This was posted in NYTIMES.COM last January 3, 2000:

"Either there will be a lot of Y2K problems, and I will make a tremendous living as an expert witness in the next year or two," Mr. Yourdon said. "Or, if it turns out, a month from now, that there never were any serious problems, I may have to eat my words, publicly and with great embarrassment."

-- Bill Renegade (phantom@sprain.com), February 02, 2000

Answers

I must say Bill...You are slower than molasses in, of all times of the year (January). For a Troll, Polly, nerd, or just a plain fool. I am sure you are rubbng your "cybernet" hands togeather, congradulating yourself for being so "cute". When in reality dear sir, you have just classed yourself with other miscreatants as Y2K Pro and LL.

It's sad...Really sad that the money spent to get you on the internet, was wasted by your (mother, father, or person respondsible for looking after you). And it is plain, that you will not; cannot, ever hope to advance to a journeyman Troll.. Untill you remember to come up with some classy news (like with in the last week, day or hour) And not something dredged up from before the turn of the century...LOL

"As for me...I shall finish the Game"!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Shaey~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-- Shakey (in_a_bunker@forty.feet), February 02, 2000.

Shakey I do believe you hit the nail on the head. I'm new here so tell me are all these negative posts of late from people on the now defunct debonkers board or whatever it was called?

-- David Whitelaw (Dande53484@aol.com), February 02, 2000.

Hey chill out pal! I'm just quoting the great Yourdon in his own words!

-- Bill Renegade (phantom@sprain.com), February 02, 2000.

Here is what is happening to the physicians in my area in SC. We are getting duplicate payments from insurance companies. An example...today we got a check from Hitachi managed care for a Hitachi employee for $ 103 dollars. This was a duplicate payment for a medical service last year which had already been paid. Listen... the date of service was 5-10-99. The managed care administrator sent us a check for that service on June 3, 1999. Today, the duplicate payment was for date of service 10-19-99. We never saw the patient on that day. Note that the 05 month had been omitted by the computer and another check was issued. This is happening over and over to the physicians. Some of the checks are rather large for major surgeries. Some offices simply keep the checks to see if the error is caught; some mark void and return the check. I have no way of knowing the amount of money involved, but in our area, it is big.

-- Don (don@aol.com), February 02, 2000.

Mr Renegade- you obviously do not have a few kids, a mortgage, and your own truck that hauls freight cross country, or you would be down on your knees praying to God to survive the fuel hikes ( not related to all the refinery troubles, of course, it's all OPEC's fault), insted of on line. Or maybe you'd be out looking for another job. Tell the folks that can't get kerosene to heat their houses your low opinion of Yourdon so they can get warmed up throwing snowballs at you.

-- can't (stand@uninformed.jerks), February 02, 2000.

You folks cracks me up, I didn't make that up. Your venerable Mr. Yourdon said that himself. Don't take my word for it, go to nytimes.com and find out! Enough said.

-- Bill Renegade (phantom@sprain.com), February 02, 2000.

Hey, what's the big whoop? Either he said it or he didn't. Mr Renegade, I'm too lazy to go to the NYTimes archives--how about a link?

-- Lars (lars@indy.net), February 02, 2000.

Bill, who really cares? I don't. I think Ed is alright. Why are you so hateful?

-- sandy (rstyree@overland.net), February 02, 2000.

can't...you made me laugh...I love it...

"Tell the folks that can't get kerosene to heat their houses your low opinion of Yourdon..."

-- snooze button (alarmclock_2000@yahoo.com), February 02, 2000.

I rather think the "expert witness" option is coming into play. In fact, I "know" it is.

;-D

Cheers.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), February 02, 2000.

Wasn't it Dovorak that literally ate his words a few years ago? I think it was his column predicting the "collapse" of the internet that year?

He tore the page from the magazine, cut it into small pieces, and put it in a blender, with some sort of liquid. One story said that he checked with the magazine printer, to see if the ink was toxic!

Maybe Ed will eat the first page of his book!

LOL <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

Back off, of Yourdon, and his brethen, Hopefully whole economy won't fall off face of our modern world, as has happened to history past. Who has a knowledge of eyes to see, or ears to hear? This was a drill.

-- Mebbe Not this Time (but@thenext.com), February 03, 2000.

From the looks of things right now, Ed won't have to eat many of his words.

BTW, weren't those words first posted to this forum in a message from Ed just after 1/1/00? (or -- maybe they're from his first article of the year)

-- Dean -- from (almost) Duh Moyn (dtmiller@midiowa.net), February 03, 2000.

