Dale Way's essay and his various responses here have provided me with answers that tempt me to be less apprehensive of how the machines will respond to the CDC; how people will respond to apparent and persistent deceptions in the face of so-called inconveniences is another matter entirely. That's not to say that the machines are all ok; a thousand duck bites over time (as Way describes it) may indeed be crippling in devastaing ways. But whether or not Way is proved right or wrong, at least he seems interested in an honest conversation. Meanwhile, as I continue in my attempts to get to a more adequate personal opinion on Y2K, Ken Decker seems to have taken a pessimistic turn with William Ulrich.

In a very recent post, Ken Decker enthusiastically recommends William Ulrich's article, Year 2000 Aftershock. And at first glance, William Ulrich's article seems to be a hipper kind of optimism-- an optimism that can admit that some things will go wrong, some problems will hit us hard, but not so wrong and so hard to ever justify being a card carrying doomer. But he turns around in Appendix A to his article; his optimism gives way to a doomy pessimism when he illustrates a scenario in which a Y2K neighborhood group meets to discuss what has happened and what they are going to do next. In this scenario, the neighborhood stockpiles of food are running out in what I must guess to be late spring.

Again, in this scenario, real food shortages caused by y2K problems begin in late January, continue into late spring, and are expected to continue well into the future. The neighborhood garden project is viewed as critical. Among the failures mentioned: food supply failures, power outages, water treatment failures, sewage treatment failures, 911 system failures, fire-fighting equipment failures, and massive failures elsewhere in the world. At least one house burned down in the neighborhood, money was taken out of the stock market, people were laid off, and, assumedly, some worried about having their houses foreclosed on. Large, medium, and small companies were going bust.

For most pessimists here at TB2000 (and especially those so often derided as fear mongering doomers), the failures and problems described and suggested by Ulrich's scenario are pretty much the same as the things for which they prepare. For those who have made more intensive preparations, they too often expect nothing more than the same-- though they intend to weather such so-called inconveniences better than others. And perhaps, the pessimists have a better sense of the problems that would attend the failures and problems that Ulrich describes in his scenario. Ulrich makes no mention of social unrest, health and safety consequences that would likely follow the things he has described.

If I can consider further the survivability of the CDC (laughing), will Ken consider further that his Y2K predictions may require his public advocacy of more than 3 days of preps?

Sincerely,
Stan Faryna

Got 14 days of preps? If not, get started now. Click here.

Click here and check out the TB2000 preparation forum.

-- Stan Faryna (faryna@groupmail.com), November 12, 1999

Answers

Stan, if you think Decker's gone doomer, you'd better email your favorite farm family ASAP.

-- you know me :) (youhaveaplace@myhouse.mine), November 12, 1999.

Hello Stan! I believe kenny decker has become a closet doomer... and it has been more apparent in the past few weeks when we've had more posts on the oil/energy situation. I'm sure he would deny it to his dying breath however. Thanks for all your good work bringing info to this forum that people can actually use!

-- jeanne (jeanne@hurry.now), November 12, 1999.

See threads...

Decker talks with ComputerWorld author

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

IEEE Y2K Chairman takes questions (Dale W. Way)

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

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 12, 1999.

2 things to note:

1) A while back, "a" more or less predicted that Decker would "evolve" into becoming a doomer, right about this time as I recall. I think that the thread was entitled "The evolution of Mr. Decker" or something like that.

2) Double-Decker is well known for his "Trojan Horse" type arguments. Like with personal preparation -- he sez that he is all for it, would never discourage anyone from it, but then goes all out to emphasize that Y2K itself is NOT worth preparing for to any significant extent!! If DD is in fact starting to appear doomer-like, be cautious, it's probably one of his usual set-ups.

There are LESS than 50 days left, folks. Come Nov 21, a Y2K disaster movie is going to be shown on nationwide TV, MAYBE for the first time getting Joe Sixpack's attention in a serious way. P-R-E-P-A-R-E F-O-R Y-2-K.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), November 12, 1999.

