This is the last thing I will contribute to this useless forum. A co-worker of mine pointed this forum out to me last week because he thought I would get a kick out of it, knowing that I have followed comp.software.year-2000 and believe Y2K will be a big fat nothing in 3 months. I've read a sampling of threads and I've never seen such a devoted cult of blind followers as I have seen in this forum. I've seen posters pounced on for accusing Ed "Messiah" Yourdon of the same tactics that they themselves decried in previous threads.

Perhaps it is as I have read from others here, all of the minds are made up, and no amount of news or events unfolding will change these minds. That is truly sad and scary at the same time. I am hoping that Diane "Sally Struthers course grad" Squire keeps this board up after 1/1/2000 so that I can see how many of the doom sheeple are still following the party line. This forum is a goldmine for sociologists and psychologists alike.

It must be truly frustrating knowing that the mindset and thinking in this forum is so different than the attitudes and beliefs that you will find outside of this virtual community. If only you could live within this webboard huh? Well, I'll check you out in the new year. Try not to kill yourselves tripping on your AK-47's until then.

To the clearer thinkers: leave these fools to waste away in their own delusional thinking. They are no harm to others. No intelligent scientific thinkers could ever be influenced by their ideas.

You Knowwho

-- You Knowwho (debunk@doomeridiots.com), October 09, 1999

Answers

Hey, thanks.

So you at Time Square in New York City on New Years Eve.

You'll be there, right....?

-- Please (say@you.will), October 09, 1999.

It is always terrific to be the first to answer!!!! Now tell me why this board bothers you, and, what do you think of the current price of gold??

Sincerely,

-- Psychotic (y2k@doom&gloom.com), October 09, 1999.

don't go away mad JUST GO AWAY

-- *.* (b@y.e), October 09, 1999.

Yep. Were biased. We think Y2Ks a global problem. Its a concept shared by President Clinton, even though he doesnt talk about it much, on down the dot gov and dot mil food chain. Do the homework.

Sorry, you choose not to see the forrest for the trees. Your choice.

Try to have a nice life. Or not.

Diane

(And dont forget to feed your children).

Suggested reading... from a "real doomer..." and do read down the thread a bit for the Y2K links...

OT?: William S. Cohen, Secretary of Defense: Preparing For A Grave New World (USIA)

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 0018ov

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 09, 1999.

Good riddens! Don't let the door hit you in the ass.

As far as this forum being biased, yes you're correct. Most of us have very common beliefs, at least about the subject of Y2K, and we learn a lot from each other by sharing our views.

Of course, then there are people like you, who would be much happier starting your own forum. The theme could be something like "We hate anyone who has an opinion different than us Forum".

-- @ (@@@.@), October 09, 1999.

Hmmm....you find this forum that is dedicated y2k to preparations and discussing the way y2k will probably cause chaos is ridiculously biased.That's right,dipshit,we're biased.We do not frequent here because we wonder if it'll cause problems,like you,our minds are made up.If we're wrong life will continue,what will happen if you're wrong,mister smarty-big brain?

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), October 09, 1999.

This is the last thing I will contribute to this useless forum.

Buh Bye.

-- semper paratus (llmcl@usa.net), October 09, 1999.

This is like telling the pope, "Hey, did you know you're Catholic?" The bias you notice is the beauty of this forum, it's a gold mine of tacit assumptions, invalid premises, arguments post hoc ergo prompter hoc, precious non sequiturs, and other endless entertainments.

And by the way, there's still a lot of software out there that won't handle the century change correctly.

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

YouKnowWho's post exemplifies just about everything I have ever posted about weak ego boundaries, and demonstrates some pretty classic fallacies of logical argument, among them, ad hominem, and gross generalization.

Fallacies

Human beings must really begin to learn how to keep their 'bad self' projections inside their heads.

Just children in grown bodies; it's a K-8 world.

-- Donna (moment@pacbell.net), October 09, 1999.

Hey, YouKnowWho do you mudwrestle?

-- IKnowWho (I@K.Who), October 09, 1999.

