y2ktoday.com to shutdown on Friday

http://www.y2ktoday.com/modules/home/default.asp?id=2279

Seems like people are just pulling out of this as we get closer to the rollover.

-- hamster (hamster@mycage.com), October 20, 1999

Answers

Yeah, and what happened to euy2k - it no longer links to a site detailing problems of Y2k and Power Industry. Rather it redirects one to a site describing the future of Power Generation/Distribution in the coming millenium. Have some of our "leaders" forsaken us and abandonded the movement? Whats going on here - inquiring minds want to know.

-- william holst (w_holst@hotmail.com), October 20, 1999.

The people in charge of these sights are probably running for the hills and making final preparations, or, there's nothing more to report--it's a wait and see thing now.

-- volt (volt@voltt.xcom), October 20, 1999.

Volt,

Take a look at the Power Site - they are retooling their pitch (away from Y2k) to a new audience. Its not a matter of running for the hills but rather trying to tap a new market.

-- william holst (w_holst@hotmail.com), October 20, 1999.

What new markets? These marketers are optimistic

-- doomer (waiting@to.see), October 20, 1999.

doomer,

I believe the new market is providing information/guidance to companies/local govnts as the industry enters the uncharted world of deregulation. This is but one new market - I am sure that they aim to be information purveyors. The big question that remains to be answered - will they have anything of value (added) to sell...Regards,

-- william holst (w_holst@hotmail.com), October 20, 1999.

You have to understand that Mr. Holst is infected by the debunking meme. He doesn't post much over at BFI, but what he has posted is not sympathetic to this forum.

-- Saw (ya@GNBFI.com), October 20, 1999.

Saw,

I am not infected with the debunking meme - in fact I do believe there will be some failures at 010100. Have made preparations to compensate for loss of power/water and 2 weeks worth of rations (but than again I have always had such preparations due to my experience from working overseas - El Salvador, Malaysia and Mexico). But I do get irate when individuals (on both sides) make claims or statements that are totally irrational. I have worked as an engineer in both Power & Telecom for 12 yrs (MSEE & MSc in Physics) and can not believe some of the statements made by Mr. North, Milne and Yourdon in their books and on websites. They could have practiced a more balanced approach to their reporting/estimation of the Y2k problem...Regards,

-- william holst (w_holst@hotmail.com), October 20, 1999.

Electric Utilities and Y2K?

Growing responsibly at:

http://www.ene rgyland.net/introduction/index.asp

-- Critt Jarvis (critt@critt.com), October 20, 1999.

"You have to understand that Mr. Holst is infected by the debunking meme. He doesn't post much over at BFI, but what he has posted is not sympathetic to this forum. "

Gee, you mean he is not "sympathetic to the movement" don't you?

-- not in a (million@years.com), October 20, 1999.

Seems more to me like people are trying to establish a business that will last more than a few months into next year. Of course, if they thought Y2K would be an ENORMOUS event, they would keep Y2K on the front page of the server. After all, they would get mega millions of hits, and be applauded as great heroes.

A bunch of these folks have been comparing themselves to the telegraph operator on the Titanic, bravely fighting against impossible odds (read:laughter of the engineers) to bring you the true word. Now they change orientation (not flee, not shut down anything, just change to 'FUD about Cyberterrorism') in the last few weeks before the first of the year. Sound more like the rats deserting a sinking MEME.

Well, they learned a valuable lesson. NEVER give a nebulous fear a concrete date. Cyberterrorism is vague enough that they can milk it for twenty or thirty years.

Y'all keep them preps now! The cyber boogeyman is coming to get you. Fergit all thet Why2Kay nonsense - this here is the REAL THING!

Don't expect me to come over and debunk the cyber terrorism nonsense. I did my stint, someone else can have this one.

AND, it seems important to me to know where these guys are. After all, if they are hiding in the wilds of Montana, they may be able to claim they are just making their OWN preps. OTOH, if they are near NYC or Washington, DC, they do NOT seem very concerned about TEOTWAWKI.

