* * * 19990905 Sunday

Re: Paula Gordon and her Y2K "position" ...

I was (pleasantly) astounded to hear Paula Gordon announce on C-SPAN that on the scale of 0-10, she's at "~9.5"--versus Jim Lord, at "~8.5"!

Ms. Gordon was a relative "late comer"--mid-1998, I believe--into the Y2K mix for trying to determine rational strategies and solutions to the inevitable problems. ( She'll correct me if my memory has failed. ;-) )

I was impressed with her quick pick-up on Y2K ramifications; her excellent background has served her well on that count!

It's too bad she's being relegated to the "background" on Y2K. A lot of people could benefit from her sage advice. Regards, Bob Mangus

P.S.: I've been an "11" on the Y2K event scale since 1996!

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@hotmail.com), September 05, 1999.

Makes you have to wonder what he was trying to say there doesn't it? Maybe he hyped her up because she agreed with his view and those who listened to him would in turn listen to her

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), March 22, 2000

Answers

Cherri,

If we were to look in the archives, I'm sure you will agree, we can find many statements, opinions, fears, or even general b*llsh*t.

Frankly, I was concerned, still am, for different reasons. I've gone from a "doomer" to a concerned citizen. Not too bad a tradeoff.

What's the "point" of your post?

-- Michael (michaelteever@buffalo.com), March 22, 2000.

Michael,

I don't think Cherri's goal here is to simply take a cheap shot at Mangus (I'd be the one to do something like that; Cherri's too nice[g]).

Why does this matter? Why rehash it?

It's simple: to prevent anything like Y2K Doom from ever happening again.

There's one big price that people like Mangus, Gordon, Kappelman, Hall and all of the other Prophets must pay for their position: it's called the "Cry Wolf" effect. No one will *ever* take them seriously again -- not even if a real crisis comes along.

To a lesser extent, every Doomer who got suckered by these people will ALSO pay this (thankfully, not quite so large, but due nonetheless) price to their friends and family.

("There's a flood coming!")

("Yeah, sure, Joe ... just like Y2K. Right?")

During the Y2K debate, some people kept saying, "why are you criticising me? If I'm wrong, I just eat my mistake." (SURELY you've heard that one a time or three[g]?) Wrong: we have a responsibility to examine ALL sides of an issue before taking a stand ... and one (very good) reason is to prevent becoming victims of Cry Wolf syndrome.

I don't have anything against Mangus personally. But in light of how fantastically wrong he was about Y2K, I don't consider him (or Gordon) to be a very credible or objective source.

That's the price they pay for the Cry Wolf effect. Cherri's simply reminding people of how loud Mangus was hollering, "wolf! wolf" the past few. That's a perfectly legitimate thing for her to do.

In fact, if you wanted everyone to learn the lesson about Y2K doom, you would *encourage* this, rather than criticise it.

-- Me (me@thisplace.net), March 23, 2000.

That's the price they pay for the Cry Wolf effect. Cherri's simply reminding people of how loud Mangus was hollering, "wolf! wolf" the past few. That's a perfectly legitimate thing for her to do.

Since Bob Magnus is an individual and wasn't a public figure who could alter the course of national Y2k policy, this is more than just not legitimate or not appropriate.

It's petty.

-- Forgive your enemies or you'll (become@like.them), March 23, 2000.

-- (html@normal.cy), March 23, 2000.

Cherri, I for one appreciate your post. Michael I too have gone from a "doomer to a concerned citizen," but frankly, I'm not even *very concerned*, except for the environmental destruction I see going on all around me.

But I think cherri is right in reminding us that we shouldn't be taken in by everyone who is, or who considers themselves to be an expert. In fact "Me" stated the point very well, saying, "To a lesser extent, every Doomer who got suckered by these people will ALSO pay this (thankfullly, not quite so large, but due nonetheless) price to their friends and family.