Is this King of Spain thing contagious?

-- day@by.day (day@by.day), October 09, 1999.

"To the clearer thinkers: leave these fools to waste away in their own delusional thinking. They are no harm to others. No intelligent scientific thinkers could ever be influenced by their ideas.

You Knowwho

-- You Knowwho (debunk@doomeridiots.com), October 09, 1999"

Now of course those "intelligent scientific thinkers" are the same ones that created the problem in the first place.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), October 09, 1999.

I agree with the poster who pointed out that you have demonstrated some classic logical fallacies. I would just ask you one question: How have you debunked the so-called "doomer"? We are not idiots as you would imply. On the contrary, the posters on this forum are highly intelligent people who have obviously taken the time to imform themselves on the Y2K issue. However, if you know something that we have over looked please explain it to us. I am sure it will at least make for some interesting discussion. As it is you have not posted one thing that could be even remotely construed as a fact which might overturn the mountain of evidence which indicates Y2K is going to be a disaster of unimaginable proportions.

-- Robert (worldpage@aol.com), October 09, 1999.

Everyone:

It is sooooo funny to hear polly whiners who won't present facts. Hey You Know Who, present facts. Do you honestly expect us to believe your statements simply because it's you that say them? You're toooo funny. Just another clueless polly who thinks that their statment should be followed as authoritative simply because they say them. Most of us are very open-minded, much more so than you think. It's just that we don't care about what you say unless there is something factual upon which to base it.

So go dry your whiners tears in the corner. Perhaps your immature attempt at drawing attention to yourself will be more successful somewhere else.

-- b (B@B.com), October 09, 1999.

The pollies think they are the cat's butt, but actually I am.

-- The Cat's Butt (Purina@kitten.chow), October 09, 1999.

It must be a weekend.

-- The children are out of school (no@no.no), October 09, 1999.

And what facts have you presented?

-- d is d (d@dd.d), October 09, 1999.

Please don't feed the drolls

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 09, 1999.

why?

-- troll'; (no@food.yobu), October 09, 1999.

Good Bye. It cracks me up that someone would come here and not expect some bias opinions. The debunking forum is biased too.

If you go to a gun collectors board and start spouting anti-gun talk, would you expect to be taken seriously? If you go onto a dog owners board and say that cats are better pets than dogs, you would be run out of there too. This board is TIMEBOMB 2000, not Happy Days 2000.

Speaking only for myself, I come here because I think there are going to be serious problems. Like everyone else, I want to know how serious they will be. I listen to all the facts, opinions, and rumors and make up my own mind. Sometimes I need reassurance that I'm doing the right thing because it's hard to be a minority that is laughed at and ridiculed by friends and family. The last thing I need is to hear it here from mindless nitwits who can't back up anything they say more than TBTB would never let this happen. There is too much at stake, yada yada yada.

Get real and get lost. Until you come with some backed up facts, nobody will change their mind on anything.

-- Bill (bill@tinfoil.com), October 09, 1999.

Quoting an anonymous moron sans the balls to use a real name:

"It must be truly frustrating knowing that the mindset and thinking in this forum is so different than the attitudes and beliefs that you will find outside of this virtual community. If only you could live within this webboard huh? Well, I'll check you out in the new year. Try not to kill yourselves tripping on your AK-47's until then".

My frustration comes from knowing that there are many thousands of folks out there with no preps at all. I work disaster services and will have to try and help them if things turn out badly. Actually I don't think they will in most places and certainly hope they don't (heck, I like my income stream and convieniences). I know most folks don't buy into the idea there will be problems and hope they're right...I have a 10 year old son who's used to eating regularly so I prepare just in case. Although I think probably 90% of the stuff online is crap I've also found some real gems which make the signal- to-noise ratio bearable.

As for tripping over my AK...not bloody likely. I'm much better at gun safety and proper handling of firearms than that. Besides, usually when I walk the fenceline (usually looking for holes the wild boar around here make to get to the garden)the AK stays home and I carry a 9mm handgun and a 12 gauge pump shotgun (them porkers can be nasty).