ALL, EVERY SINGLE INTERNET SERVER, must have a registered domain. Those domains are public record. You want to know all about IDEFENSE.COM, or EUY2K.COM? Or you want to know why Mr. Decker calls BigDog (self proclaimed owner of y2krecover.com) RUSS?

www.networksolutions.com

It is a slow page, wait for the options on the left hand side to load. Then click on WHOIS. When that loads, input the top level domain name, such as idefense.com, or y2krecover.com. Then hit search. You will learn many things about that domain, and its registered owner.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), October 20, 1999.

Mr. Davis, just curious: are you calling me a rat?

Scott Johnson
Editor, y2ktoday

-- Scott Johnson (scojo@yahoo.com), October 20, 1999.

Oh my. I have just learned that GARY NORTH has now pulled down his home page for 'updating'.

Will Y2K be on the front page anymore? Or will CYBERTERRORISM be the new threat that will cause TEOTWAWKI? Tune in tomorrow for the results, same cyber time, same cyber station.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), October 20, 1999.

Mr. Davis, once again: are you calling me a rat? -s-

-- Scott Johnson (scojo@yahoo.com), October 20, 1999.

Um, Paul?

BigDog has used his given name frequently in e-mail correspondence, so I suspect that Mr. Decker knew it via that more straightforward means.

BTW, you really do need to head over to Philly and help those folks get that payroll system working. Things are getting very ugly.

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), October 20, 1999.

Scott,

I think we all know who the "rat" is... and it's NOT you.

What are you going to be doing now?

Best wishes.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 20, 1999.

Like all reported news, only the extreme will grab an audience. I believe that the majority of people that are Y2K aware have backed off from the doomsday scenarios and are taking a more moderate position. This leaves only the fanatical elements to display a public position and that will scare the masses away for fear of guilt by association. This leaves the crazies to preach to each other and shoves the rest of us into limbo. I personally subscribe to a 2-3 and wonder how many more of you feel the same way?

-- Truth (at@the.ready), October 20, 1999.

Truth, if Y2K and/or terrorism cut our oil supply by a significant percentage, then you can kiss your "2-3" scenerio goodbye.

-- Ohio Bob (ohiobob@buckeyestate.com), October 20, 1999.

euy2k is still alive and well at Energyland.net. All you have to do is click on the year 2000 button. There's also daily updated news feed with Y2k as well as general energy industry news from NewsEdge.

You also might be interested to know that Dick Mills has joined the energyland.net team, and his first column is online this week.

-- Rick Cowles (rick@csamerica.com), October 20, 1999.

Oh, and "Truth", do you suppose you could name some names of people on this forum who are "Y2K aware" that have backed down from their "doomsday" positions? I see this opinion popping up quite a bit lately by pollies, but they never name any names or give any evidence to back up their claims. So how about naming some names for me, huh?

-- Ohio Bob (ohiobob@buckeyestate.com), October 20, 1999.

Ohio Bob..

I did not say that the Y2K aware folks that were referenced were necessarily from this forum. I did however ask those on this forum if they too have reduced their original threat levels. An honest question from one whom believes we will have problems.

-- Truth (at@the.ready), October 20, 1999.

Mr. Johnson, I think that is the same Paul Davis who now owns Gary North is a Big Fat Idiot forum.

-- WhoIs (Paul@Davis.then?), October 20, 1999.

Yes, it is the same Paul Davis, who all the time he actively posted on THIS forum never let on to his "hidden agenda". Also, back then, his posts actually seemed coherent and sensible, even if very pollyanna-ish. Now, as you can see, his posts are that of a babbling lunatic. Makes one wonder if he was taking his medication back then. (Of course, most of the people who post at his GNBFI site seem to be looney-toones....)

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 20, 1999.

Scott.

You have milked the fear about the millenium rollover for all it is worth. Now you are moving on to a new fear.