Think about it. We who were so scared for our family members, have lost credibility for any future problems. In fact, the DOOMERS, that preached disaster, literally flamed and beat down anyone that didn't GI. Remember all the GI, DGI, DWTGI, crap they carried on about. And believe me, if they had been right, and had there been even a *one week* period of power disruptions, they would have beaten pollies and naysayers to bits with their gloating and "I told you so!!!"

I should have listened to the government!. And I will never, ever believe anything that pseudo religious, government hating, camo wearing, hateful bunch of FUD filled crazies says again. And don't think I'm blaming them for everything. I had a choice and went with the nut cases.

Moderation in all things is my motto. Be prepared, but never trust that bunch of kooks, crying wolf.

Forgive your enemies. Well, first they aren't my enemies, they are just nuts. And second, I don't recall ever reading any of Bob's posts. But for Paula Gordon, and all the others, Hyatt, Yourdon, Hamasaki, Lord, (Milne was such a raving nut I discounted him ) etc., who did influence thousands of people, I think they should think seriously about what they've done. They could at least say loud and clear, we made a bad error in judgement, and for that we are sorry. If that's petty so be it. I'm not trying out for sainthood.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), March 23, 2000.

for gawd's sake when are you all going to stop this I told you so over and over again

OK so who lost a lot of money over making unnecessary preparations for y2k

the doomers as it happens were wrong, y2k was such an unknown they could have been right, if so where would we be now

not in any position to have I told you so conversations on the net

let it be

-- richard (ohsirrichard@aol.com), March 23, 2000.

Richard,

Perhaps the point is that no matter how many times "I told you so" is said Paula Gordon and others are still at it.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), March 23, 2000.

Paula was a 5.5 to 9.5.

How about get your facts straight you dumb bitch.

-- (@ .), March 23, 2000.

Hmm... is it "a" semi-undercover again?

Until Paula Gordon steps off the Y2K bandwagon, she's still fair game. Of course, in academia you can be a fruit cake and still publish papers somewhere. Gordon is going to milk this thing eight ways to Sunday. It's no different when a new PhD milks a thesis for half a dozen journal articles (or a full career). I'm waiting until Gordon grows up and stops convening "panels" with WND moderators.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 23, 2000.

And Y2K was a 1. (if that)

Arguing the difference between 550% wrong or 950% wrong seems a tad pedantic when evaluating the justification for asking them to stop the games now, and even maybe admit they were TOTALLY WRONG.

Wouldnt you say ?

W

-- W0lv3r1n3 (W0lv3r1n3@yahoo.com), March 23, 2000.

Also, it was Robert Mangus who placed Gordon at 9.5. Is Mangus the "dumb bitch" --@ is referring to?

By the way, whatever happened to Robert Mangus?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), March 23, 2000.

Richard, I took a lot of shit for several months on the old TimeBomb board. Now if you don't mind, I will bitch until I get over feeling quite a bit of anger about those who thought they knew everything, and knew nothing, and bashed anyone that didn't agree.

If you do mind, too bad. You're no Mr. Charm School.

-- gilda (jess@listbot.com), March 23, 2000.

All together now, 1, 2, 3

"NOBODY KNOWS"

The more it snows
(Tiddely pom),
The more it goes
(Tiddely pom),
The more it goes
(Tiddely pom),
On snowing.
And nobody knows
(Tiddely pom),
How cold my toes
(Tiddely pom),
How cold my toes
(Tiddely pom),
Are growing. ........(apologies to A.A. Milne)....... Milne? did I say Milne ?? )

"IT WAS JUST DUMB LUCK"

...anybody know that one? :-) :-)

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), March 23, 2000.

Excuse my flippancy (verse above), sometimes I just have to laugh at the idea that "nobody knows", maybe it is my ex-doomer's long pent up relief about it all.

Richard, you said,

for gawd's sake when are you all going to stop this I told you so over and over again -
the doomers as it happens were wrong, y2k was such an unknown
they could have been right, if so where would we be now

I can see wanting to drop an issue and move on, but how can anyone say, now, in 3/2000 that Y2k was SUCH an unknown? True, even by rollover, it wasn't precisely known, but it was known that it would be manageable it's not like "there but for the grace of God go we" as you would say when the tornado just misses the town.