DCK

-- Don Kulha (dkulha@vom.com), October 09, 1999.

Does da wittle pawie have too much sand in his wittle nostwils?

BLOW IT, BUB.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), October 09, 1999.

It took you a WEEK to decide this forum is "biased"? Of course, "biased" is what people accuse me of when they disagree with my opinion. Is that what you mean--you disagree with opinions expressed here? Did you read "About" on the main page:

"This forum is intended for people who are concerned about the impact of the Y2000 problem on their personal lives, and who want to discuss various fallback contingency plans with other like-minded people." Yup, that's something you disagree with all right. Thanks for letting us know.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), October 09, 1999.

Here's another hint: Don't go to an AA meeting if you are looking for drinking buddies.

-- Bill (bill@tinfoil.com), October 09, 1999.

Here is what I dont understand about people like "You Knowwho". Why the hell do they care how we choose to look at Y2K? Does it bother them *THAT MUCH* that we have chosen to play it safe and prepare for possible adversity? Why? If he is so anti-prep, is he here reading our posts, and contributing his opinion? Why not just dismiss us "doomers" and go find a group that is dedicated to laughing at us?

Hmmmm. I believe he is insecure, himself, about Y2K, but is scared to admit it publicly. Is it because the people he associates or works with think the whole "doomer" view on Y2K is rediculous? Is he frustrated, and unsure about what to think, so he lingers here with us waiting for that one piece of evidence that he can use to justify his preparation to the people he knows?

So tell us "You Knowwho"....WHY WERE YOU HERE TO BEGIN WITH? WHY DID YOU LINGER SO LONG TO LISTEN TO US "DOOMERS"?

Fine. So you chose to disagree. We get your point (and in fact deal with people like yourself ever day).

Happy trails, sparky. Time for you to go habg out elsewhere, although i suspect you wlil just change your name and remain here anyway....since you obviously having nothing better to do with your time.

peace out.

-- Cory (coryh@strategic-services.net), October 09, 1999.

Troll--it's a pun, ha ha. Please don't feed the DROLLS.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), October 09, 1999.

Great response Cory! People are lame, even the smart ones. That has become my mantra lately.

-- Carol (glear@usa.net), October 09, 1999.

Imo see if I can get hold of a style analysis program somewhere and see if I can figure out YouKnowWho is. He's obviously a regular on csy2k, otherwise he wouldn't mention that his coworkers know that he frequents that ng. Is he Bradley Sherman? Is he Bob Brock? Don Scott? Inquiring minds want to know. After his quick driveby shooting (or is it a typeby pooting?) he's off like a prom dress. His real purpose seems to be/have been, to rile things up here and then skeedaddle. What a manly show. What a pissant.

-- Kurt Ayau (Ayau@iwinet.com), October 09, 1999.

No duh. Practically everything in life is biased. If you're a University of Michigan fan and tailgate in Ohio State's parking lot before the game, some will taunt, others may pass you a beer.

Or, if you walk in to McDonald's, don't expect to find Whoppers on the menu, no matter how hard you scream, "I WANNA WHOPPER, I WANNA WHOPPER!"

We may pontificate til the cows come home about our advanced and how civilized we've become compared to ancestors, but as a species will still tend to be cliquish, with tribalistic tendencies.

-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), October 09, 1999.

Most everyone is entitled to an opinion, but not everyone.

You are an exception to the rule.

Go soak your elbows.

-- no talking please (breadlines@soupkitchen.gov), October 09, 1999.

I must be feverish. I'm begining to like Donna. You are right! He's proyecting. He's insecure, and being "educated" he knows the consecuences of being wrong. As General Lee said-"The best defense is an attack" Our mindset is so different from the attitudes and beliefs on the "outside" world? Of course!! But then, we'll have to define what are those attitudes and beliefs. Anyone mention mass propaganda? With no facts, please? Sheeple?! Who? Those who believe the propaganda? Of a patently corrupt gov.org? BTW, I don't think E.Yourdon has founded any church. Does YouKnowWho has evidence to the contrary? If the web stays on 2000/01/01, I'll be here(with a filled pantry). This forum IS a goldmine for sociologists and psychologists, ask Donna!

