[IMPOSTER] We are now taking questions [IMPOSTER]greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread |
IMPOSTERDoing a reverse DNS now: 208.150.169.34 maps to ... mail.davisgarvin.com
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (jameswood@eartjhlink.net) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c4ixxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (concerned@citizen.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (garfield@the.cat.com) on 1999-12-28: Response to We are now taking questions
* (c41xxx@hotmail.com) on 1999-12-28: We are now taking questions
* (hypocrisy@maybe.???) on 1999-12-28: Response to Oh god, look what the whiney debunkers went and did NOW!
* (he@is.nuts) on 1999-12-28: Response to Did anyone watch letterman last night?
* (sharp@dressed.man) on 1999-12-28: Response to The explanation for the Polly mentality
* (why@do. only a few people see this?) on 1999-12-28: Response to The explanation for the Polly mentality
* (I'm@waiting. anxiously (not)) on 1999-12-27: Response to Why the strange silence about December 28th?
* (there@i've said. it) on 1999-12-27: Response to Playing 52 pick up with my very being. Or, how to recognize a Bizarro.
* (don't@go away mad... etc) on 1999-12-27: Response to The indomitable human spirit
* (that@was.funny.though) on 1999-12-22: Response to Increased Military Aircraft Activity???
* (thats@all.I got to say) on 1999-12-22: Response to Controversial Y2K essay went up 11:30am EST
* (and@thats.the facts, Jack) on 1999-12-22: Response to OT: From h2g2, the real meaning of the song 'The 12 Days of Christmas'
* (now@I'll make. a million dollars) on 1999-12-22: Response to Eathquake Rocks Malaysia!! Predictions come true.
* (rumors@lies.deception) on 1999-12-22: Response to Somre more info on the idea behind Y2K
* (rumors@lies.deception) on 1999-12-22: Response to Somre more info on the idea behind Y2K
* TheTruth behind Y2K (rumors@lies.deception) on 1999-12-22: Response to Somre more info on the idea behind Y2K
* (rumors@lies.deception) on 1999-12-22: Response to Somre more info on the idea behind Y2K
* (rumors@lies.deceptioon) on 1999-12-22: Response to Somre more info on the idea behind Y2K
* (rumors@lies.deception) on 1999-12-22: Response to Somre more info on the idea behind Y2K
* The Truth behind Y2K (rumor@lies.deception) on 1999-12-22: Somre more info on the idea behind Y2K
* The Truth (rumors@lies.deceptions) on 1999-12-22: Response to Something you might want to consider if you're looking for answers and you're not technically savy.
* The Truth Behind Y2K (rumors@lies.deception) on 1999-12-22: Something you might want to consider if you're looking for answers and you're not technically savy.
* (go@back.to sleep now) on 1999-12-22: Response to Will major utilities follow governnment and business lead, and SHUT DOWN THEIR COMPUTERS FOR ROLLOVER?
* (so@go. back to school and brush up on a clue) on 1999-12-22: Response to Some will unplug computers for Y2K
* (go@ahead.delete see if anyone cares in two weeks) on 1999-12-22: Response to Some will unplug computers for Y2K
* (I@know.I don't) on 1999-12-21: Response to I wonder if ...
* (before@you.accuse them) on 1999-12-20: Response to Who cares about Joe Six-Pack?
* (wow@you're. all cracking up) on 1999-12-20: Response to Time to add "snodgrass" to the ban list
* (look@before. you leap) on 1999-12-20: Response to Time to add "snodgrass" to the ban list
* (look@before.you leap) on 1999-12-20: Response to Time to add "snodgrass" to the ban list
* (look@before.you leap) on 1999-12-20: Response to Time to add "snodgrass" to the ban list
* (boink@narf.skippy) on 1999-12-20: Response to ATM Withdraw
* (just@doesn't. equate) on 1999-12-17: Response to The Spin Worked
* Alan (at@work. rather not) on 1999-12-17: Response to Hyatt Is Grossly Misquoted by Baptist Press
* (Doomers@suck.com) on 1999-12-17: Response to Temperament and Y2K
* (just@a. thought) on 1999-12-17: Response to Glad to be Wrong
* (anon@anon.aaa) on 1999-12-16: Response to Glad to be Wrong
* (I@don't.know) on 1999-12-16: Response to Walmart update, stocking up even more.