Do you expect me to be impressed? I'm not. Somehow, I don't think all the people who are wondering what has happened this last few weeks, with the demise or sudden changes in several Y2K listservers and sites, are very impressed either.

(Other than the robot like chorus that always comes around to harass the 'pollies'.)

Or are you angry because I told these people how to look up public domain records? Public Domain means 'belonging to the public'.

For the record, IDEFENSE.COM seems to be located right close to DC. Aren't you worried about all the ravening hordes spilling out from the city and eating you or your network administrators alive? Your suggestions seem rather contrary to your actions.

You have been guilty of spreading information you would have known was bad if you had done the slightest bit of research. When did you make any attempt to say "this information is bad - don't listen to it?". (Aside from the silly Q7 transistor hoax, I can't think of one.) You have truly earned the scorn of your peers.

Oh, and KOS. My agenda is, and has been, to call it like I see it. Your agenda seems to be speading horse manure over everything you don't like. Do I track YOUR posts and harass YOU? How many are on your 'seek and discredit' list anyhow?

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), October 20, 1999.

Paul Davis:

You paranoid, raving lunatic! I don't "track" anybody. I CALLS 'EM AS I SEES 'EM, DUDE.

Are you DENYING that you kept mum about your connection to the Gary North Is A Big Fat Idiot Forum back when you were actively posting here?

Are you going to deny that you attempted to "entrap" Paul Milne into a prediction that he in fact NEVER MADE? For which you finally, weakly, sheepishly, did apologize for, after the evidence was presented even over at the GNBFI forum?

On top of everything else, you are also INCOMPETENT!! While you are off in la la land with your paranoid delusions, you let BFI sink to where it becomes unusable, the topic of which then winds up as being a laughing stock on this forum!

Gawd, man, have you no sense of shame???!!!

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 21, 1999.

Scott,

Best wishes. You did great work and always stayed balanced.

Thanks,

Mike

=====================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), October 21, 1999.

The King of Spam calls Paul Davis a lunatic.

Bill Clinton calls the Republicans immoral.

So what else ain't new.

KOS, you obviously have a problem. I'd try to recommend someone who could help; but I can't think of any cranial surgeons who also specialize in proctology, right offhand.

-- Chicken Little (panic@forthebirds.net), October 21, 1999.

Hey KOS,

I was wondering if you would care to provide commentary on Paul Milne's libelous statements concerning Ericsson Wireless Systems (see the url the posting below):

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

Have been waiting quite awhile for Mr. Milne to provide some data to back up his claims...Regards,

-- w holst (w_holst@hotmail.com), October 21, 1999.

KOS - have you been taking memory lessons from Bill Clinton? The same day that BFI was moved and running, I posted here stating that I had helped move the server, and that it was up and running.

Moreover, it was common knowledge on both BFI and Doc Paulies Debunking Y2K board that I was trying to find a new home for that server. Hardly what anyone would call undercover work. It is impossible to find old posts on this place, but BFI is another matter.

Maybe you should take a look at BFI posts 1250/1, and post 1253. On both of those I stated I was involved in moving the server.

I have also said that I would try to keep this place going if someone forced it off Greenspuns server. And I would. Though the size of it would make mirroring this site difficult. Not to mention the rather expensive software requirements. Oracle 8i is not cheap.

Incidentally, when we do finally take down BFI, I intend to make a CDROM of the contents. Some record of this entire affair needs to be made and preserved for posterity.

As for your claim that you don't have a 'list', I just don't believe you. No matter what the thread, or how far down toward the bottom my post is hidden, you follow me around. I think you use the auto mailing feature of this board to track and harass those you don't like.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), October 21, 1999.

Paul Davis says, "Maybe you should take a look at BFI posts 1250/1, and post 1253. On both of those I stated I was involved in moving the server."

So I took a look. Here's what I found:

1250/1

Right now it looks pretty certain that BFI has a new home. I will let ID or the new owner announce the details, but I think BFI is going to survive.

Glad to hear you got over the meme infection.