Decker's playing you like a harp Stan. He's playing this whole forum like his own private little petri dish.

Judge a man on his fruits, and the patterns established therein. In Decker's case, hubris needs a redefinition. He simply is desperate for others to throw accolades and appreciations his way. Call it fuel for Decker.

Be wise. A leopard changes not his spots.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), November 12, 1999.

Stan, you are a great writer and a valuable poster to this forum in your own right. WHY do you have this semi-obsession with this one guy, Decker ? Who cares, why refer to him all the time ? Be yourself and forget about tracking Decker all the time. He's just another nobody in this great big world.

-- Count Vronsky (vronsky@anna.lit), November 12, 1999.

Stan,

Let me respond to you, before I speak to the "peanut gallery." I have been an advocate of "preparation," but I do define the word somewhat differently than most forum pessimists. I have recommended debt reduction. Extreme pessimists like Andy (aka "Weasel Boy") have suggested emptying retirement savings and running credit cards to limit to finance "preparations." Frankly, I think the best preparation for an economic downturn (my prediction) is setting one's financial house in order.

As you must have read in the Ulrich "scenario," food "shortages" were primarily impacting the poor. As I have said many times on this forum, the effects of Y2K will be felt harder among the poor, elderly, etc. In my conversation with Mr. Ulrich, we discussed the risk for those people who depend on bio-medical devices or life- sustaining medicines. Preparation for one "at risk," must be considered from a different perspective.

Mr. Ulrich agreed that the primary impact of Y2K will be economic. The "preps" I suggest do not ignore the possibility of disruptions in basic services. On the contrary, I think modest preparations are wise.

On the other hand, I have argued that if we consider a scenario where one will need a year's supply of food... survival may come down to the ability to hide successfully or defend one's food supply. Well, Stan, you know where I stand on fixed position defense. In my opinion, it would be a fool's errand to defend a faux Y2K stronghold.

While wrong about most matters, Will Continue's idea to hide in a cave has some merits... if one is concerned only about personal survival. In my opinion, it would take considerable time and money to develop a hiding place so secure as to remain undetected for an extended period of time. Against this "cost," I weigh the risk. For me, it is not worth it to stock a hidden bunker... and it just happens to rub me the wrong way.

You see, Stan, I plan to stay debt-free and liquid during the anticipated downturn. Even if we drop into a depression, I think cash will be worth having. If it gets worse than a depression, I'm not sure your "preps" will be of great utility... unless you have a hideaway.

Now, onto my daily exercise. Jeane, the "prep" forum is tailor made for you. You will not be bothered by people who are discussing the outcome of Y2K. With you mind carefully closed, you can prepare to your heart's content... or you could buy Carla Emery's book and save some time.

Spain, actually the prediction was for late summer. With 49 days left, it seems I'm overdue (laughter). Of course, I know it must be difficult for you to understand a nuanced position on Y2K... particularly given your binary thought patterns. Read Yardeni and Ulrich... and you'll have a better grasp of my thoughts on Y2K. Or you could just ask Jeane to mudwrestle... odds are better there.

Ah, Invar, still the angry gasbag. Actually, Invar, your scorn is far sweeter than praise. It tells me I cannot be far from the truth.

Count... ah, why bother (laughter)

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), November 12, 1999.

Ken Mentioned

"Frankly, I think the best preparation for an economic downturn (my prediction) is setting one's financial house in order."

Wise advice Ken. Now to get back to the economists that you just love,

Can you find one really good article suggesting that JQ Public should be getting "One's financial house is in order"?

Have you ever considered also that preparations can help if one is laid off or their work has payroll problems?

I would really like to see you support your position with data that suggests that debt reduction should be a priority for the common man.

Unfortunately my research does't extend in this direction but you should be able to find something during your investigations in Yahoo :o)

It would be MHO that the financial community would not like this concept of debt reduction, but I do support your convictions on this matter as you know.

But I think "they" want to keep the public deaf, blind and dumb on this matter.

Prove me wrong

-- Brian (imager@home.com), November 12, 1999.

