Blast from the Past: Selected doomer quotes

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Unk's Wild Wild West : One Thread

You have to love these warm, sentimental feelings projected by the doomers and their master Cyclops:

These wicked little turds will be singing a different tune when telecom, transport, fuel, etc., crash, and the economy "contracts."

They'll try to blame it on "panic" for awhile. But I don't think they'll get far with a face-to-face audience, who will realize that THESE are the people who were working feverishly to supress warning about, and preparation for, the event.

When you see these people getting what they deserve, please: just look the other way and let nature take it's course.

AK

-- AK (ak@home.aum), June 14, 1999. "

Ahhhh, yes, the loving doomthoughts of yesteryear.... and notice the support of regulars...

"Thanks OutingsR,

For the continued vigilance. Hipocracy at it's finest.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), June 14, 1999. "

"Their ONLY objective is to DISRUPT and they can't even do that effectively. Soon they will self destruct.

Ray

-- Ray (ray@totacc.com), June 14, 1999."

Doomer Drool (LOL!)

-- Andrew Raymond (cousin@ndy.ray), December 09, 2000

Answers

don't forget Lobo-"Outings...keep up the vigilance. But don't bother to argue with any of the main Pollies. "It only wastes your time and it annoys the pig".

SuperPollie. I would ask if you 'wanted a cracker' but I hesitate to smear my avian friend that's on my shoulder. (She bites). "

LOL!!!!!!!

-- (blah@blah.blah), December 09, 2000.


Like the November election, there was a small but vocal group of hotheads on both sides of the Y2k debate. Quotes from some of the 'polly' hotheads are at

http://www.google.com/search?as_q=mit&num=100&btnG=Google+Search&as_oq =&as_epq=&as_eq=&as_occt=any&lr=&as_dt=i&sitesearch=stand77.com&safe=o ff

But these people -- 'pollys' and 'doomers' -- were individuals expressing their opinion to other individuals. They had little chance of influencing what public policy was in regards to Y2k. Policy was set by the government and the business community.

The U.S. raced to spend approximately $100 billion on Y2k repairs in the late 1990s. I seriously doubt the corporate world and the government spent that because of what an 'AK' or a Diane or a Ray said on the Internet. There were flame wars on the Net before Y2k, and flame wars will be around long after the year 2000 computer problem has been forgotten.

-- Giving (it@some.perspective), December 09, 2000.


Hey you guys!

The game's on.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), December 09, 2000.


So what is the point of your post ANDREW???

No, it wasn't Y2K that caused the "problem". But do you mean to tell me that we don't have a problem now?

Are you telling me that we don't have a fuel problem? Take a look at the price of gas, and heating oil, not to mention gasoline.

Telcom and transport? Have you looked at the NASDAQ lately? Have you noticed that it is down almost 50% from it's high this year?

Na, we don't have any problems. The pollies were right. Life goes on.

Just tell me, where can I get a pair of those rose colored glasses that you guys have?

Tick... fucking tock... <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), December 09, 2000.


Sorry about the off...

<:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), December 09, 2000.



What's this? Sysman himself, showing up to claim that whoever said date bugs in software were no big deal, were *really* saying that problems of ANY kind could NEVER exist? C'mon, the real Sysman was just not that dumb.

But for the record, there are always problems almost everywhere, some much worse than others, and this is a fact of life. Be thankful that software date mishandling was not one of them.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), December 09, 2000.


Howdy Flint, my old friend, long time no chat...

Yes, I am thankful that "software date mishandling" turned out to be no big deal.

But I've still got a problem with "polly" thinking, and with posts like this one. In my opinion, pollies tend to ignore "ANY kind" of problem. They ignore the energy "crisis" and figure that OPEC will pump up production, and fix it all. They forget about the fact that refineries are now running at capacity, that there just aren't enough tankers to move the product, and that demand is going up daily.

Pollies, IMHO, are the kind of people that try to find the low in the market, only to be disappointed the next day, or the next week, when the market drops another few %. They would rather play the "long shot" with their retirement, than take the "sure thing" and invest their money in a guaranteed 7% CD.

Sorry Flint, pollies do ignore the facts. When problems do show up, the just go out and buy a darker shade of rose.

There was a time when people were self sufficient. There was a time when people could live on their own for a few days, or a few weeks, or a few months, without having to run to the local 7-11, or the local McDonalds every day.

What's wrong with living one's life this way, Flint? What's wrong with preparing for whatever life deals you, including the now defunct Y2K? What's wrong with alternative energy, or with getting out of the stock market? What's wrong with me spending my hard earned cash on gold if I want to?

Do these things make me a doomer? Maybe so, but, please, tell me why I am wrong?

<:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), December 10, 2000.