If Ed Yourdon and Jennifer Yourdon had not written Time Bomb 2000, is there anyone who seriously thinks that Y2K would have played out the way that it has to date? Even John Koskinen (surprisingly enough) said recently that two years ago, it was quite valid to assume that if nothing were done to address Y2K, the consequences would have TEOTWAWKI. (This statement is in a January 27, 2000 transcript noted on TB 2000 in a recent thread. It may be called "Koskinen speaks out".)

How was awareness of Y2K raised and why do you think so much got done? How do you think a worst case scenario could have been averted, at least up to now? If anyone deserves major credit for raising the world's consciousness concerning Y2K, it is the Yourdons and their book.

-- abc (abc@ab.cd), February 03, 2000.

And PS,

As I noted in the "full story" thread, wasn't this "news" posted here just after 1/1? It sounds real familiar, the "out of the box" part, his son breaking his chops... I know I've seen this before. Anyone else remember this?

Maybe it's a slow news day at the Times... <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

PPS - Yea Dean, we posted at the same time. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

OK, we've got the answer in the other thread. Old news.

Sorry Billy (NOT!) <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

And here is my standard answer... So you say you are a republican who hangs out on democrat forums just to harrass; you are a man who hangs out at women's just to harrass. You are a christian who hangs out at pagan forums just to harrass. You are a meat eater who hangs out at vegetarian forums just to harrass. Getting your own life and doing something significant with it might be in order

-- Sheri (wncy2k@nccn.net), February 03, 2000.

Thank you, Ed Yourdon, for your words! They were sweet to me, and I'll never again be within three days of disaster.

Mr. Renegade: Ed posted that himself right after the turnover. You're a little slow on the uptake.

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), February 03, 2000.

Y2KPro..Why they can't admit that it's all over. Yourdon admitted himself it was the greatest embarassment of his life. I personally think that most people on this board had been very disappointed that a disaster did not happen but still hoping for it. What's next? Feb. 29? It kinda' blows your mind, doesn't it?

-- Bill Renegade (phantom@sprain.com), February 03, 2000.

Y2KPro..Why they can't admit that it's all over

Because it's not over, moron. The oil company I work for is currently suffering major Y2K problems. Next time you fill up your gas tank, don't worry about those prices, okay? It's all over, right?

-- Dog Gone (dawgawn@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

"Dog Gone", please enlighten us as to what those "major Y2K problems" are. I'm sure everyone would appreciate it.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), February 03, 2000.

Y2KPro..Why they can't admit that it's all over

Tell that to the folks freezing and starving in Siberia right now.

-- Y2K Pro broke his leg and spam came out (@ .), February 03, 2000.

abc,

Yourdon's book was poorly written in the area of Telecomm, Power and Embedded Systems - his writings had little effect on the overall remediation efforts. In my field (telecomm & system on chip), one could even say that his text had a negative effect on our efforts - as we had to spend valuable resources and time defusing the statments made by Mr. Yourdon, Hyatt and Lord. Regards,

-- William Holst (w_holst@hotmail.com), February 03, 2000.

Tell that to the folks freezing and starving in Siberia right now.

As opposed to the folks who were freezing and starving in Siberia at this time last year?

-- (brr@brr.brr), February 03, 2000.

Buddy,

Our mapping systems have been on the fritz for the last two weeks. Almost half are completely offline and unavailable as we scramble to fix them. We have numerous sophisticated programs for mapping reservoirs and underground rock formations. We have others for mapping well locations and seismic anomalies. These are tied into production rates and histories, as well as engineering data programs. The problems are definitely date-related and have to do with our enormous inventory of existing data.

Additionally, we are having problems with many of our accounting functions. Checks are being issued with bizarre dates and amounts. I'm told we're catching all these before they leave the company, but who knows? We're a multi-billion dollar company, and we generate literally hundreds of thousands of checks each month.

If any problems exist in the actual production of oil or gas, I'm not aware of it yet. But that's not my area of expertise within the company.

These are Y2K problems and they are having an effect on our ability to conduct our business. I am confident that we will correct them, but if we couldn't we would be unable to stay in business. I consider that to be a serious problem.

I doubt my company is alone in this. Who can tell? It's not like we're issuing press releases about it.

Anyway, I don't want to hear any crap from the gloaters here about there being no serious Y2K problems. I know better. Yeah, we didn't blow up at rollover. Terrific. That hardly ends the story.

-- Dog Gone (dawgawn@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

Dog Gone, I am not here to gloat. The problems you describe are serious as far as running the business goes, but none of them are serious as far as the public is concerned except for their possible impact on prices due to increased expense and/or possible impact on stockholders.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), February 03, 2000.

This article was discussed a month ago--click here

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), February 03, 2000.