I think some people are focusing way too much on "Glitches - We Still Don't Know Where They Are" and not enough on questioning the whole assumption behind the "Prep" movement which was that Y2k glitches would have a disastrous ripple effect throughout society.

If the FUD is not over for some people and they are still stirring it up publicly, well they are fair game as Flint said, so small wonder people are taking pot shots at them. "Forgive me" you said it is petty to go after individuals and not public figures. I tend to agree, to a point, maybe the pot shots are misdirected toward people who just went along. But sometimes it was hard to tell the people pulling the bandwagon from the people going along for the ride - actually it seemed like a circular wagon train - LOL - the back end tied to the front end, going around in circles. :^)

The enmity seems to continue, as I see it, because there is a whole lot of anger that this idea was ever put out there, because the whole Fear and the basis for Prepping, was built on this idea. (This was apart from the remediation effort, which was very real. I think some people do not separate these things in their minds.) If anything RIPPLED throughout society, it was that idea - all the way to places like the National Guard web site (ever see it- it was pretty compelling). Amazing if you ask me.

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), March 23, 2000.

Debbie,

Well said. Let me clarify, too, that I'm *not* harping at those people who were honestly misled (like gilda). In the final analysis, these were folks who were simply worried about their families. They're really more victim than anything else.

But I believe that the people who misled these victims should be called to account for their actions. It is infuriating that they want to slink off now and pretend like it never happened. (Jim Lord especially comes to mind.)

I also have no patience with the "no one knew, we were just lucky!" argument. Wrong. I knew. I didn't guess. I didn't hope. I didn't (to quote Cory Hamasaki) "wish real hard." I KNEW that Y2K was going to be no big deal -- a few scattered failures here and there, but NOTHING like the 6.0-and-up scenarios of the Doom Prophets.

That's not "rubbing it in." That's simply stating a fact.

I bet my life and my family's life on this and don't regret it for a moment. My family's quality of life was enhanced because we DIDN'T live in uncertainty and fear. You can't put a price on that.

-- Me (me@thisplace.net), March 23, 2000.

I also have no patience with the "no one knew, we were just lucky!" argument. Wrong. I knew. I didn't guess.

Not everyone was so certain last year.

http://www.computerworld.com/home/print.nsf/CWFlash/990628B142

Link

Many corporations are apparently doing the same. A survey of Fortune 500 firms released last month by Cap Gemini America LLC in New York found 85% of the companies surveyed plan to build Y2K command centers or crisis-management centers  up from 40% just five months earlier.

-- (May@of.1999), March 25, 2000.

Me (me@thisplace.net),

>I knew. I didn't guess. I didn't hope. I didn't (to quote Cory Hamasaki) "wish real hard."

How did you *know*? What was the factual basis? How far did your *know*ledge about Y2K effects extend?

I'm willing to grant that you, like I, did know about the Y2K-readiness of certain places and organizations with which you (or I) were especially familar. But the original reference statement, "No one knew" referred to the global, or at least the U.S. national, situation -- how much did you *know* about that broad scope, and what were your information sources for that?

>I KNEW that Y2K was going to be no big deal -- a few scattered failures here and there, but NOTHING like the 6.0-and-up scenarios of the Doom Prophets.

What would have been the rating on one of the major Y2K 0-10 scales of your worst possible Y2K scenario? And how did you know that would be the worst possible level?

I KNEW that Y2K was going to be no big deal -- a few scattered failures here and there, but NOTHING like the 6.0-and-up scenarios of the Doom Prophets.

-- No Spam Please (nos_pam_please@hotmail.com), March 25, 2000.

Whoops. The last sentence in my preceding posting was mistakenly left over when I failed to clean up after a cut-and-paste. I did not intend to leave it as some echo of what "Me (me@thisplace.net)" wrote.

-- No Spam Please (nos_pam_please@hotmail.com), March 25, 2000.