"software date mishandling" turned out to be no big deal.

defunct Y2K

please, tell me why I am wrong

Even if you believe that the current
system collapse has nothing to do with
Y2K, there are many stories coming out
now that are undeniably Y2K related
meltdowns and the rumbling is getting
stronger.

duck and cover :-&

-- spider (spider0@usa.net), December 10, 2000.


Woodwork seepage. ROTFLMAO!

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), December 10, 2000.

Sysman,

Sure... divide the world neatly into the "prepared" and everyone else. (laughter) I don't ignore economic events, but I do not interpret every dip or swoon of the markets as a "crisis." Nor do I react to every hiccup in the economy by putting on a lifejacket and running to the boats.

Speaking of "ignoring the facts," you and your brethren managed to ignore the factual evidence that Y2K would not be an apocalyptic event. You also ignore the facts of history. People have never been "self sufficient." Survival has always been a community effort for our species. You also ignore the fact that life used to be "nasty, brutish and short." The division of labor and advance of technology have improved our quality of life.

Even so, no one is criticizing your personal lifestyle. Frankly, no one cares if you live in a bunker... but climb off the high horse. Just because some of us take advantage of a few of the conveniences of modern life (like the Internet) does not make us morally inferior.

You do justice to a classic liberal strategy... attack others and then act the victim.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), December 10, 2000.



Speaking of "ignoring the facts," you and your brethren managed to ignore the factual evidence that Y2K would not be an apocalyptic event.

Ken, are you claiming Sysman predicted last year that Y2k would be an "apocalyptic event"? There's a big differece between "apocalyptic event" and "significant problems."

Methinks your brush is a bit broad here, Ken. You weren't a "10" last year, were you, Sysman?

-- (Bemused@by.stander), December 10, 2000.


Certainly Sysman was never a "polly." His tagline was "tick tock," a suggestion our time was running out. Of course, Bemused, you miss my real argument. Sysman, like his pals at EZB, spent a great deal of time criticizing the "pollies." Despite the fact Flint, Hoff and others were proven correct, Sysman is still prattling on about "crises" and "preparation." He takes a page from Gary North. Keep predicting a disaster and eventually one will come along to fulfill your prophecy.

Of course, this is America and everyone seems to have a soapbox. I wouldn't mind Sysman except he has the poor sense (and manners) to criticize the "pollies" out of hand. He fails to recognize that the so-called "pollies" like Flint and me have the ability to discern a real crisis and prepare accordingly.

Oh, and for the record, Y2K did not cause "significant" problems.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), December 10, 2000.


Ken,

So you consider a 50% loss in the NASDAQ over the last 7 months just a dip? LOL!

And I suppose that the current stage 3 power emergency in California is nothing to worry about. After all, it doesn't get cold in California, right Ken?

This is what I mean by typical "polly think". As long as it doesn't impact your nice comfy life, it isn't a problem.

And who said anything about living in a bunker? I've made a living, and quite a nice living I might add, off of "technology" since 1968.

No, I never was a "10". In fact I never made it to 7. While I was somewhat concerned about "business systems", where I do have a great deal of experience, my main concerns were things like power and oil. While these are not my area, some people that I do consider experts, like Mr. Cook and Mr Cowles, were concerned enough about it to speak out. However, it was the arguments of other experts, like Dan the power man, and David (Factfinder) that kept me from ever becoming a 10.

<:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), December 10, 2000.


I see that we posted at the same time. Go ahead Ken, it's your turn. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), December 10, 2000.

Sysman:

You're doing it again! Wasn't Ken one of many who expected a sizeable market correction? That was his major prediction. And now that his prediction comes true, you accuse him of pretending it didn't, because "pollies don't see reality" or some such. You have got to be kidding.

And nobody is pretending California's power problems aren't real either. I expect we will see some strain while additional capacity gets built (which might take 2 years). And if history is any indication, in *four* years California will have so much spare capacity that people will be claiming they *wasted the money* building it. Cycles repeat.

Most of your dreaded "pollies" recognize these cycles, and recognize that some (like NASDAQ and California power) may be at their worst, some are at their best, and most are in the middle. And in time, the picture will change and other problems will loom largest. Doomers, on the other hand, focus ONLY on what's going wrong RIGHT NOW, ignore everything that isn't, and think they are describing the nature of reality. And again, you are just not that dumb. Quit acting like you are!

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), December 10, 2000.



"And nobody is pretending California's power problems aren't real either. I expect we will see some strain while additional capacity gets built (which might take 2 years). And if history is any indication, in *four* years California will have so much spare capacity that people will be claiming they *wasted the money* building it. Cycles repeat."

California's energy crunch is due to the fact that some power plants were taken off line for maintenance. Some of these power plants just happen to run on natural gas. Natural gas IS very expensive, and I have an idea that the power company took them off line because they couldn't make any money leaving them on line.