Thanks for sharing your story Dog Gone.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

Buddy at Debunking Y2K

"Many are semi-literate, and they use 500 words when one sentence will get the point across." http://stand77.com/wwwboard/messages/12078.html

"In my opinion, if you want sick bastards and a shitload of attaboys then TB2000 is your place." http://stand77.com/wwwboard/messages/12061.html

So why ARE you here, Buddy?

-- Do you need (to@feel.superior?), February 03, 2000.

Thanks for the info DogGone. Unfortunately, since there were no apparent significant problems at the rollover, pollies like Bill and his brethren will continue spreading inaccurate responses. Ed Yourdon`s Y2k efforts have been and should continue to be commended. I,and most on this forum, believe this to be the case. I read, just after rollover, the comment he quoted by Ed. Delayed reaction-- wouldn`t ya say?

-- NoJo (RSKeiper@aol.com), February 03, 2000.

Buddy,

You weren't gloating on this thread, but I think you know who was. As far as your comment,

The problems you describe are serious as far as running the business goes, but none of them are serious as far as the public is concerned except for their possible impact on prices due to increased expense and/or possible impact on stockholders.

I beg to differ. None of the problems I outlined are a threat to the general public in a physical sense, but if I can't the landowner his or her royalty payment that may be pretty damn serious to their family. If I can't pay my invoices to suppliers, they will think that's pretty serious. We are talking literally hundreds of millions of dollars.

If we can't get our maps up and working we can't do anything except to produce what we've already found. Thousands of employees, and subcontractors we hire to provide services will be affected.

Just which of these people I've mentioned are not part of the public?

-- Dog Gone (dawgawn@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

So, which regular posted as a troll, hmmm? Lots of people whine about trolls here, yet any troll post by a "doomer" is allowed to stand. Also, you've taken my comments out of context, not that I would retract them. I have no need to feel superior, only a desire to help people sort out fact from fiction and get to the truth. That is always what I've been about.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), February 03, 2000.

"...only a desire to help people sort out fact from fiction and get to the truth. That is always what I've been about."

Actually Buddy that's BS,

Late 1998 and early 1999 you "trolled" this forum pretty heavily. You have not always acted honorably, and the Sysops are well aware of that fact.

Same old DB trolls. Same old "we're lilly white of hue" story. Move on, Buddy.

'Nuf said.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

No, Diane, you're the one who's full of BS here. Sure, I've posted with different handles, for which you call me a troll. Besides that, the earlier regulars were calling me a troll just because I disagreed with them, even before I ever posted with a different handle. However, you don't seem to have a problem with it when it's done with a "doomer" slant.

You're trying to control the flow of information here. Ever since you took the job of moderator this has been true.

By the way, Ms. Internet Researcher, you need to look up some definitions. You are not a "Sysop". And you don't understand the meaning of "troll". Go look 'em up while I move on as you suggested.

I will move on now, because I haven't posted anything nasty or personally derogatory, yet you continue to call me a troll. You were wrong about Y2K and you're still wrong. You're wrong about how a forum should be run as well.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), February 03, 2000.

P.S. Don't dare talk to me about "acting honorably" after the way this forum has been run.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), February 03, 2000.

Your messages on this thread haven't been deleted, Buddy. What's your gripe about the way this forum is being moderated?

-- I don't (see@a.problem), February 03, 2000.

Y2k Pro has made comments in the past that I'm sure he wishes he could take back.

http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000eyW

-- (Hall@of.records), February 03, 2000.

Yea Buddy, what is your problem?

This place is pretty darn free for a moderated forum. You do know what a moderated forum is, don't you? I do, and I've been on more than a few.

This whole "censorship" issue is BS and you know it. Talk about "out of context". You guys are trying to make a big freaking deal out of nothing. Just more noise. Just more BS to disrtact us from more important issues.

There are a few basic rules here. Don't break them, and you won't have a problem. Too bad isn't it, that you have to live by the rules, just like the rest of the world.

Just a little advice from a EX-SYSOP. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

http://www.neill.net/news.html

Troll

A posting designed specifically to generate followups about something trivial, but not in the sense of a flame; or a post designed to instruct readers' to ignore obvious drivel by making the replyers feel utterly stupid. Such things as blatantly incorrect facts, misspellings, or concepts can be used as trolls. After the followups have died down, the troller will usually inform the victims of their status as guinea pigs and move on to another group. Often, trolls are explicitly noted in the summaryor keywords portions of the headers, thus making the respondents look like idiots - which they probably are for not having read the headers to begin with. For a good analogy and taxonomy of trolls, Abby Franquemont-Guillory (abbyfg@tezcat.com) writes, "Sometimes, when one goes fishing, one engages in the practice of trolling: the art of casting out a line complete with bait and a hook, and rowing or moving slowly while you drag the line and wait to see what bites."