Funny, your reply above tells me that you are so blinded by your own self-importance that you have to delude yourself into thinking that 'you' somehow are close to the truth.

You're living in fantasyland Deck.

For someone so stuck on himself as you are, and the incredible hubris you display every time you post, reveals what you truly are. It sure isn't what you would like the forum to believe about yourself.

I got you pegged, and I know what you're all about. It is a waste of time for others to be taken up in debate or discussion with you, period. My post above has your M.O. nailed. Some of us on this forum that have been here awhile have watched your incessant baiting and elitist mockery since you arrived here.

You truly are a legend in your own mind. That's not anger talking, that's just a disgusted observation.

And before you reply to me again Deck,.....I don't care what you think - you're wasting your time. But I imagine you will have to post a reply so as to "illustrate" to the rest here, how beautiful you are by analyzing my 'psyche'. Fine. We know you can't help yourself.

I still won't give two fecal droppings about what you think.

Gasbag? Pot, kettle, black - Mr. Decker.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), November 12, 1999.

I'm afraid INVAR's got you pretty much pegged, Kenny-boy. You're an arrogant, wheezing, childless, lonely jackass. I stopped perusing your supercilious vomit back in March, when it became clear your only aim is to divide and disrupt. You deserve the scorn heaped on you by other individuals who post to this forum (who you attempt to dehumanize by calling 'the peanut gallery'). Your (laughter) rings hollow: you make me sick.

-- Spidey (in@jam.yawn), November 12, 1999.

INVAR, you really deserve to be taken to the woodshed by strong Mister Decker. He is a man, and knows of manly things. He sweats testosterone! Big like bull, smart like owl! He is a god. Worship him.

-- Cult of Dreck (KuntryBoy@red.neck), November 12, 1999.

Uh, no thanks Mr. Cult.

We've already had to endure plenty of mental sodomizing by the likes of Mr. Decker. No need to institute the practice.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), November 12, 1999.

KuntryBoy, my highly unoriginal response to your few lines was to:

L O L Sheer poetry, from the peanut gallery yet.

-- Count Vronsky (vronsky@anna.lit), November 12, 1999.

Brian,

Hmm... you want "get out of debt" writings? I'm not a regular reader of the personal finance press (Money, etc.) There have been some good books including "The Millionaire Next Door...." Sound financial advice is always available, for someone who wants to look. You'd like Andrew Tobias' "The Only Investment Guide You'll Ever Need." He talks about buying tunafish in bulk.

Invar,

I'm far from a perfect person.... Pointing out that you are an angry blowhard is not about my ego, but about your gassy rhetoric. Hell, Invar, I may be wrong about Y2K. I'm relatively sure, however, you are slack-bellied sideshow barker who can't tell the time of day without climbing onto a soapbox. Still haven't figured out America, have you Invar? You're too busy waiting for the Republican party to start shitting you Tiffany cufflinks.

Spidey, tough to "dehumanize" a cartoon character... Hey, let me count how many moments of sleep I'll lose over your personal opinion of me.... Hmmmm.... keeps coming up zero.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), November 12, 1999.

Ken mentioned

"Brian,

Hmm... you want "get out of debt" writings?"

You know what I want, don't get stupid with me. I am talking about articles from economists that suggest having alot of personal debt is a serious risk because of potential Y2K problems.

Hard issues don't get solved by glib answers.

You are into microeconomics and have presented a good case for debt reduction in the past as a reasonable contingency plan for Y2K. This is true.

But there is little or no mention of such a thing in the mainstream press.

You are dropping the ball on this one Ken. If you are going to come out with worldly advice you had better recognize that society doesn't think that it is relevent. What is it going to be?

This is evidence of a "cover up" or even worse total ignorance of a common no brainer consept that is all part of the game we play.

If the economists can't even get this simple consept how are they going to get Y2K.

How are you ever going to get Y2K.

Your opinions are fast becoming irrelevant if you can't understand this simple fact.

And it is your ballpark, but you can't even play this simple game.

You lose.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), November 12, 1999.