1253

Folks

The guy who is picking up the forum got called away early today. Still, we are pretty nearly ready for the move. Looks like we are going to be back in business by tomorrow - May 22 with any luck at all.

The new home of the forum is going to be on shadowscape.com - haven't decided yet exactly what the link will be, but it will be posted around everywhere when it is ready.

Paul Davis

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), October 21, 1999.

Paul Davis: Damn it, ONE LAST TIME: I don't track ANYONE around the threads. I see a thread pop up to the top of "New Answers" and see what is going on, and respond. I am NOT "out to get you", Paul. Nobody is. Further, as long was we are addressing your well known delusions: Doomers are NOT growing dope to support their Y2K preps. And the children of doomers will not become juvenile delinquents if Y2K turns out to be a bump in the road.

Chicken Little: Go pluck yourself.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 21, 1999.

Mr. Davis: not that I should waste my time countering your arguments... on the other hand, I've always enjoyed putting people like you in their place. I have always believed, and continue to believe, that Y2K is an unknown quantity that represents a *potential* threat to the economy and -- somewhat less likely -- to public safety. I have done the best I can to present information in a balanced, fair manner, and to ask tough questions when I've been able to get Y2K "leaders" in front of me (and to be fair with them as well).

There are literally mountains of evidence (existence of a Senate committee and Presidential commission... billions upon billions of dollars spent by corporations and governments... real, documented failures... yesterday's admission by IBM that they expect Y2K to linger well into next year... polls showing real fear on the part of CIOs) that Y2K is no hoax, that even if it is not a catastrophe (and I think the jury is out but leans against it, at least short-term in the U.S.), it is a real, serious problem. Even the most adamant pollies on this forum, especially my friend Flint, acknowledge this.

But not you. It's one thing to disagree with someone's assessment of a situation. It is quite another to impugn their motives. You don't even know me, nor have you been courteous enough to ask me personally what happened with y2ktoday. (For the record, shutting it down was not my decision, which is all I will say about it for now.)

We will all know in just over two months whether we were right or not about Y2K being a real threat. I am mature enough to say that I might have been wrong about it, although I doubt it at this point. Are you? Even if I am wrong, I will not regret for one moment the work I did. In fact, I wish I could have done a lot more.

There is not one shred of evidence to make me believe that Y2K is any less a threat to the economy and potentially a public safety threat than I originally believed. Unlike Flint and a couple of others, you don't even make provocative, intelligent contrary arguments. Instead, you jump on any piece of data that you think bolsters your p.o.v. and rudely shout it. You aren't interested in the truth; you're only interested in shouting your opinion.

Scott Johnson

-- Scott Johnson (scojo@yahoo.com), October 21, 1999.

Mr. Davis and others: take a look at the excerpt from Bruce McConnell's testimony, on this thread:

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001cc2

Reflects roughly what we've said all along.

-s-

-- Scott Johnson (scojo@yahoo.com), October 21, 1999.

Scott, Davis doesn't even have the courage of his convictions. He has to ask if one of his posts to this forum was okay.

Should I have kept my mouth shut here? - Paul Davis 11:46:21 10/20/99 (11)

Hell no - Doc Paulie 22:35:42 10/20/99 (3) Not bugging me THAT much - Paul Davis 10:40:54 10/21/99 (2) Ever been to Mexico City? - Patricia 12:26:49 10/21/99 (1) No, never have been there. - Paul Davis 13:05:54 10/21/99 (0)

Yeah, you should have let it pass but I sent in a response too. - Maria 13:51:51 10/20/99 (3)

Re your response -- - Patricia 13:58:24 10/20/99 (2)

-- rpc (selltexas@fako.com), October 21, 1999.

I'm sorry to find out that y2ktoday is "closing its doors." It's been a great resource. I go there everyday.

FWIW - I'm planning to keep Sanger and Shannon's Review going for as long as I can afford to, and/or for as long as is technically possible. At the beginning of the year, I'll need to either get a "real" job, or become a subsistence farmer. :-( I imagine that there will still be interesting news well into next year, tracking things that happen. After about the second week of January, I may not do it everyday, though, for one reason or the other.