Trolling as it is used in newsgroups means much the same thing: one throws out a baited line with a hook attached, and waits to see who takes the bait by responding to the posted troll.

Examples of trolling might be going to a newsgroup filled with fans of a particular person, and posting something slanderous about said person.... going to a newsgroup filled with newbies, and posting something that the uninitiated might be taken in by..... going to a politically-charged newsgroup and posting something which you know for certain will start a huge debate or flamewar....

You can also troll for specific people.... for instance, my mother is an ethnobotanist who specializes in the usage and taxonomy of Peruvian plants, and who is writing a book about the potato.... and if I know she reads a certain newsgroup, or searches for the word "potato" or something, I can do something like post a message where I think she'll find it, a message containing some misinformation about the potato, and then if she responds to debunk the misinformation I posted, she has been trolled. In fact, if she were to discover this article and respond to it, she could even be said to have been trolled.

There are clever trolls, stupid trolls, obvious trolls, the kind of trolls where you just can't be sure if it or it isn't, the kind you can't resist, the kind that make you mad, the kind that are aimed at everyone and anyone, trolls that are intended to get one person's goat in particular, trolls which are meant in fun, trolls which are set out with malice aforethought, and many many other kinds of trolls.

The effect that trolls have can also be widely varied.... it depends on any number of things, and on the kinds of responses and respondents that a troll receives. There are people out there who live to troll, and people to whom it is anathema.

All in all, it's a pretty integral part of newsgroup culture. Ted Frank (thf2@midway.uchicago.edu) wrote: "The purpose of trolling is not to "deliberately start a flame war". Deliberately starting a flame war is flame-baiting, and requires absolutely no intelligence to post something obscene that'll get people mad."

Trolling is more subtle. It's a tactic to discourage flaming, by posting intelligently and cleverly crafted (but marked) inaccuracies; someone attempting to flame a posted troll finds that he has acted too rashly and has succeeded only in making a fool of himself. It's a device to teach people not to immediately hit "F" to demonstrate how superior they are to the great unwashed uninformed. It reinforces netiquette; compare flame-bait, which encourages the breakdown of netiquette.

A good troll is an impressive thing. Anyone can start a flamewar. Go to group X and post "X SUCKS!!!!". Trolling is much more difficult.

Flame

Flame-war

1. To post an email message intended to insult and provoke.

2. To speak incessantly and/or rabidly on some relatively uninteresting subject or with a patently ridiculous attitude.

3. Either of senses 1 or 2, directed with hostility at a particular person or people. Flames are often found in large numbers (known as a flame-war) during religious wars (see religious issue, below). alt.flame is specifically dedicated to perfecting the art of flaming.

Flamebait

A posting that is intended to trigger a flame war, or one that invites flames in reply. For example, posting an article on how to run dogs over in rec.pets.dogs is sure to draw scathing flames from the readers of that group.

-- I (looked@it.up), February 03, 2000.

As you should be able to see from the definition that you looked up, I did not troll in this thread. The definition posted says a troll is deliberate misinformation. I have never, EVER, posted deliberate misinformation. All my posts which were called trolls were attempts to debunk misinformation. It seems much of this board fits this description of troll. I asked a question of "Dog Gone" and that person answered it, quite civilly I might add. Then, a troll post was made by someone which was irrelevant to the topic at hand. That is when I posted asking which regular posted the troll response.

I have not broken any rules here Sysman. I have simply been labelled a troll from the get-go for expressing my opinion. Sorry, but just because you don't like someone's opinion does not make them a troll. I now understand why a few people flew off the handle and spammed this place. You might do it too if your opinion was deleted just because it goes against the popular one.

Sysman, you say this board is moderated. I say it is only moderated when opinions are expressed that go against the popular one. Besides, normally a "moderated" board requires preapproval before a message is posted, which is not the case here.

Oh, and it's quite ironic that someone posts a definition of "troll" as a troll post. I suspect that it was even done by a "sysop". How's that for irony?

Don't worry, I'll leave. I grow weary of trying to talk sense with people who put up with such nonsense. I thought things might have changed since Y2K turned out to be entirely manageable as I predicted it would be. I was wrong about that. Carry on with your delusions that you're discussing reality.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), February 03, 2000.

"I say it is only moderated when opinions are expressed that go against the popular one."

