In defense of EZBOARD : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

I imagine there will be a running conflict between this forum and the participants in Ed Yourdon's EZBOARD. Personally, I'm delighted Yourdon decided to move to another venue.

During most of 1999, the sysops at the old Time Bomb 2000 maintained at least the pretense of an open forum. Then Yourdon selected sysops. The new administrators sought to shape the debate... both as participants and as active editors of the forum.

In doing so, they lost credibility. As time passed, the sysops became increasingly involved in actions contrary to open discourse. This included the notorious "delete on sight" policy. During the last quarter of 1999, the Y2K optimists did not trust the forum "moderators." The open bias of the sysops also gave the Y2K pessimists free rein. Posts were treated according to author, not content. In short, the well was poisoned.

The decision to mve to EZBOARD codified what the Y2K optimists had suspected all along. It became the last puzzle piece of Ed Yourdon and Y2K. From "Beirut" to "Sayonara" to "Humpty Dumpty" to "Rodney Dangerfield" to "EZBOARD." EZBOARD fits the pattern.

I said last year that if Ed Yourdon wanted a "members only" club, just be honest about it. The original "teaser" for TB 2000 invited everyone interested in Y2K to participate. This devolved to the point where sysops acted as if TB 2000 was a "prep" forum with a Y2K catastrophe as a foregone conclusion.

EZBOARD provides a discussion area for people who do not want open discourse. Personally, it's not my cup of tea but Ed Yourdon has every right to have a little online club. (Some might call it a cult of personality.) They also have the right to exclude individuals like Flint and Hoffman. The open ostracism leaves no questions about the philosophy of EZBOARD. Frankly, I prefer honest rejection to a pretense of open debate.

Best of all, the launch of EZBOARD precipitated this forum. While imperfect, this is a level playing field. The artists formerly known as Y2K optimists can post freely without censorship. The regular pessimists can weigh in... but without the tacit support of the sysops. One can choose between an open community or a closed one.

As for me, I favor freedom.

-- Ken Decker (, March 13, 2000


Did you say "defense"?

-- lisa (, March 13, 2000.


I do not have to like EZBOARD to defend its right to exist, or even to exclude others. My opinion of Yourdon and Friends does not change my principles. Unlike some of our mutual online acquaintances, my standards do not alter on a "case by case" basis. Those I loathe are entitled to the same freedoms as those I like.

-- Ken Decker (, March 13, 2000.


My feelings exactly... free speech IS important.


The Dog

-- The Dog (, March 13, 2000.

Decker you are a righteous little prick you make me puke. This board will get the same spam attacks that it organized for the old TBy2k to bust it up so debunkers could have a home to go to.
Well what goes around is now in YOUR face.Enjoy!!

-- Uno (, March 13, 2000.


Another thread about how Ken's feelings have been hurt by the evil Yourdon. My what a productive forum we have here.


-- ZZZZzzzzzzz (, March 13, 2000.

I'm [so far] free to post at either place. I try not to make a pest of myself on the EZBOARD TB forum, but neither do I allow it to hinder my expression. I responded to one thread regarding LL's departure statement and then again to BigDog and WillContinue on the same thread. The opinions I stated in that thread pretty much cover my opinions on the differences between the boards.

As much as I enjoy the "asides" offered on THIS forum, my concern is understanding the psychology involved in Y2k. Somehow I thought that Y2kaftermath meant just that. THIS forum discusses the Y2kaftermath. The other forum WILL [per BigDog] perhaps engage in this topic sometime this summer. Actually that time-frame is HIS personal time-frame. There may be others who won't see the time for Y2kaftermath discussion until 2001 or later, but what good is a discussion when you've eliminated the opposing point of view?

In the meantime, folks on both fora discuss their interests and a few news items. I don't discuss religion or politics. Discussions on how to best use EZBOARD leave me cold, being a non-regular user. The stock market will go up and go down, so discussions on that subject don't thrill me. Recessions and depressions have come and gone before and a date glitch didn't start them, so I can't see how that relates to Y2k either. I think the bottomline is that "It NEVER was about Y2k."

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.thingee), March 13, 2000.

This dicussion seems to be another round in the ongoing debate about newsgroup moderation, with the important distinction that our "group" on the old TB2K never really nailed down its charter, thus making moderation an extremely subjective activity (and frustrating for all parties concerned.) EZBOARD has now become the moderated version of the free-wheeling "TB2K" discussions, while TB2K Uncensored has stayed for the most part unmoderated (thanks, Regular!)