-- Eli (Eli@zephyr.net), October 09, 1999.

You Knowwho,

I'll tell you the same thing that I told Maira yesterday. We've got doctors, engineers, dozens of programmers, all kinds of smart end educated people here. And you can't find any "scientific thinkers"? You are the genius here? Yea, right.

I hope that you enjoy all the happy-face reports in the media outside of this forum. I guess that you accept all of the good-news PR stuff from the .gov and .com at face value.

Go on over to debunky. You'll fit in much better there. Have a nice life.

Tick... Tock... <:00=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), October 09, 1999.

I sort of like this quote from Carmichael's newsletter of 9 October:

"What is extraordinary to me is how people can come to a conclusion, or support a conclusion about the conclusion when there is no evidence except the belief of others. Not even those who, as we know, are very highly trusted by the public."

This applies to both poles of this discussion.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), October 09, 1999.

---

When will I learn?

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), October 09, 1999.

(Maybe never...)

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), October 09, 1999.

Don't waste our time! Perhaps you should get out your dictionary to define delusional as well as scientific. That should get you through the rest of the year! And by the way, I didn't see any contribution (read helping others). You won't be missed!!

-- Big D (ddac82@yahoo.com), October 10, 1999.

I must be feverish. I'm begining to like Donna. You are right! He's proyecting. He's insecure, and being "educated" he knows the consecuences of being wrong.

Feverish?? :-) Ah, Eli, you should see my face, the big grin, hear my pleased, end-of-a-long-day-satisfied giggles. Now, if you'd just 'splain the 'feverish' reference....LOL.

Let me clear one thing up. I dearly love children, adolescent AND adult human beings in the main. I greatly dislike refusal to learn in adults, including myself. Children and adolescents get some special considerations, as they must be shown how to learn many things. In that light, also adults, who for one reason or another missed something important developmentally, merit empathy with healthy boundaries. There but for the grace of something go I. However, obvious inane bickering is not to be tolerated without 'spitting in the soup' of the bickerers, so to speak, and calling it what it is. Same with blatant baiting. What an extraordinary waste of time.

Anyway, Eli,...nice to hear/read your agreement, however feverish!

-- Donna (moment@pacbell.net), October 10, 1999.

Cory, do you really want the answer? OK, here it is!

Quite a number of the debunkers were taken in at one time or another by North and his ilk. I got bit in the 70's. I happen to know that AT LEAST HALF of the others are in the same boat. For the same reason I am not giving my name, I am not going to give their names, either. But I will tell you I KNOW at least HALF of the most vocal 'NO IT IS NOT TEOTWAWKI' group has been taken in by these shuck and jive artists in the past.

Ever meet a reformed cigarette smoker? Same thing. Yack your arm off for hours about how you shouldn't smoke.

I know, I know, you can rationalize for HOURS about how the world is going to end. Back then, SO COULD I. GET OVER IT. You are using the same stale crap with computers thrown in. My GOD, I could drag out my old books, change a handful of words, add a chapter about computers in particular, and you would SWEAR they were brand new stuff about Y2K.

In case you didn't know, several Y2K survival books have been recycled in EXACTLY that way. Check it out.

Learn from our mistakes.

-- Too Embaressing (no@no.com), October 10, 1999.

