Hi folks. There seem to be a lull in y2k news today. Russ Kelly has removed any reference to y2k from his site. Sanger news appears to be shutting down. Gary North as the flue. Michael Hyatt has been quiet and Jim Lord has disappeared off the face of the earth.

I appreciate the occasional forum comments from Ed Y. So... we are left to grasp any news item of computer glitches, chemical spills and aircraft problems and argue about whether or not is it y2k related. Although I am not a democrate and I don't approve of gloating, JAG's posting below seemed factual and helpful.

Why do we appreciate posts that confirm our view and jump on anyone's case who gives information to the contrary? Wsa Flint right about our selective attention to the truth? Just a thought.

By-the-way, I may sound like a polly, but I still have my preps, "just in case."

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), January 12, 2000

Answers

Yep. By my reckoning only around 5 of the last 35 posts are serious Y2K-related news or followups to news. Quieting down? Momentary lull? The clam before the storm? ;^)

-- Squirrel Hunter (nuts@upa.tree), January 12, 2000.

Sorry Lady, No offense intended. I thought perhaps we have a mutual friend. If you work in Columbus, Ohio with a technical writer named Jack, about 43 years old, please tell him that Jose says hi.

SH: I guess we should "chill" and see what happens by the end of the month. It's a slow day in y2k land. 8)

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), January 12, 2000.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...snort...huh? wha?.... zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...........

-- Jay Urban (Jayho99@aol.com), January 12, 2000.

Squirrel Hunter,
Subject: Things seem to be getting quiet
Great Pun: " The clam before the storm?"

-- Possible Impact (posim@hotmail.com), January 12, 2000.

Jose, If you can keep up woith the posts, you have more free time than I do!

-- Mara (MaraWayne@aol.com), January 12, 2000.

"The clam before the storm?"

Squirrel Hunter,

Wasn't that a title of a Cousteau documentary? :-D

-- Deb M. (vmcclell@columbus.rr.com), January 12, 2000.

Squirrel Hunter,

Personally, I believe it's the Clam before the Storm. I've thought about this a lot.

-- silver ion (ag3@interlog.com), January 12, 2000.

I touched on this yesterday when I wrote:

[Comment: Yes, I believe it IS playing out. And this forum is like a lantern in the darkness. Without it, it would seem Y2K just poofingly "went away", just as magically as all unremediated code seemed to "fix itself" post hoc, or was "grossly overestimated to begin with". In checking national and international newspapers today, as well as so-called "alternative" ones, they seemed noticeably barren of any mention of Y2K whatsoever. The "consensus" now seems to be that of "no big problem". I've read other postings of people having the sensation that "something is not right", or that "nothing seems to add up". That there's a sense of being "left in the lurk", or perhaps a kind of odd "silence" or "uncertainty" or "quietness" in all of this that does not compute logically. Previously vocal leaders seem to have recoursingly bitten the bullet early according to what doesn't seem to have immediately happened (though they are to be dutifully commended), forcing their Y2K by-default sheep out into the pasture to watch out for themselves. This is all the MORE reason to remain vigilant and sober and not accept the inebriating, hypnotic ebb and flow of primary information for face value without unknowingly turning into a somnambulist. Do not doubt what is "right under your nose" in this forum, through sometimes cunning or nonexistent (disregarded) reports taken, or consequentially unable to be taken, at face value.]

-- Patrick Lastella (Lastella1@aol.com), January 11, 2000

-- Patrick Lastella (Lastella1@aol.com), January 12, 2000.

LOL Deb!

-- Dee (T1Colt556@aol.com), January 12, 2000.

OH! How I wish I were as clever as my typos!!

-- Squirrel Hunter (nuts @upa.tree), January 12, 2000.

Jose, you seem to be getting pretty bored with this forum. I think it will be several months before we can draw any conclusions on Y2K, and at this point, I have no idea how it will play out.

We are focused on bad news because it is difficult to derive any useful information from good news. I think almost everyone expected the majority of companies and goverment agencies to be fairly well prepared, but will there be enough that are not prepared worldwide to seriously harm the economy? That is the important question.

From this point forward, I think most of the important news will come from the financial press, and problems won't be identified as being related to Y2K. They will simply be catogorized as operational or computer problems. History tells us that companies will cover up their problems as long as they can legally do so, and I expect the same pattern to prevail with Y2K.