There you go again Deck, putting onus and assignment on that which you don't know to make an argument. You are a true demouguoge.

No longer a member of the RNC. Republicrats are one and the same to me. Tiffany cuflinks? No Deck, it's all stink...no substance...you don't even get the stool with the Republicans....just gas, like you. Democrats have been dishing out shit and telling us it tastes good for years. It's a liberalism technique...but you've perfected it into Deckerism; you give us shit and tell us how we're too ignorant to understand, comprehend or appreciate how sweet and tasty it is (laughter).

Like I said, I have you pegged. You aren't fooling anyone here so you can just drop the pseudo-intellectual claptrap you spew.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), November 12, 1999.

Brian,

Some economists think the current level of personal debt is dangerous. Very few economists see Y2K as a major problem. The economists writing about Y2K (Yardeni) are looking more at Y2K, than at the structural weaknesses in the economy. The economists writing about weaknesses in the economy, don't see Y2K.

In fact, most economists do not talk about personal debt the way you and I will. They think of it in aggregrate, rather than the plight of individuals. In fact, I'm not sure you want an economist as a personal financial advisor... it's really not their trade.

My answer to you was not meant to be glib. If you want leadership on any subject, avoid economists. As a profession, economists prefer to dissect the past.... Only the foolhardy try to predict the future. Of course, I guess my prediction of a recession next year makes me foolhardy. C'est la vie.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), November 12, 1999.

Invar,

C'mon, Invar. I don't like you. You don't like me. Not a terribly intellectual exchange. You want to dazzle me with your political philosophy... carry on. For you, Invar, the world divides neatly into two camps. The few who agree with you, and everyone else. Because you have the intellectual depth of a avocado, everyone you hate is a "liberal." (I'd be surprised if you can actually define liberal or conservative.) Let's see... what's next on Invar's greatest hits? Oh, tell me about how Clinton is responsible for everything evil in the known universe. Then you can move to explaining the NWO, Bilderbergs, etc. How about contrails? It's all a conspiracy to strip the rights of crabby, middle-classed white males. Still feeling put upon because you can't smoke in a public building? Irked because you can't carry your sidearm into court? (laughter) Sorry, Invar, tactical nuclear weapons are not covered by the 2nd amendment.

The sad part, Invar, is that assholes like you actually hurt those of us who care about personal freedoms. Cartoon characters give the media an easy target. Your bombastic rhetoric makes even sensible people think twice... who wants you to have a firearm, or even a pair of sharp scissors.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), November 12, 1999.

Brian:

You ought to realize that Decker wouldn't even be here if he weren't among the more pessimistic of the economic persuasion. How does he become a loser, simply because he offers what you yourself admit is good advice, but hasn't supplied a link to someone else who agrees. Isn't your own agreement sufficient?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), November 12, 1999.

Spare everyone your analysis of me on this forum Deck. They can read what I write for themselves without needing an "interpreter".

You know nothing of personal freedoms. Instead you tell us what they are and how they are to be viewed. You make giant assumptions and assign them towards making points to fill your agenda. It's called elitism. And you sir are as big an Elitist I've ever read. and your condescension speaks volumes. Perhaps the "peanut gallery" can attest to that.

You aren't worth further engagement, and I'm not going to toss pearls before your feet, so go ahead and assume victory for your egotistical appetite, and I'll choose restraint out of sheer disgust.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), November 12, 1999.

And while you're at it, INVAR, wipe the drool from your chin. It's very unbecoming (nor is it easy to talk at your level).

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), November 12, 1999.

Ha ha Flint. That was a good one.

You should try stand up.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), November 12, 1999.

OK, INVAR, that sounds kind of fun. You can be straight man. I assure you you'd get all the laughs.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), November 12, 1999.

I gotta go along with Flint and Ken on the Invar read. With the exception of those whom have hooked-up in person with other forum posters Im sure all of you have developed mental images of certain regulars. Invar conjures up an image that replicates that of Jaba The Hut. An extremely obese social outcast with little or no self-esteem, angry at the world, with a vicious, spiteful attitude. A miserable individual that insists we join him/her/it in the abyss. The type of person that rarely has a good day and wants to make sure you do dont either.

