The [pick a historical event] is over. Why do you fools keep talking about it? : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

I wager Napoleon had this sentiment about Waterloo. (chuckle) Y2K is part of history... why study it? Why study any period or event in history? To me, the answer seems rather obvious. History offers us the chance to learn from our past. The study of history provides insights into every aspect of human civilization including culture, religion, warfare, philosophy, government.

Some periods of history are unpleasant. Perhaps the Catholic Church would prefer we avoid study of the Inquisition or papal politics the early middle ages. I'm quite positive the Y2K doomsayers would prefer we "move on."

The study of history is not, however, about moving on. It is about moving deeper. Clearly, deeper analysis is not Andy Ray's rhythmic verbal spasms or Reuben's frothing rants. There is, however, room for reasoned analysis on why a small group of people "jumped the tracks" about Y2K and why a much larger group spent time (and money) worrying about a nonproblem. Perhaps the passage of time will allow the emotionally distressed to find other hobbies and allow a less vitriolic discussion of the event.

Depending on the authenticity of the Greenspun post, this forum may end soon. For reasons of principle, I will not apply for Steve Heller's uber genius forum or the notorius EZB. If this is the end, I wish you all well. What a long, strange trip it has been.

-- Ken Decker (, July 07, 2000


Either way, a rational discussion was hardly possible amongst AndyRay's juvenile "neener, neener, you're a MEME'er, I'm smarter than you are, nyah, nyah, nyah" responses or cpr's "I WAS RIGHT AND YOU WERE WRONG AND *YOU* REFUSE TO MOVE ON SO YOU'RE A @#$%^&%$#@!@# #$%^%$#@ ASSHOLE AND I'M NOT AND THE SOONER YOU RECOGNIZE THAT I'M GOD EVERYTHING WILL BE FINE SO COME OVER AND KISS MY RING BECAUSE I'M BETTER THAN YOU AND DON'T YOU EVER *^%$#@! FORGET IT!!!" responses... there wasn't much room for discussion of any kind.

Come this time Monday, I suppose we'll know one way or the other. If it's still here, will anything change? I doubt it. We'll just move on to the next round.

-- I'm Here, I'm There (I'm Everywhere@so.beware), July 07, 2000.

At least Decker is on record for saying he thinks you are all just fools, not that it is coming as any revelation to us. I'm looking forward to Decker reactivating his dog&pony show about the long list of rules that will have to apply to the next forum and why that really isn't censorship (as though any of you even know what that means).

I'm here, your ability to pull off such a good impersonation surely indicates you don't have a life. ;^) (BTW, really love your handle!)

-- Whatever (, July 07, 2000.

Luckily for History, History will not pay much attention to you, your comments or your assignments of words to AR or myself.

Luckily also for History, some of us collected to CD *all* the rantings of the many and with the time line and statements of the major players in place, we can clearly show how the BRAIN WASHING was done and re-inforced. We also have begun to quantitate the damage that goes far beyond your dismissal of Y2k Fear. I stated and can prove the Banks spent a min. of $100 Million on PR DAMAGE CONTROL directly caused by the HOODLUMS and HOOPLES OF Y2k. NICK of TxDIR discusses that on another thread as you should know but chose to ignore above. (AS PER USUAL).

HISTORY.... most certainly will not pay attention to the "case for the defense of the Thought Contagion known as "Y2k Doom and Gloom". The Historical jury will merely take the words of the "perps" of this insult to intelligence and society and cut through all the "spin".

As for "frothings", since the early days of BIFFY, everything was done to evoke exactly the reaction I wanted. I.E.: to incite and infuritate the assorted pressure group leaders of Y2k BULLSHIT.

In so doing, I knew one thing. Get them mad enough and they would slip. I offer Heller as the classic example that alll that is necessary is to expose their own words to the open view of many and let the many decide.

In all the information and material I ever sent to the Press and Media, I never once asked a reporter or commentator to ever accept my viewpoint or my position but rather asked them to judge for themselves. Time after time, the naive like Heller fell for it by his ludicrous "letters to the media" and his diatribes implying that all those who did not see the "wisdom of Heller" were fools.

REMEMBER, regardless of Heller's exalted view of himself, he is merely a "Placeholder" or stand in for many all baptized and some bathing still in the waters of the Y2k Thought Contagion.

Aaron Lynch will have far more to say about this in the future.

-- cpr (, July 07, 2000.

...we can clearly show how the BRAIN WASHING was done and re- inforced.

Which explains why it didn't work on the polly-wacko CreePeR. He has no brain to WASH.

I for one will react with delight if Greenspun stomps this little cockroach-infested dung heap into electronic oblivion. I guess all you DeBunkie's will then have to reactivate your old haunt, in order to bash and belittle those who don't/didn't think JUST LIKE YOU.

Good riddance to you. Blow me, assholes.

-- Yeah Right (Ahhh@haaa.haaa.haaa), July 07, 2000.

At the risk of violating some pratical rules of debate (One cannot prove a negative; Don't engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed person; etc...) I will attempt to explain to the perpetually incorrect (yes, I am singling you out again Sysyman) that I have not emailed anyone at MIT about regarding matter.