* (tis@the.season to be MERRY) on 1999-12-16: Response to Walmart update, stocking up even more.
* (just@another.programmer) on 1999-12-16: Response to A Doomer is Finally vindicated - Yes!!! - a must read
* (just@another.programmer) on 1999-12-16: Response to A Doomer is Finally vindicated - Yes!!! - a must read
* (just@another.programmer) on 1999-12-16: Response to A Doomer is Finally vindicated - Yes!!! - a must read
* (yawnday@y2000.com) on 1999-12-15: Response to Will Osama Bin Laden destroy the World?
* (earth@to. programmer) on 1999-12-14: Response to Had to tell him again to buzz off...
* (a@little. advice) on 1999-12-14: Response to Anybody else having trouble sleeping????
* (watching@in. awe) on 1999-12-14: Response to Doomsayers Are Batting Zero
* (just@another.programmer) on 1999-12-10: Response to With only three weeks left, why don't they get it?
-- (c41xxx@hotmail.com), December 28, 1999
C4I, Any indication that planned responses are moving beyond contingency to we really do expect to put them in place?
-- Noone (Noone@none.com), December 28, 1999.
I thought martial law would happen today what happen.Was it just a rumor?
-- metoo metoo (metoo@metoo.com), December 28, 1999.
c4i;What is your projection on oil supplies and when will the magnitude of the problem (if any) become obvious to the general public? How will oil problems effect power generation?
-- Helium (Heliumavid@yahoo.com), December 28, 1999.
One of my employees is married to a Navy recruiter. His office, in Battle Creek, MI, recieved a memo "from the Admiral" yesterday, telling them that there was a "97%" chance of no telephones or electric on 1-3-2000. Any info or feedback on thisAlso, any new word on travel restrictions? Voluntary or otherwise?
-- mushroom (mushroom_bs_too_long@yahoo.com), December 28, 1999.
You mentioned that railroads will be moving very slowly - perhaps 50% of normal capacity? I'm not even sure OTR trucking could pick up the slack - provide the redundancy the pollies are always chirping about - and wouldn't OTR add 400% freight costs to items shipped?Also, now that Christmas shopping finished and retail $ secure, should we expect rapid changes in the way this thing has been hush- hushed and suppressed?
Thanks in advance.... now, bout that Dallas prediction........
-- nice (ten@pound.bass), December 28, 1999.
Ok, we'll have power and nothing will go wrong. Guess I'll start eating my stuff now and pour out all my water storage.
-- nuttygirl (aminuts@y2k.com), December 28, 1999.
Are there enough "Bastards" in the DOD to adequately defend this country?An individual made some remark on the Art Bell show that certain people were inviting or going to invite a first strike by the Soviet Union to destroy the US military and deplete Russia of most nuclear weapons all in one moment of glory. Because the US military stands in the way of the supposed new world order. Do intel people doubt the administrations motives with regards to ther defense of the US.
Thanks....
-- Squid (ItsDarker@down.here), December 28, 1999.
C41;Why are so many of the Navy ships in port? Quoting from an earlier artcle, "there are usually one-third deployed xx xx xx with an additional 20% en route from our ports xx xx", it seems waaaaay too odd to have 78% of our entire fleet now in port.
Why are they not at least "en route", or out of harms way in case of terrorist attacks at the ports?
-- Beached Whale (beached_whale@hotmail.com), December 28, 1999.
C4, Sounds like rosy scenario expected conus. Elsewhere?