-- Truth (at@the.ready), November 12, 1999.

Boy, when a thread goes down hill, it goes down hill quickly.

Gentlemen, since I am making a rather large assumption that you are all grown men (and/or ladies), I am making a request that you all act like adults. The constant name calling is getting rather old for many on the forum, and is driving away new members. Think to yourself for a moment, if you were new here, would you respond to such a thread? I wouldn't (and some may say probably shouldn't have). The words that you type into your screens come across to many as nothing but pure anger. Many people here may wish to respond to threads like this, or indeed others, but upon reading some of the writings here, are afraid. You may not realize, but some people are afraid of personal attacks via the words written to them.

With what little time is left, can you just agree to disagree?

While I am not picking on anyone individual, can the discussions from this point on return to their formal civil tone? So you don't like someone, please be as patient and civil as possible.

Just my couple of grains of sand on the beach we all call life

Ms. Cannot-Say in her nomex clothing.... flame away

-- (cannot-say@this.time), November 12, 1999.

Hey!!!! We all know that little kenny decker is a snot-nosed, condescending, arrogant,hateful yuppie twit that is childless, clueless, and without empathy....He has no clue as to the thoughts, dreams, and concerns of the majority of americans. He really thinks that he will be just fine(as long as his money holds out!!!) I have an idea: I've been reading this forum for about 2 years now. It is truly about time that kenny decker is "shunned" in all ways. What do you say gang?????::: No comments to his snide posts(even if directed at you!!!!) and no response to his always hateful remarks regarding someone else's post. When you attack Old Git and Big Dog, as he recently did, there's no redemption in my book. Eat shit and die Decker-you deserve what you will be getting.

-- catfish joe (joe6pack@bottomdweller.com), November 12, 1999.

And Decker doesn't have thick and slimy gobs of chin-anchored spittle swaying in the fetid wind of his evil verbiage, Flint? Spidey, Invar and others have described Decker with unerring accuracy. There is no other troll on this forum who so arouses (and so richly deserves) the volume and depth of utter contempt as this filthy-hearted murky shadow of a human being named Decker. You're in second place, of course, Flint.

-- Not a fan (of@either.of.you), November 12, 1999.

Well, well...I leave just for a few hours and everything is in flames when I get back. I must agree that clearly Decker is a legend in his own mind. I also agree that he should be shunned in entirety. He did speak so disrespectfully to Old Git. In fact I believe he lied: by saying that he never visited the Prep forum. How could he possibly say that her prep tips resembled Carla Emery's book unless he was "visiting" the prep forum to see what Old Git had posted; she doesn't (as a rule) post prep tips here anymore. More to the point-what the hell difference does it make if her tips were from Carla's book? They were all helpful, and that is the important thing. He apparently thought that forum regulars would disrespect Old Git if, in fact, her tips came from Carla's book. See you guys? She was (and is) trying to be helpful, and he was trying to "gotcha"!!! It would appear to me that shunning would be the ultimate penalty for a person like Decker.....What do you say guys???? Do you have the self=control to "shun"???????????? (laughter, tee-hee, snicker,laughter again!)

-- jeanne (jeanne@hurry.now), November 12, 1999.

Hey Truth (So-called);

Ha! Bongo wonchie cochkba, anungo wonki chuckatroi!

Choy! Spateelya peedunkee Truth-dey nah mohta!

Binkchu du whatta dun Bantha Poodoo, Ho, ho, ho!

-Yavoo de Jabbo Du Hutt!

Well, you asked for it! Check your Huttese dictionary for a translation you Slaemo!

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), November 12, 1999.

Flint pondered

Brian:

You ought to realize that Decker wouldn't even be here if he weren't among the more pessimistic of the economic persuasion. How does he become a loser, simply because he offers what you yourself admit is good advice, but hasn't supplied a link to someone else who agrees. Isn't your own agreement sufficient?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), November 12, 1999."