Good luck Scott! Hope to see you around here once in a while...

-- (pshannon@inch.com), October 21, 1999.

I'll be around... am also considering sending out my own version of the Media Roundup, on my own time... thanks to everyone for all the support. I've gotten close to fifty e-mails in the last couple of days, from around the world, and it has made this difficult week a bit easier.

I want to say one more thing. Those of you who have made thoughtful, cogent arguments on either side of the Y2K fence (or straddling it) have done your community and this forum a service. Those of you who have attacked other persons' motives, or otherwise personally lambasted people simply because you don't agree with their views, have diminished your community and this forum. That goes for doomers, pollies, and everyone in between. We are all in this together, folks, whether we like it or not.

-s-

-- Scott Johnson (scojo@yahoo.com), October 22, 1999.

From debunking y2k:

In Reply to: Here's how you RATTLE their Bird Cages posted by cpr on October 21, 1999 at 20:44:53:

That is pretty funny all the way around.

I do think I shook up a few of them with the 'This is how you look up a server location on WHOIS' post. Did I tell anyone what to do with the information? It is a freaking PUBLIC DOMAIN database!

Wonder how many phone calls they got?

I kind of hate to point this out, but most of the folks using the Internet don't know diddly about how the system works. No wonder they worry about 'it will all die and go away'. If they understood the incredible amount of redundancy and self-healing built into the system, they might not be so eager to believe the DOOM stories.

For some reason, I got the distinct impression that telling the TB2000 folks a little something about "HOW THE INTERNET REALLY WORKS AND WHERE THE DATA IS", is just verboten. Not done. HEY, these guys are the EXPERTS. IF THEY don't take their own advice, well, YOU SHOULD. ROFLMAO.

Scott was pretty pissed. Tough! The day I am afraid to tell someone how to look up public data, I will give up computers and take up tatting.

Wonder if that thread is marked for 'delete later and quietly' now?

You know, I never have looked up an IP on BFI. Doubt that I ever will. I do think I will copy the whole thing to a CD-ROM before the server is finally taken down.

-- just (another@regular.regular), October 22, 1999.

"Scott was pretty pissed. Tough! The day I am afraid to tell someone how to look up public data, I will give up computers and take up tatting."

What are you TALKING about? I could care less whether people look up idefense.com on INTERNIC. Who cares? Hell, I'll post our mailing address if you want. I'm pissed -- actually, not really, but annoyed -- that some loser (who can barely string together an intelligible sentence) has the audacity to question my morality without knowing diddley-squat about me or the situation here.

What does our proximity to DC have to do with anything? We never, ever told anyone that they should head for the hills or dramatically change their life based on our assessment of Y2K. That is not my personal position, nor has it ever been the position of the site, and anyone who has spent any time there would know that.

"You have been guilty of spreading information you would have known was bad if you had done the slightest bit of research. When did you make any attempt to say "this information is bad - don't listen to it?". (Aside from the silly Q7 transistor hoax, I can't think of one.) You have truly earned the scorn of your peers." Well, all I can say is that I have received about fifty e-mails in the last two days, praising our site and the balanced way in which we dealt with this story. And that's not just from the general public, but from the Y2K teams of major corporations like Merrill Lynch amd Toys-R-Us. As for the "silly Q7 transistor hoax," I don't even know what you are talking about, and it makes me think that, perhaps, the genius Paul Davis has mistakened us for one of the other Y2K sites out there.

I guess I'm sick of the jackasses on both sides of the Y2K argument. (I'm no longer editor of y2ktoday, since it no longer exists -- in its known format, anyway ;) -- so I can say things like this.) Paul Davis is a jackass, a fact that is quite independent of his feelings about the Y2K issue.

-s-

-- Scott Johnson (scojo@yahoo.com), October 22, 1999.