-- Noone (None@none.com), December 28, 1999.
c41xxx,Infomagic's latest ....your take on his scenarios.
-- TM (mercier7@pdnt.com), December 28, 1999.
Who or what is C41?
-- Anonymous999 (Anonymous999@Anonymous999.xxx), December 28, 1999.
Are we being sprayed, or are those just your average everyday CONTRAILS?
-- (Here@today.com), December 28, 1999.
May i ask who are you?
-- metoo (metoo@metoo.com), December 28, 1999.
Who/what is C4?(I apologize for my ignorance, but this board moves too fast for me to keep up.)
-- why does s/he have (all@the.answers), December 28, 1999.
Confirm or deny : Intel I recieved that there are 'many more' tangos pulling infiltration ops than expected. More have been caught than reported, some with nbc capabilities? Y or N?Latest DOD expectations on Tangos "pulling a Beirut" on rollover? Whats the status on Meggido?
-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan101st@Aol.com), December 28, 1999.
Your take on chemical plants. How safe?
-- Familyman (prepare@home.com), December 28, 1999.
Folks, I've been following c4i's postings. This smells. Too many changes, all polly, in the last week. For what it is worth.
-- mushroom (mushroom_bs_too_long@yahoo.com), December 28, 1999.
This is not c4i. Fakers! Ha ha. Oh, what fun ...
-- ..- (dit@dot.dash), December 28, 1999.
C41,Do you think that there will be any InfoWar attacks on the US DOD or critical infrastructure during the rollover?
-- Stars and Stripes (stars_n_stripes@my-deja.com), December 28, 1999.
i agree. this is not for real.
-- tt (cuddluppy@nowhere.com), December 28, 1999.
c41xxx See's no evil,hears no evil tells no evil..................and doesn't no didly about...........uh what are we talking about.hint ps debunkers forum co-host
-- whogives-a-rats@ss.com (zigwood99@aol.com), December 28, 1999.
Who are you, c41xxx????? Did you just show up?
-- LindaO (imcurious@also.com), December 28, 1999.
Mushroom,he/she did a 180 on oil...is this a ruse?
-- TM (mercier7@pdnt.com), December 28, 1999.
If I want "info" like this, I can turn on CNN.
-- dizzy (spinning@y2kspin.com), December 28, 1999.
In your first appearance here you said you had an 87+% track record of being right. Based on your predictions in that first message you are down to 80% if the remaining 17 predictions I tallied all come true. I don't see that happening so may be you'll end up at 50%.Sounds like a crap shoot to me.
Comments about why you're so far off the mark?
-- Interested Spectator (is@the_ring.side), December 28, 1999.
Think I'm with the 'shoom on this...My intel source is beyond reproach, and doesn't jive with such a short answer.
-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan101st@Aol.com), December 28, 1999.
Thanks for the facetious answer.The sailors don't have the last say as to whether they are in port or not, and you know it. Now do you know of a logical reason for more of our fleet to be in port than in any normal times, or do you not?
-- Beached Whale (beached_whale@hotmail.com), December 28, 1999.
If the Arabs and South American oil producers are lagging, how can you expect no short fall on fuel?
-- morgan (bitbybit@eoni.com), December 28, 1999.
C4I: My my, what has brought about the change of temperment? Hardly seems like the fun doom and gloom c4 we all knew and loved. Is nothing sacred anymore?
-- Noone (Noone@none.com), December 28, 1999.
"Folks, I've been following c4i's postings. This smells. Too many changes, all polly, in the last week. For what it is worth."Yep. Smells like a polly troll, or paid "spin-control". School's out...
-- Anonymous999 (Anonymous999@Anonymous999.xxx), December 28, 1999.
Lady;Is that you?
C4i, why have you changed your original outlook from lots of problems, to Y2K=AOK? What data changed your outlook?
-- Its (All@Conspiracy.com), December 28, 1999.
make that the 'Shroom...
-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan101st@Aol.com), December 28, 1999.