Flint

Follow the action will you ;o) I was not calling Ken a looser, just that he lost. What I have a problem with relying on economists to judge the effects of Y2K which is silly yet something that Ken and others look at as an indication of future problems (or the lack thereof). Since this subject is well within Ken's zone of reality I just have been challanging him on this issue.

If he stops mentioning the forcasts of economists I will not mention the subject again.

Economics as Ken mentions is more a study of the past and not a map of the future. It was my intent to drive home the point that economic indicators is no way to judge the impact of Y2K for the average folk that make up the bulk of the population.

I don't like people telling me how I think, at no time have I made this personal. But my good Scottish heritage has made me a $$ conscious individual and it is well within my experiance to make a call on this.

Ken wants to play the game well he has to prepare to loose a round once in a while.

He has now mentioned that Economist's shouldn't be the ones that a person should rely on for personal finances, and this should apply to Y2K also.

Now I wonder what the CGA's would say about the subject.

And as far as the opinion of an individual goes that is fine but you will never see me pulling articles from yahoo or deJagers site and posting it as information. I go right to the source. Not some silly economic forcasts. If Ken wants to have a serious opinion on the effects of Y2K he should do his homework.

There has been no shortage of times that he has ridiculed others because of what they believe in and sometimes he has to take his own medicine.

Of course Flint of all folks that shouldn't be commenting on personal finances or getting into the discussion it would be you based on your past personal testimony.

You and Ken like hammering down nails that stick up and once in a while I do to. And Ken is a nail that sticks way up.

His choice, my reaction.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), November 12, 1999.

Shun away, guys... It's not like you're adding anything to the Y2K debate. My posts are not "required" reading. Just scroll on by.

By the way, have you noticed how the attackers always go to their own personel biases. Invar suggests I'm a "liberal." The bottom-feeding Catfish Joe calls me a "yuppie." And Joe, I take "Old Git" to task for her insensitive remarks comparing forum "trolls" to the Nazi brownshirts... that and she has generally poor manners. And for Russ Lipton... well, there's quite a history there. Russ has shown no reluctance to engage in name calling, though Russ and I are moving closer to detente.

I'll be delighted if I can post without your mindless attacks. But know this, cellar dwellers, if you push... I'll push back.

As for the addled Jeane, I was on the forum when Old Git's only contribution was a re-write of Carla Emery. Personally, I like Carla's book. It's Y2K compliant and easier to read than this forum. Read whatever you want into it.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), November 12, 1999.

Please all... read my comments on the other thread that joe pulled the posts for...

Thanks

-- (cannotsay25@hotmail.com), November 12, 1999.

Ken mentioned

"And Joe, I take "Old Git" to task for her insensitive remarks comparing forum "trolls" to the Nazi brownshirts... that and she has generally poor manners."

You know Ken I disagree with that also, Old Git may have a sharp tongue (she is not alone) but she also has a heart, which might be my next lesson in the continuing education of Ken Decker.

Besides this is soooooo old. I would be more than happy to dig up dirt on your past posts but really that would be a waste of time right?

-- Brian (imager@home.com), November 12, 1999.

Brian,

We agree. Old Git has a sharp tongue. Please feel free to read my "old" posts. At lest 95% of the time, my jabs are in response to the usual "attack dog" pessimists. You'll also find my general essays nearly always qualify my remarks by referring to SOME pessimists. I also use "pessimist" rather than "Doomer" as a less pejorative name. As such, I think "optimist" more forgiving than "Pollyanna" or "DGI."

Honestly, Brian, isn't classified everyone who does not agree with you as "doesn't get it" the height of arrogance? As for heart, you should know better than most that I have responded to civil prep questions. While my position has not been popular, I have provided balance to the Y2K debate on this forum.

If Invar, or any other pessimist wants to lay down their arms, I will cease and desist from the verbal sparring. If they "make nice," I'll hold up my end of the deal. What say?

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), November 13, 1999.