Moderated newsgroups are fine as long as everyone has a clear understanding of the group's charter (e.g., "No posts about the tastiness of horsemeat in rec.pets.horses"). I prefer unmoderated groups myself and learned long ago that this means one has to put up with the occasional spammer and flamefest.

-- DeeEmBee (, March 13, 2000.


Decker you are a righteous little prick you make me puke. This board will get the same spam attacks that it organized for the old TBy2k to bust it up so debunkers could have a home to go to. Well what goes around is now in YOUR face.Enjoy!!

Your language is interesting. Actually, I was with the old board about as long as anyone. I found it by accident. I have a 40 or more year interest in photography. Hence, I have looked at Phil's stuff from time to time. I found this board by accident.

You are claiming to be a regular.

I can look at the people posting on EZ and limit the possibilities of who you are. Not many of the originals there. Old Git, Chuck, Ed, Large Canine, Wilford and, more recently, Ynott and Carl. Come on, Fess-UP.

Best wishes,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (, March 13, 2000.

Z1X4Y7, There are a couple of other possibilities for the excerpt that you quoted. When you consider the richness of the language used, the sprinkling of words such as "prick" and "puke", and the bitterness expressed against anyone who uses logic and reason, then I would tend to suspect that it was posted by someone with a birdlike brain.

The way that the post was formatted and the opinion expressed appears to be very similar to that of the LL imposter, it is obviously a person who believes that they can fly in the face of logical thought.

The fact that he/she is unable to hawk his/her opinions in a reasonable manner suggests a wish to establish a perch which is superior to everyone else, but they actually end up as a scavenger of others' ideas.

Yes, I believe that there is another regular poster who fits these criteria.

-- Malcolm Taylor (, March 13, 2000.

This board will get the same spam attacks that it organized for the old TBy2k to bust it up so debunkers could have a home to go to. Well what goes around is now in YOUR face.Enjoy!!

This board did not exsist during the time that Debunky exsisted, nor did this board ever spam TB2K original. While some of the posters to this board have also posted to Debunky, and some of those posters may have spammed TB2K original, your all-inclusive statement makes little sense when one considers that many of the posters here also posted to TB2K, and were in fact DOOMERS. I don't know who you are but I will lay odds that I posted on TB2K many moons before you, and I posted maybe 4 times to Debunky. So what? Perhaps you have a blurred distinction between posters and the board to which they post.

*WARNING* Gratuitous personal attack to follow! Do not read if easily offended!

You sir, Mr. Uno, are a fucking fruit-loop.

That is a personal attack from me to you, it bears no involvement from any other poster to this board, nor does it reflect upon the board in general. Get it?

-- Uncle Deedah (, March 13, 2000.

Another advantage of free speech... it's much easier to spot to idiots. (chuckle)

The whole "debunker plot" myth is silly. In truth, the thoughtful participants on both sides disliked the disruptive behavior. As for my feelings being "hurt," I have yet to lose a moment's sleep over any of the online debate. Of course, one would actually have to READ my post to understand this. I wonder if the recycled regulars will ever learn to read what's written above my name?

I'm sure you'll understand, Anita, but I'd prefer not to participate in EZB as a matter of principle. And I will wager that if you wander too far from the party line, you'll receive your walking papers. It's an inevitable process in a closed society... conform or be shunned.

As for EZB conducting an honest discussino of anything regarding Y2K... I will not hold my breath. By summer, how difficult will it be to link a particular problem or concern back to Y2K? It's nearly impossible now. Call me cynical, but I think the waiting time is mostly a way to distance the participants from their 1999 positions.

Dee, as far as moderation... the old forum kept "redefining" on topic until dissent was no longer on topic. The problem was not the charter, but the agenda of the sysops and the specific actions taken. With luck, we'll dodge that bullet here.

"Z" don't hold your breath. Some of the old-timers don't want to be held responsible for their earlier behavior.

-- Ken Decker (, March 13, 2000.

Have to agree with UnkD. Mr. Decker has always been a bit of a jerk in his own special way but you've got that, universal quality to ya.

-- Carlos (, March 13, 2000.


Cute! :)

-- viewer (, March 13, 2000.


Wrong. Very cute :o).