Why want you tell us who you are?
-- metoo (metoo@metoo.com), December 28, 1999.
Diane...A little help here Sysops...Who is this masked c41xx?
-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan101st@Aol.com), December 28, 1999.
I would await confirmation from A&L. This sounds pretty wacky to me...dubunkies having abit of fun.R.+
-- Roland (nottelling@nowhere.com), December 28, 1999.
Can anyone confirm who this really is? Look at the e-mail address, first he puts c41xxx, and then it's c4ixxx.What the f#ck is going on? This can't be c4i!Imposter!!!
-- Imposter!!! (donot@believe.com), December 28, 1999.
Any important comments about RC's 3 part report on the situation with oil posted 2 days ago.Will TPTB shut down the nukes or try and keep them going to keep power flowing? Will they be able to shut them down if what RC's source says about the nukes using the same boards as the oil people is true? Is that true?
-- Interested Spectator (is@the_ring.side), December 28, 1999.
Let me get this straight, you are saying that y2k will be a BITR for at least the near future? What about later on down the road?
-- cal762mm (cal762mm@webtv.net), December 28, 1999.
This whole thread smells. Sysops, a little help please.
-- troll alert (GOAWAY@NDONT.COMEBACK), December 28, 1999.
delete
-- d----- (dciinc@aol.com), December 28, 1999.
Why the change in your predictions martial law from your first appearance? Is that the herd has stayed in line better than expected because spin control was so brilliantly executed so there was no need to do anything or were you just guessing the first time around?
-- Interested Spectator (is@the_ring.side), December 28, 1999.
geesh, it must be wonderful to be able to sign on as anyone and give these mystical answers and have people be enthralled with you. can you tell me, oh c41xxx@hotmail.com, "will i get rich this year?"
-- tt (cuddluppy@nowhere.com), December 28, 1999.
Folks look closer C41 versus C4i.Details, details...
-- gary elliott (gelliott@real.on.ca), December 28, 1999.
Methinks there is a skunk in the woodpile....
-- RJ (LtPita@aol.com), December 28, 1999.
C4l for today; next spoof please try harder. more fun that way. besides, you should try to emulate the real c4 for professional courtesy.
-- Noone (Noone@none.com), December 28, 1999.
Notice the quick comebacks/answers at first, then as the light shines on his happy-polly ass, he retreats and is silent. Troll. No doubt...
-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan101st@Aol.com), December 28, 1999.
In this thread, pollies 1, doomers 0.The pollies made their point here about how impressionable folks are. I'm waiting for the God thread. I have questions about aliens.
-- Anonymous999 (Anonymous999@Anonymous999.xxx), December 28, 1999.
c4i: will Stephen Poole commit hary cary when he discovers his pump-up dick is not y2k compliant?
-- a (a@a.a), December 28, 1999.
I'm interested in updates about international banking and the foreign exchanges. I just read about some of the problems with the Euro conversion that were hidden, until recently, but since I don't read German, I'm not sure how much I trust the translation of the article. *Are there still problems with the Euro conversions as of 12/26?*Are these problems severe enough to impact recovery time from Y2K glitches?
Thanks!
-- (ladybuckeye_59@yahoo.com), December 28, 1999.
pro, Only eat crow when nothing else , like tasty pro's, are left.
-- noone (Noone@none.com), December 28, 1999.
This is crap...I could get better information out of a comic book...
-- BiGG (supersite@acronet.net), December 28, 1999.
Wha hoppen? How did the top msg of this thread change to "IMPOSTER" etc, and what is a Reverse DNS? It is still from C41xxx, and all the later replies to our questions from C4ixxx, but the top message has changed.Sysops, help!!
or delete the whole damn thing as polly farts.
-- Beached Whale (beached_whale@hotmail.com), December 28, 1999.