I don't know if this is from Mr. Greenspun or not - it's very difficult to tell with all the imitation that seems the joy of the memetic. Though I will agree with Mr. Rienzo above (having exchanged email with Mr. Greenspun in the past) that the writing seems familiar enough.


You have outdone yourself - again.

There are almost as many lies in your accusatory questions as you told and endorsed regarding Y2k. You are such a doomer (that's an insult - in case you're too ignorant to realise it).

Though it will accomplish little (and though I will not redress matters already attended), I will attempt to communicate with you in your native tongue, Doomer Meme:
You cannot prove I sent any emails to Mr. Greenspun, therefore I must not have. I have conducted a survey of a group of people who conjoinly represent 875,526,152,923.132 years of programming and email experience, and they all agree that it is simply not possible that I could have emailed Mr. Greenspun enough - no matter how many people I hired to do the typing, or how much money I threw at the problem - to "fix" this forum before midnight tonight (or last night).

It's too late already! The forum cannot be fixed!

If you love your family, you will tell them to be prepared for not having an Hysterium upon which to blather! It's coming soon!



I hope that conveys the essential message. Perhaps someone impersonating me sent email to MIT, I am not certain.

I will miss this place.

Vindicated Regards,
Andy Ray

-- Andy Ray (, July 07, 2000.

(FONT SIZE = 3) for this size of text. I'm on a new system with no access to HTML

-- cpr (, July 07, 2000.

Actually, there are many people on this forum I do not consider fools--Brian McLaughlin, Flint, Anita, Jim Cooke and many others are quite bright. Please note, I disagree with these fine folks on a semi-regular basis. They have, however, proven the ability to articulate sound arguments and generate interesting insights.

During the Y2K debate, I did belittle some of the extreme doomsayers. This was not because I thought they were wrong about Y2K, but because I thought they were militant, rude and closed- minded. You may place this into the record... I thought some of the people in the debate were misanthropes and misogynists. If you want to post under your old handle... I'll tell you if I thought you belonged in either camp.

-- Ken Decker (, July 07, 2000.


You're sounding like a middle-of-the-roader {by comparison}.

"There is, however, room for reasoned analysis on why a small group of people "jumped the tracks" about Y2K and why a much larger group spent time (and money) worrying about a nonproblem. Perhaps the passage of time will allow the emotionally distressed to find other hobbies and allow a less vitriolic discussion of the event."

As she whines from the backseat:

"Are we there yet?"...

-- flora (***@__._), July 07, 2000.

could,lack of FAITH. be a determiner??fear is not-of-GOD, it is a spirit!!& boy can it whisper-scenario,s!!IMAGINATION-OUT-OF-CONTROL??

-- al-d. (, July 08, 2000.

...militant, rude and closed minded...misanthropes and misogynists.

Didn't break into the first tier so must be somewhere in here. Where ya got me pegged Kenny?

-- Carlos (, July 08, 2000.


Hell,I know I'm a lunatic,a fun,personable,lighthearted,sometimes articulate,can be esoteric,often eccentric but still a lunatic by most standards.I can judge myself just fine without your codification,thank you though anyway.

But here is where the rub is; You claim not to adhere to Steves' elitism,all the while,subtly,you are very adept at using these same tactics to achieve your own desired result.

Case in point,You and I have retorted back and forth a few times(post rollover) on some y2k related topics but not all(censorship),we disagreed,sometimes mildly sometimes strongly.Maybe it's because I'm a lower class of "former doomer" but even when the olive branch has been extended or when I have seen you done unjustly and speak on your behalf,you turn a deaf ear or more accurately turn your back.This in itself is a form of the same elitism you accuse Heller of,even now you sit high in judgement of him while from my common perch you two are two birds of the same feather.

What gives? Is esotericism the law of the land with you? Or is there room for the regular things in life to be bandied about,without condescension from the self proclaimed elite?

You tell me,and sinse I have given my 2$ worth you have equal lattitude as well.

-- capnfun (, July 08, 2000.

Carlos, I really didn't see much of you last year. If asked, I'd say you were generally a noncontributer.

Cap, I did not judge you. I simply stated my opinion that some of the "doomers" were jerks. They were not "jerks" because their test scores were too low for Steve's super genius forum. They were jerks because they engaged in nasty personal attacks and tried to bully people off the old forum. I had cordial relationships with several of the serious pessimists. For example, I think Helen Statten is a wonderful woman. I like her. There I other people I do NOT like.

Who I like and don't like is entirely separate from who I think is right on a particular issue and who I think is wrong. Reuben is utterly obnoxious, but he was generally right about Y2K. Heller is insufferable, but he was right when he argued with Reuben about cell phones.

I don't treat this as a social forum, Cap. I'm not here to make friends, but to discuss issues. I don't have a particular bone to pick with you. I don't really recall you "defending" me nor do I recall asking you for assistance. If you feel slighted, I apologize.

As for "judging" others... I am not passing judgedment on you, Reuben or others. For all I know, you are all wonderful people in real life. Speaking of which, if I'm thinking about a margarita, I'm going to make one, not talk about one on the forum. We just have different reasons for being here. Back slappin' and beer drinkin' is something I enjoy in person.

-- Ken Decker (, July 08, 2000.


Thanks for the prompt reply and explanation.

-- capnfun (, July 08, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