Why is y2k still a subject for debate on this board NOW? I know some people got their feelings hurt last year on both sides. Maybe if we all say we're sorry and have a group hug we can DROP IT? You guys keep using big words and complex sentence structures and philosophic arguments to describe the purchase of mass quantities of BEANS, for heaven's sake. God almighty, just HAVING a ton of beans is punishment enough for being a doomer.

WHERE do you KEEP the *%$# ASPIRIN around here?

-- helen (b@r.s), October 01, 2000

Answers

do you not G.I. ? this is ego-ville!!

-- not surprised (dogs@zianet.com), October 01, 2000.

Here's some asprin *** and I want to know who ran off with the Beano!!!

;-)

-- Tricia the Canuck (jayles@telusplanet.net), October 02, 2000.

CPR, answer please.

-- (nemesis@awol.com), October 02, 2000.

People decide what they want to think first, THEN afterwards they find reasons for it. Why? Why do the same people who say "nobody knew what would happen" say that this is rational? Why? Why?? Somebody help me. I'm losing it....

Why don't they just say "I didn't want to be bothered thinking about it" or "It was too complicated for me" or "Wake me when it's over." But no. What do they say?-- LOGICAL, RATIONAL, PRUDENT. And on top of that, they say they did thousands of hours of research. So why is it they never can say what they learned except "nobody knows"

-- Spock (ItsEnough@to.make.me.cry), October 02, 2000.

I learned that having a ton of beans without an equivalent amount of Beano keeps you off the "A" list at many of the better parties.

-- I'm Here, I'm There (I'm Everywhere@so.beware), October 02, 2000.

I have a theory about some people in this debate.

I say this as someone who was wrong and has said so. (And happy to be wrong, let me tell you, with a nice real estate deal with settlement in March of this year and I couldn't get earnest money that amounted to anything.)

My theory is that some people have had very disappointing lives compared to their youthful hopes and dreams, and it is important to them to be in a group that they think was 100% right. Not 95%, a lot of people are 95% right about things, that's not nearly elite enough. That is why they will twist the truth, rewrite history, and never admit they were wrong on one single point. They will fight like tigers over every single point.

Needless to say, there are people in both the pollie and the doomer camp who fit this description (numerically, much more common among the doomers; a lot of the people at EZ board are indeed amazing.)

-- Peter Errington (petere@ricochet.net), October 02, 2000.

Helen,

Because this is the New DeBunkie's House o' Trolls. Pretty simple really. These head-case DeBunkie bastards now have nothing to do with their time. While the Doomers (tm) have gone on with their lives, the erstwhile Pollies, who devoted their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor" (snicker) to the "cause" (protecting the world from the Doomzie menace) are now lost, and without direction.

So, in order to maintain their collective sanity, they continue to live in 1999. This board really is the "New Hysterium". (Thanks to CPR for coining that term.)

(Now, don't the rest of us have something else to do today?)

-- Yeah Right (Ahhh@haaa.haaa.haaa), October 02, 2000.

Mostly because it's fun watching ex-doomers squirm.

:)

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), October 02, 2000.

Hear that, nemesis? Errington? I'm Here? Unk D? KOS? Apparently, you're all "debunkies" now. Congratulations. Your uniforms will be ready later this afternoon.

-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), October 02, 2000.

yeah right:

One question...what does your posting here make you? By association you are a member of this house of trolls-does that not make you a debunkie and a troll? Does that not make you part of the hysterium?

Dennis, if we have nothing good to say here, why are you here? I mean, you are welcome and all that, but you are doing the very thing you raged against-coming into someone's house and saying it smells-is this not what you said the pollies were doing last year on the old board?

-- FutureShock (gray@matter.think), October 02, 2000.

Hey Dennis, sounds like you're cruising for an invite to the molten lava pit.

Running low on sulfuric acid, though. BYOSA.

-- Bingo1 (howe9@shentel.net), October 02, 2000.

"Because this is the New DeBunkie's House o' Trolls. Pretty simple really. These head-case DeBunkie bastards now have nothing to do with their time."

And how many Debunkies is that? All 2 of them? CPR and Andy? Well they're just varmint, we can't keep them out coz this place is not locked up with a password like your place. But your place smells worse by far!

You're not my kinda troll, go back to EZB you varmint. SHOO!

-- From one troll to another (smarty@wannabe.one), October 02, 2000.

Evidently, you folks are short on menory cells.

CPR, Andy Ray, Poole, Decker, Flint, Y2KPro, and more.

The list is long and undistinguished. And they're all here, a veritable gallery of nasty. But you love them, so feel free to defend them.

-- no one here (-@-.-), October 02, 2000.

" a veritable gallery of nasty"

Enough already!

Nasty? The worst "polly" is an angel compared to the likes of an Invar or a Paul Milne.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), October 02, 2000.

hmm:

Actually, in all seriousness, it is amazing how much the de-bunker crowd and the doomer crowd are actually quite similar in their approach to Y2K -- as opposed to your average polly. Doomers worried about the computer glitch, de-bunkers worried about people's reaction to (needless) worries about the computer glitch, and both camps essentially went to a lot of completely unnecessary extremes.

helen:

IMHO, this is the BEST time to discuss Y2K -- nine months afterward, the event is detached enough, yet fresh enough, to have good discussions. (And, there have been a few.)

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 02, 2000.

To "no one here":

Anyone who would lump together the six people you listed (CPR, Andy Ray, Poole, Decker, Flint, and Y2K Pro) as a "veritable gallery of nasties" definitely has his head in the wrong place. If you have my meaning.

-- Peter Errington (petere@ricochet.net), October 02, 2000.

Travesty! I don't see Bagga listed anywhere.

How quick they forget...

-- flora (***@__._), October 02, 2000.

The only thing you should be discussing nine months after the event is what you're going to name the baby.

-- helen (b@r.v), October 02, 2000.

Gee...I'm the "forgotten" polly.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), October 02, 2000.

helen:

Careful now!! You wouldn't want Ken to misconstrue that as some kind of SEXUALLY SUGGESTIVE remark!!!!!

Gawd, makes lament the decline of the classics....

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 02, 2000.

KOS -- I shouldn't have thrust myself into the ins and outs of a debate where verbal thrashing or moaning about insults is a passionate pursuit done without intention of reaching a climax, that is to say, an end. Locked forever together, hopelessly writhing through yet another argument, we are linked by y2k in a perverted way. We're perverts, I tell you.

-- helen (b@r.z), October 02, 2000.

Helen, if you weren't so damn fertile I'd make a play for ya.

Ever give a thought to writing for television? I understand there's a dearth of comedy writers since Mel Brooks and Woody Allen left the biz.

-- Bingo1 (howe9@shentel.net), October 02, 2000.