We should know if y2k is going to be a major problem when the majority of companies release their first quarter financial reports. If they are having serious computer problems, they will have to acknowledge them at that time, or face lawsuits by shareholders. Obviously. they will not be attributed to Y2K, but we will be able to see if a trend is developing.

-- Dave (dannco@hotmail.com), January 12, 2000.

Dave, when will the first quarter reports come out? Would that be around April 15th? Also, we should have an idea about the IRS by then. I agree with your comments but may I point out that now we are not talking about societal collapse, we are talking about economic effects. Very different scnario.

My problem is with the people who eagerly and joyously jump on any and every problem (Cubans in Miami, fire on a cruise ship, etc.) in an effort o relate it to y2k and justify their views of a collapse of society. I don't think that is any longer a realistic scnario if it ever was. From now on, the concern is bankruptcies, unemployment and a slowdown in the economy as well as a downturn of the stock market.

I am not enough of an economist to really have a valuable opinion in the economic area -- I just believe there MIGHT be negative effects caused by bad data due to y2k.

The societal collapse scnario is over, to the great disappointment of some individuals.

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), January 12, 2000.

Dave: One more comment. I am NOT directing any criticism toward Homer Beanfang, John Whitly or Craig or others that research and post bona- fide news articles that "may" be y2k related. They are doing a valuable serive to the forum. It is more those who seem excited at any bad news and jump down the throat of anyone with good news. A perfect example was the post by JAG a few threads ago. 9 out of 10 posters trashed him and told him he was in denial, despite a pretty factual post.

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), January 12, 2000.

Squirrel Hunter,

You are a person of considerable integrity. If I had made a typo that was so amusing, I would never have admitted it was a typo.

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), January 12, 2000.

I'm relieved that there is a lull. I began keeping a Y2K journal on Oct. 1, and have tried to post the most interesting subjects, some of them taken from this list, as a matter of fact. This journal is for the education of my children and grandchildren and will never be published, but I have learned a lot from my association with this list.

My own private opinion on what is being reported is that the problems will continue, although I personally have no way to know if they will be serious enough to bring down a society.

My worry now is about the inevitable financial situation that seems to be lurking in the stock market news. For this reason, I plan to continue to add to my preparations and my journal until I receive incontrovertible proof that we have passed the crisis. Good news, bad news, off-topic silliness, it's all important.

-- Liz (lizpavek@hotmail.com), January 12, 2000.

"Gary North as the flue...."

Interesting. He's been hollowed out & installed in someone's chimney.

Why didn't we think of that before?

-- now what to (do@with.Clinton), January 12, 2000.

Jose, the quarterly reports don't come out at any particular time. Most of them will be released during April and May. However, if a company is having unexpected problems, they usually issue an earnings warning soon after the quarter ends, as Grainger recently did for the 4th quarter.

I was not as impressed with the jag post as you were. He really didn't give enough information about the companies to help us draw any conclusions. I wouldn't expect him to name them, but he could have given more information concerning what kinds of systems and software they use. Also, he seemed to be a person with a very strong point of view, which might cause some bias in his investigation.

I would agree that Y2K is not going to cause any major breakdown in society. However, I am worried about the stock market bubble and the extreme levels of consumer debt.

-- Dave (dannco@hotmail.com), January 12, 2000.

Dave:

You may have a point about JAG. My point was the immediate negative feedback he recieved, must of it emotional or irrational. I realize he was asking for it with his comments about gloating and Republicans, I just wish people would be polite and seek out factual information.

By-the-way, I agree with your concern about consumer debt and the stock market bubble. Even mild y2k problem in accounting and administrative software could be the pin that pops the ballon. As I have elsewhere, that is a very different scenario than most of us have prepared for. It will be more important to be out of debt than to own a porta potty or a couple of solar panals. Those who have gone deeply in debt in their preparations thinking that it was the end of the world, may be in for a rude surprise.

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), January 12, 2000.

Lars, If it were'nt for my screw-ups, I would never have good fortune; and if it weren't for my spoonerisms, I could never carry- off a joke. I have come to the conclusion that the Universe is far, far wittier than me. Y2K is just the latest example!

-- Squirrel Hunter (nuts@upina.tree), January 12, 2000.