(snip from yourdon's comments on greenspan's speech) as you must be aware, the software industry has a notorious record for failure on complex problems, especially in the three critical areas of schedule, budget, and defects. The OMB report [1] issued last week highlighted one aspect of the problem within the U.S. Federal government: even though the number of mission-critical computer systems has been reduced from roughly 9,000 to roughly 6,000 between 1997 and 1999, the budget for Y2K remediation rose from approximately $2.3 billion to approximately $8.3 billion during that same period. Thus, in the space of only two years, with a workload that was reduced by 1/3, the government nevertheless managed to over- run its budget by almost a factor of four. If you had contracted with someone to build you a house, and he underestimated the cost by a factor of four, wouldn't you be a little worried that he underestimated the schedule, too? After all, doesn't that enormous increase in expenditures imply that much more work has to be done than originally anticipated? As for the schedule and deadline, that's obviously fixed -- and it has become politically unacceptable for any organization, private- sector or government, to admit that it won't meet the deadline. Indeed, 8% of the government's mission-critical systems were not finished by the self-imposed deadline of March 31, 1999 and it appears that roughly 3% won't be finished by September 30, [2] when the government is ready to begin its 1999-2000 fiscal year. Meanwhile, the fate of some 60,000 "non-mission-critical" systems (which presumably includes the 3,000 systems that were once considered mission-critical, but then were magically downgraded in status) is unknown. Well, perhaps not unknown to the managers of various government agencies, but certainly unknown to those of us who have to make our own personal decisions as to whether our lives and our day-to-day activities are going to be disrupted by the government's non-compliant status. (end snip)

-- Apokoliptik (Apokoliptik@yahoo.com), October 10, 1999.

Yack.........I can not ge to the top level of TB 2000 because of a server busy error. I'm going to go out in the streets and riot and steal my neighbor's food. I'm going to shave my hair into a mohawk and join a gang. And this is over one little computer glitch. Imagine what will happen when Joe Six Pack start encountering computer glitches.

-- Butt Nugget (nubuttet@better.mousetrap), October 10, 1999.

Now that he's had his little adolecent temper tantrum let's all get on with the adult world of planning what to do in this impending crisis. Ever notice how kids have the answer to all the worlds problems?

-- Itol D. Youso (mrosscorecomm@hotmail.com), October 10, 1999.

Apokoliptik

Same thing I used to say. Only I was talking about the unfunded future value of Social Security when treated as a loan. I was SURE it would bring the entire 'tower of cards' down with a crash. Been nearly 30 years now. Ain't come to pass. Don't expect it to.

I used to say 'tower of cards'. You like to talk about crashing computers causing others to crash in a chain reaction. See the similarity?

Son, it just isn't going to happen. You have been snookered, same way I was. Admit it to yourself, and get on with life.

-- Too Embarassed (no@no.com), October 11, 1999.

Embarrased,

Yup! You hit the nail on the head. Same basic doom and gloom looking for a reason...right now it's Y2K bug. HAve made same observations...remember 20 years ago....then it was nuclear war with Russia, ecconimic collapse, Mideast WW III, diseases, famine, societal breakdown, ect....Your observation to get 20 - 30 year old books, change some words, and they would swear it was new Y2K stuff was great! So true!

I too used to be predisposed to doom and gloom...probably from growing up hard. The greatest value from this forumn to me was recognizing this in me...and getting over it -- permanantly.

Love another line by somebody.."$hit happens...and life goes on". Kinda sums up life after Y2K...no matter dow "deep" or "shallow" Y2K happens to be. People do fix things, work around problems...and life does go on..no matter if a thunderstorm knowcks out the electric for a few minutes, or a more serious problem comes along.

Have pointed out selective perception, interpretation, ect. They don't "get it"....and won't until the time is right for them. Basically, I think as long as in their minds they see doom and gloom having more of a "payoff" than presperity....based on their own warped thinking and value ssytems...they will stay stuck...some for the rest of their lives...nice to see someone who has also grown past this pit.

What amazes me the most are the "resoned" responses from people here...presumably outside an asylum. Does not matter what facts you provide if it doesn't support the doom and gloom mania here....they attack it like a rabid dog...since it is a threat to the "cult". Would give examples, but why waste the time? Some here couldn't reason 2+2=4. They would INSIST! with PROOF!! you were wrong. Another thing this STINKBOMB 2000 place has taught me is not to waste precious time arguing with $hitheads. IS a good place for laughs!

Take care, and thanks for sharing!

-- verytrue (doesnot@matter.atall), October 12, 1999.