IMPOSTER huh ? Well, imposter or not, I can't believe so many people can be led around by the nose like this anyway. Jeez people, you would be as well off to call a psychic ! No ID. No verification of source. NO NOTHING. This info isn't even as good as CNN, and they are terrible at accuracy.I am a doomer (3-4), but I'm not gullible. Look outside and tell me what you get. THAT, is the reality of it. Turn on you shortwaves. Turn on your HAM radios. VERIFY THE SOURCES when you get the info. Do not subject yourselves to being led around, by anyone. Make your own determinations by staying on top of it and getting your data corroborated.
Besides, this info that you are getting is so lacking in detail and hard fact that the average Joe can post this stuff without having any background, especially in intell. This isn't intell. This is opinion.
This c4ixxx stuff just cracks me up. If you can't come forward and be known, you have a definite reason to be suspect.
-- Rob (maxovrdrv51@hotmail.com), December 28, 1999.
Billy Boy,Great question. And you're right, C4Ixxx Sierra Hotel is a wannabee.
-- Darby (DarbyII@AOL.com), December 28, 1999.
The person who started this thread is an IMPOSTER.
The thread is being left on the Board to preserve those questions that might have been posed with genuine interest.
-- Sysop (y2ktimebomb2000@yahoo.com), December 28, 1999.
To the Sysops:Are we to understand that the "IMPOSTER" posts from the many, varied different email addresses listed? Or that all of these posts stem from the "mail.davisgarvin.com" address?
Is this a business address? I wonder what his/her employer would think about this?
-- Anita Evangelista (ale@townsqr.com), December 28, 1999.
Looks like that troll was just outted. It has been busy. Look at that list of troll posts coming from mail.davisgarvin.com. Disgusting. Impostering is very bad juju.
-- trolls are sick (delete@it.on.sight), December 28, 1999.
My My, Losta little names eh? Busy little scuzzbag, ain't he though?
-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan101st@Aol.com), December 28, 1999.
Davis Garvin Homepage
-- hiding in plain (sight@edge. of no-where), December 28, 1999.
Well,Maybe this is not the work of a sysop. If not a sysop, could the real C4I have hacked the site, produced the reverse DNS above, and then deleted all posts by the false C4I? It seems very unlike Diane, Chuck, or one of the others to do the above trick, even if they are capable. Not that the imposter would deserve less.
-- Undergraduate (Not@chemist.com), December 28, 1999.
Good grief! What a mess. Guess c4i should not have announced that s/he/it/they were going to come back on the 28th.For what it's worth, c4i has not eMailed us at all today, so we can only conclude that this indeed is a troll. A really smelly one at that, stinking and starting many bogus threads, from the look of that list. Besides, c4i has been consistent and is not so flippant.
We do not verify the info that c4i posts, but just whether or not it is or is not the real c4i.
-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), December 28, 1999.
ISP is Logic South ISP HomepageCorporate Office - Dutch Fork Business Park 110 Dutchman Blvd. Irmo, SC 29063-1543 Regional IS Center - Columbia, SC
-- hiding in plain (sight@edge. of no-where), December 28, 1999.
Geeze Louise, all this frantic, panicky two weeks worth of trolling from mail.davisgarvin.com, who no doubt thinks that y2k is a joke...right!! davisgarvin sounds hysterical to me...maybe some preps would help him/her.
-- (RUOK@yesiam.com), December 28, 1999.
Hint: An Altavista search on davisgarvin.com does bring up a hit, if anyone is curious.
-- John (jh@NotReal.ca), December 28, 1999.
*Sheesh*Just checking in from work. Looks like the above c4i imposter sure ticked off one of the Sysops.
This person has been relentlessly trolling many threads over the past few days, and even pretending to be a "crude" Ed. It's bucking for an ISP abuse complaint.
Just a "warning" troll.
Later.
Diane
-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), December 28, 1999.
Extra hint: search on "Davis-Garvin" yields even more interesting info.Try Google. Very, very useful search engine.
-- Mac (sneak@lurk.com), December 28, 1999.