"While my position has not been popular, I have provided balance to the Y2K debate on this forum. "

What a mighty high opinion you hold of yourself Deck. The above is proof positive of your continuous and unerring display of hubris, arrogance and unmitigated gall.

Your own self-importance to the Y2K issue screams delusional.

As far as laying down my arms....you're insane. I don't give up that easy, so "playing nice" in the face of your elitist condecension is not an option, because you never stop firing.

-- INVAR (gundark@sw.net), November 13, 1999.

Shhhhhh....don't anybody talk to decker!

-- LongTimeLurker (lurker@lurk.net), November 13, 1999.

That's OK, INVAR. Decker can lend balance, and you can lend imbalance. Takes all kinds.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), November 13, 1999.

"Brian,

We agree. Old Git has a sharp tongue. Please feel free to read my "old" posts. At lest 95% of the time, my jabs are in response to the usual "attack dog" pessimists."

And alot of the attacks you received was because of your smug manner in reporting to the debunker board with your original "doomer" post. Sniveling to CPR and crew, brown nosing to the less than "human" folks about your triumphs in fightening those less informed over here about the bush and sniper tactics was rediculous. You always comment on the "fixed position" that people could find themselves in without realizing that being on the "run" and transient has its own challanges which I am sure you know little about. Over and above that if it comes to the point where folks have to worry about "bugging out" then civilization is over.

What you never have provided is an alternative to the fixed position. That is because there really isn't one for 99% of folks.

What you have done is created a stupid issue and relied on it support your position when the chances of it happing are near zero and have no real alternative.

Unlike most I lived 7 yrs out of a backpack Ken. In some of the harshest weather man can live in. And with some of the hardest members of the human race.

Your sniper story was bullshit. Yet it is your claim to fame in your own mind.

That is why you have alot of bad blood in the forum. Being a legend in your own mind is not enough to say you know what you are talking about or that it is relevent.

I think that life has never taught you humility or you have been to gutless to take the chance of having nothing, no where to go, no one that cares for you yet have the faith in humanity that you have a place in life.

Read Job or;

From Wen Tzu

Chapter 67 P.59

Human feelings are such that people submit to virtue rather than force. Virtue is in what you give, not in what you get. Therefore when sages want to be valued by others, first they value others, when they want to be respected by others, first they respect others. When they want to overcome others, first they overcome themselves, when they want to humble others, first they humble themselves. So they are both noble and lowly, using the Way to adjust and control this.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), November 13, 1999.

Well, Invar is consistent... if nothing else.

Basically, Brian, I don't think you're a bad guy, just full of shit. I'm one of the few optimists who "called" CPR on his "list making." I weighed in against Stephen Poole for his false story and, well, I can make you a list. If you actually read what I posted on Debunker, you'll see I actually complimented this forum. My tongue-in-cheek humor was grossly misunderstood by Russ Lipton aka Big Dog... not that the pessimists needed a reason to go on the offensive.

My "sniper" essay is tactically sound... if you bother to ask anyone with real military experience. Frankly, I doubt I'm the first one on this forum to make the point that a Y2K "stronghold" is better described as a juicy target. Well, enough on that. While you wring your hands about the plight of people who may suffer from Y2K, I'm actually working 6 days a week to make a difference. I don't expect you to appreciate this, or even acknowledge it. I would appreciate you putting your sermonette back in your backpack... and walking with it.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), November 13, 1999.

Ken mentioned

"My tongue-in-cheek humor was grossly misunderstood by Russ Lipton aka Big Dog"

well you have a right to think I am full of shit :o) But you should really provide disclaimers when your "tongue in cheek humor" comes out.

As mentioned in the other thread(s) I am ready to hang up the gloves for this match and hopefully you can to. Funny my interest in the forum took a big dive in October till all the "fuss" happened on the halloween weekend. It got my combative skills up :o)

But all things can wear thin and this is to. I prefer information over conflict. But every once in a while its good to keep in practice.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), November 14, 1999.

can you spell c-o-d-d-l-i-n-g?

-- (didn't@think.so), September 16, 2000.