in one package), we'd have been sunk. We'd have never been ready. I think we will be OK. Yes, I did find a number of "show stoppers" in the embedded chips. (Engineering manager, worked on embeddeds down to the microchip level during their remediation).

This is a totally non-scientific, non random sample. I talk to people who are looking for jobs. This may skew their experience.

However, I am hard pressed to remember ANY of the "front line" people I've talked to who thought that everything was under control.

FWIW

-- Jon Williamson (jwilliamson003@sprintmail.com), September 28, 1999.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