Look Buddy, what you are saying just isn't true. Hoff, Flint, Decker, they all posted their "opposite" opinion, and never had any problems. They didn't have problems, because they could carry on an ADULT conversation, in a CIVIL manner. Y2K Pro was a full-time regular, and he didn't have problems, until he went too far. In Y2K Pro's case, I saw it with my own eyes, so don't tell me that it's all a big crock.

What we have with this "censorship" problem, is a HANDFULL of mental midgets, that have nothing better to do, than play KINDERGARTEN level stunts, and waste EVERYBODY'S time.

At least that's this regular's opinion. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

No Sysman, it is true.

But nevermind, I don't care anymore. I'm gone.

Carry on with your foolishness over contrails and hidden Y2K timebombs.

See ya, wouldn't wanna be ya.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), February 03, 2000.

Have fun Buddy. I think I'll hang 'round and check out some of this "foolishness" on oil, and processor shortages, and such. Y2K related or not, I think it's important stuff.

See ya! <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), February 03, 2000.

Dog Gone,

Sorry to hear you're having problems at your company. I think this is the first real first-hand post from someone having specific date-related problems that I've seen in this forum. (Other, more forum-studious readers may provide links if I've missed some :^)

Are the problems with the mapping software itself, or with the archival and retrieval of mapped images? If the latter, are the problems related to HSM (Hierarchal Storage Management) software, or something similar?

Also, if you feel free to say, in what area do you work in the company (general I.S., mapping software programming/support, end user/GIS analyst, other,) and do you happen to know what your company did for Y2K remediation in 1999 (warp system dates on test systems and test the software, etc.)

Thanks for any info.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), February 04, 2000.

Bemused,

I'm afraid I'm not going to be much help in answering your questions. I don't use most of the mapping systems that I reported about, and there are many here that I've never even seen in use, because I'm not on the scientific/technical end of things. Much of what I reported was gleaned from the rash of company-wide emails notifying users of numerous system crashes and unscheduled maintenance on various systems. It's unprecedented in my 20 years here. Many of the emails outlined date format problems and problems with previous patches which we are trying to reinstall.

I'm not in the information services group, except as design consultant, and I'm not really sure of all the pre-rollover testing protocols. However, I avidly followed our Y2K remediation program and every single one of these systems had been signed off as compliant prior to rollover.

I'm just speculating, but since 99% of our data was created prior to this year, and there are mountains of it, I'm sure there are conversion problems, especially since these systems have to integrate to produce a final product.

I'm sorry I couldn't give a more specific answer than that. The good news is I only received two emails about the issue today. One that a system was back on line and one that a different was was going to undergo emergency maintenance this weekend.

-- Dog Gone (dawgawn@yahoo.com), February 04, 2000.

So, Dog Gone admits of no direct knowledge of his/her company's Y2K problems, only e-mails sent to end-users, assumptions, and speculation as to the seriousness of the problems.

Also, everyone seems to have missed the point of this thread: That one month ago, Ed Yourdon made the above statement and of course, will never follow through with eating his words.

Curiouser and curiouser.

-- as usual (always@laugh.here), February 05, 2000.

That's right, I must have made it all up. Since I can't explain the intracacies, that's the only logical explanation.

Anybody who can't explain the details of the problem to some jerk polly on a vindictive vendetta to HIS satisfaction is definitely NOT witnessing a Y2K problem.

No siree. I see your logic.

-- Dog Gone (dawgawn@yahoo.com), February 06, 2000.

Ed Yourdon on 'Y2K success lessons'

http://www.computerworld.com/home/print.nsf/all/000124E21E

01/24/2000 article in COMPUTERWORLD.

-- (01@24.2000), February 06, 2000.

uh huh

-- (foo@bar.com), February 06, 2000.

On the contrary, the problems D.G. describes could very well be Y2K related in two possible ways - Y2K patches inplemented incorrectly or incompletely, or HSM software not able to handle the retrieval of stored images across the rollover barrier 100% accurately.

I work in I.T., and have worked some on Y2K remediation the past 3 years. Things have looked very good since early/mid 1999, but these were two areas I had some (mild) concern about;

1) making the problem worse with "bad" Y2K patch installs, and 2) HSM systems not being fully remediated.

A lot of companies like the one D.G. describes use some form of HSM to store and retrieve images and documents, and the indexes used by it can be very date/time dependant. What HSM basically does is automatically migrate older data to longer term, cheaper storage while making it look like the data is still "present". When a program or user requests that file or image, the HSM software consults its index and retrieves the data from the backline storage. If the indexes are even a little corrupt, it can be a real bear to fix, because you're dealing with enormous, complex indexes and huge amounts of data. This might be what's happening there. Anyway, sounds like it's getting cleaned up, good to hear.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@people.com), February 07, 2000.