I'm sitting here laughing at myself. Laughing at all those posts about sheeple and why we called them sheeple. You all have to admit, it's pretty damn funny!

-- Rasty (Rasty@Bulldoggg.xcom), January 03, 2000

Answers

An old rule to live by when negotiating (or discussing the unknown): never assume you're the smartest person in the room.

On this board, all of the Doomers did.

-- JD (JXD29@hotmail.com), January 03, 2000.

Someone named "Y2Kbert" over on CSY2K has a sig line:

"Sheeple come in more than one flavor."

-- (mmm@mmm.good), January 03, 2000.

The "Sheep" toe the party line and blibdly take the big ol' gubmint as being upfront, honest, and, right.

Those questioning this fallacy are as far from 'sheeple' as you can get. The rational ones here were mostly that. Were you?

Preparations for the very real risk that was/is kept from the masses is nothing less than wise.

-- unsheeple (US@not.blind), January 03, 2000.

I beg to differ. We tried very hard to understand the problem and took the most risk-averse course of action. They did not. My distaste for the Fed spin has dropped DRAMATICALLY. My distaste for the supper pollies (arrogant scoffers) with families has not subsided one bit. You, sir, are trolling!

-- Dave (aaa@aaa.com), January 03, 2000.

So Rasty- you're a Doomer?

Does this mean that:

You spent $100,000 + to prepare for TEOTWAWKI?
You got out of the stock market and took a second mortgage on your home?
You ran to the hills to hide in your bunker?
Your marriage is not intact?

I hope I didn't get any of this wrong- you just defined what a "polly" is to you on a thread below.
Since you claim to be a "Doomer" you can't be a "Polly" can you?

link to Rasty's def of Polly:

http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 002Cne

"A Polly is someone who didn't spend $100,000 to prepare for TEOTWAWKI.
A Polly is someone who kept investing in the stock market, didn't cash in their 401K plan, didn't max out their credit cards, and didn't take second mortgages out on their homes.
A Polly is someone who isn't trying to get refunds on their unwanted purchases, and donating boxes of food to food banks.
A Polly is someone who didn't run to the hills to hide in their bunker - in other words a Polly is the opposite of a Paul Milne.
A Polly is someone whose marriage is still intact and whose having a good time making fun of all the doomers here on TB2000.
I think that pretty much sums up what a Polly is.

-- Rasty (Rasty@Bulldoggg.xcom), January 03, 2000.

-- plonk! (realaddress@hotmail.com), January 03, 2000.

Not to offend, unsheeple, but you must admit that in the same way one mindset is content to refer to the government, etc. in relatively accepting terms, the other is equally content to assume problems, conspiracy, plots, etc., and to advance certain particulars as being constantly true as well. In both cases, what rigorous self-questioning is being done? Assuming you are right doesn't mean that you *are* right, and that applies down the line from extreme contentedness to extreme paranoia, shall we say.

-- Ned Raggett (ned@kuci.org), January 03, 2000.

Doomers are bad, bad ,BAD! (Slapping myself upside the head)

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), January 03, 2000.

Rasty,

I disagree with your assumption that we are the "sheeple." I was and still am a Y2K agnostic, but studied the issues and took the most rational course of action--preparing for disruptions. To me, this was a "no brainer" decision as long as I purchased items I need and use ANYWAY. So what, I have a few pre-paid expenses...no harm in that.

We were not sheeple because we QUESTIONED the party line. We believe (believed) that disruptions were possible based upon the best EVIDENCE that was available. Industry and government leaders for the most part presented happy press releases without supporting evidence. We we reacted different than the masses becasue we felt the balance of facts indicated Y2K problems. I was never SURE there would be disruptions, just as I do not anticipate getting in an auto accident. However, I believe it is rational to purchase auto insurance.

You're wrong. The "sheeple" are the ones who are spoon fed the stuff dished out by the spin-mongers. "No need for insurance, the roads are all safe, the cars are all 'ready.'"

-- No Polly (nopolly@hotmail.com), January 03, 2000.

Plonk! Nope, didn't spend hardly spend anything, that's why I am laughing! I've got friends and acquaintances though that did! Thanks for reminding people of what some people spent though. But you have to admit, all those sheeple threads are pretty damn funny right now....because we ended up being the sheeple following the expert leaders.

-- Rasty (Rasty@bulldogg.xcom), January 03, 2000.

Rasty, laugh at yourself...I am not embarrased for making responsible decisions based on the evidence available. No one made them for me.

You have a problem being a "sheeple"? Every day we make decisions, along with countless other folk, that cause us to follow one path or another. Not everyone can be a leader or visionary. Y2K is no different.

-- TM (mercier7@pdnt.com), January 03, 2000.

No Polly: We are the sheeple because we ate from the spoon that kept feeding us the doom and gloom. The more the experts dished it out, the more we lapped it up and criticized everyone around for being sheeple for not preparing. We can now eat our insurance and who knows what's down the road, but I'll find out when I get there.

-- Rasty (Rasty@bulldoggg.xcom), January 03, 2000.

Rasty - you've yet to establish your credentials as worth heeding on matters of fact or opinion ..... but are busy (the past two days) establishing them as inconsistent, bitter, irritating, condencending (-1 sp), and worthy of being ignored.....

-- Robert A Cook, PE (Marietta, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), January 03, 2000.

Rasty,

I beg to differ with you. I resent the statement that I lapped up the substance from the "doomers." This was not the case. In fact, I read DeJager as well as North. I don't beleive everything that anyone says. I attempt to get as much information and act according to the preponderance of evidence. In this case, it simply made sense to prepare.

Earlier, I posted a brief essay, "Glad to be Wrong." Although it is too early to know the full extent (or lack) of Y2K disruptions, I won't mind admitting I was wrong one bit. See, I didn't follow everything hook, line, and sinker. I'm glad my bank account won't disappear, that my daughter can get the ongoing medications she needs, and that I can buy gas and groceries. Who WANTS to be a doomer???

As a previous poster said, everyone follows one path or another. If this is the case, we're all "sheeple." It's just a label, maybe we're arguing semantics... what the heck.

-- No Polly (nopolly@hotmail.com), January 03, 2000.

Gee, Rasty....acording to that definition of yours that plonk reposted, I was a Polly all along. Does that mean I can now start obnoxious posts, laughing at people?

Nah. No thanks. I'll pass.

-- Bokonon (Bok0non@my-Deja.com), January 03, 2000.

At the risk of being the target of everyone's anger, I have to say you guys are taking yourselves way too seriously! Rasty is just cracking a joke for goodness sake. Lighten up!

-- Hope Full (notareal@address.com), January 03, 2000.

Have you ever criticized someone for being who they are and all of a sudden the joke was played on you? You actually become the butt of the joke? That's all I am saying, I prepped some too. I'm laughing because the joke has been played on us. Learn to laugh and get on with your life, no use crying over money spent.

-- Rasty (Rasty@bulldoggg.xcom), January 03, 2000.

Beware of the Pokemon Mafia! Death by a thousand cards! Bwahahahahaha!

-- dinosaur (dinosaur@williams-net.com), January 03, 2000.