Best wishes,,,,,,


-- Z1X4Y7 (, March 13, 2000.

Malcolm, before it became a 'Hawk', it was an 'A'. Same lame brain with new name.

-- Sifting (through@the.rubble), March 13, 2000.



Wrong. Very,very, cute :o)


-- Laura (Ladylogic@...), March 13, 2000.

I have been called doomer names that you would not believe over at Biffy, and now Uno says I'm a debunker. Clearly I must be doing something right.

-- Peter Errington (, March 13, 2000.

Hey Ken,

Does your blowhole ever clog?

Just wondering.

-- clogged blowhole (porpoise@windbag.gag), March 13, 2000.

Hey sifting you worthless piece of horseshit, it seems you are the lamest of lame brians around here, you can't even see the difference between an "@" and an "A" you dumbshit! "A" is a completely different person, but I do agree with most of his posts.

You, on the other hand are a worthless piece of crap 6 year old, and it's past your bedtime. You really should quit kissing Deckers sphincter, your lips are getting brown. Though I must admit, being an ass-kisser does suit you very well. :-)

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), March 13, 2000.

I think someone should defend Decker just as he has defended the EZBOARD forum, so I'll do it. To wit:

Decker is a worthless pile of crap, but he has the right to be a worthless pile of crap.

I hope this settles this argument. Thank you.

-- None (none@none.none), March 13, 2000.

LOL Peter!!!

Maybe everyone who ever posted at DeBunker should wear a badge in their posts. Something like this:

;I posted at DeBunker's+


-- Laura (Ladylogic@...), March 13, 2000.

Hawk, Im on the floor LMAO. You are so easily provoked and when reading your post above I have this vision of you crabbed over your keyboard with spittle flying all over the monitor. You sir are a lightweight.

-- Ra (tion@l.1), March 13, 2000.

I bet Ra and Sifting are the same schizoid asshole! They are both worthless fuckwad jefkoffs LOL!!!

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), March 13, 2000.

Better yet, I bet they are a couple of fags that suck each other's little peckers and kiss each other's sphincters! ROTFLMAO!!!!

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), March 13, 2000.

Golly! I wonder if they allow this type of language over at TB2000 II? I guess not since Hawk seems to feel the need to get his daily minimum requirement of cursing and foul language here.

-- Jim Cooke (, March 14, 2000.

No Jim, that is, in the words of Hawk, a forum for intellectuals. Hence, his preoccupation with this place.

-- Uncle Deedah (, March 14, 2000.

Hey Jim, fuck off!

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), March 14, 2000.

Tsk Tsk Hawk. If only your mother knew you used such language....

-- Jim Cooke (, March 14, 2000.

Hi Hawk,


-- Someone (, March 14, 2000.

worthless pile of crap describes many people on this forum

only you know, I could name names but there's little point, just look in a mirror

-- Sir Richard (, March 14, 2000.

Well, I see the thread has taken its usual turn.... and I'm glad you have proven my point about free speech.

-- Ken Decker (, March 14, 2000.




-- Ghost of Diane (, March 14, 2000.

Those postings cannot be the "Richard Dale" from old TB2K. The founder of "Rickology" and "Daletics" is a very good writer with a fairly dry (and definitely Brit) sense of humor. This "instance" has no command of the language whatsover. Trolls are so tedious...

-- DeeEmBee (, March 14, 2000.

And that ain't Hawk either, but this is as close to a family reunion as we gonna git.

None.none: too, too funny.

-- lisa (, March 14, 2000.

the only way lisa could know if that was hawk is if SHE is hawk...

hmmmm........curiouser and curiouser


-- A Diane-Like Ghost (sigh@sigh.sigh), March 14, 2000.

aww, man, busted....

you'd never guess who else I am.

-- lisa (, March 14, 2000.

LOL. Maybe 30% of the posts signed by Hawk are actually written by Hawk. Most of the rest are written by LauraLunatic.

-- Ghost of Milne (BWA@HA.HA), March 14, 2000.


Henry Mancini???

Forrest Tucker?

Abe Vigoda?

Lawrence Welk?

John Wayne?

Stephen Poole?????

Steven Tyler?

Bette Davis?

Olivia DeHaviland?

Betty BOOP????

Richard Nixon.... yeah that's it...

tail waggin'....

The Dog

-- The Dog (, March 14, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