Pacific Gas & Electric is in the process of building several power plants OUTSIDE of California. There has not been one single power plant built in California in last 20 years (thanks to environmentalists). PG&E owns Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant and is trying to sell it. There's more money in the distribution of power than in the generation of power in California. Due to deregulation, this is what Californians are left with....threats of rolling blackouts. Glad I bought lots of candles and oil for lamps.

-- Mrs. Cleaver (Mrs. Cleaver@LITBBBB.vcom), December 10, 2000.


Sysman,

The tech stocks have been grossly overvalued. Thankfully, someone finally noticed there were no earnings to justify the silly valuations. Let me translate this into real life. "Hey, Sysman, want to buy a used car? It's only $250,000 but since I'm desperate I'll give you a 50% discount." [Sysman nudges his pal and whispers, "See, I told you I was gettin' a great deal."] (laughter) Am I in "crisis" because you only want to pay $125,000 for my old beater?

The measure for "polly" logic is not personal impact, but understanding. I know why the NASDAQ has fallen and why why have fluctuations in energy markets. Unlike primitive man, I do not attribute lightning to the angry gods. No omens, portents or bad signs, Sysman... it's just the way capitalism works.

Unfortunately, you still haven't addressed my core concern. Why do you continue to mock "polly" decisions when they are, in fact, grounded in an understanding of the economic system you apparently do not possess. As Flint aptly notes, "we" got Y2K right because we saw the forest for the trees. Oh, we also did a pretty good job of filtering out bad data (like Mr. CEO). (My stock market prediction was accurate, however, the recession is slower in coming than I imagined.)

Why do you feel the need to attack people who's only "crime" is to have correctly analyzed the problem? Instead of mocking our "rose colored lenses," you may want to reconsider your prescription. Here's a free tip. We will have a recession within the next 18 months. You may want to write your gloomy posts ahead and beat the rush.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), December 10, 2000.


Why do you feel the need to attack people who's only "crime" is to have correctly analyzed the problem?

I don't see what Sysman said as an attack on anyone, Ken. Sysman seems to be talking about staying informed and practicing risk management. However, your continued attempt to misrepresent Sysman as some kind of believer in apocalyptic events might fit the definition of an "attack" as you're using it.

Unlike primitive man, I do not attribute lightning to the angry gods. No omens, portents or bad signs, Sysman... it's just the way capitalism works.

or

He takes a page from Gary North. Keep predicting a disaster and eventually one will come along to fulfill your prophecy.

That's a great debating technique you have there, Ken, but it's become a little too obvious.

-- (Bemused@by.stander), December 10, 2000.


Bemused:

Sysman said "where can I get a pair of those rose colored glasses that you guys have?" But nobody denies there are problems unrelated to y2k, and nobody is pretending they aren't as bad as they are. So what is Sysman doing if not attacking? He sure ain't *describing* anyone.

Sysman said "pollies tend to ignore "ANY kind" of problem." This sounds like an attack. And his example? Apparently, that nobody is screaming about NASDAQ or California power! Uh huh.

Sysman said "they ignore...they forget." These sound like attacks as well. They are not supported by anything but invective.

Sysman said "pollies do ignore the facts. When problems do show up, the just go out and buy a darker shade of rose." That's not exactly a compliment, nor does it describe anyone I know of.

Sysman said "This is what I mean by typical "polly think". As long as it doesn't impact your nice comfy life, it isn't a problem." Might that be a compliment? Doesn't sound like one to me.

Staying informed and practicing risk management is something Ken and I have been encouraging right from the start. Turns out our information was correct, and our risk management reasonable (maybe I went a bit overboard, though). In fact, you cannot find ONE SINGLE polly whose y2k information was false, nor whose risk management threatened his wellbeing.

Now you might think Sysman, whose predictions were totally wrong, whose analysis was based on spun sugar, and whose information was carefully sifted to fit his incorrect convictions, might just stop and think a bit, wouldn't you? It was the POLLIES who stayed informed and properly managed the risk. Why claim THEY can't see straight? Why claim THEY are "ignoring" the evidence? We seem to have a serious learning disability here, and not on Ken's part. Ken was right. Sysman was wrong. Remember?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), December 10, 2000.


Flint wields a sharp blade dissecting Sysman's original post. (chuckle) If Sysman wanted to provide helpful advice on "preparation," he might actually want to include information rather than engage in baseless attacks on the "pollies." He might want to encourage prudent planning... something both Flint and I did last year. In fact, I provided many posts on "smart living." Perhaps Sysman can link us to his contributions on the subject.

What happened, Bemused, is that Flint, Hoff and others were excoriated for being "pollies." Unrelenting personal attacks were directed towards the "pollies" despite the fact that most of us were exceedingly prudent in real life. Our sin was simple. We did not see Y2K causing any disruptions in basic services and felt the Red Cross/FEMA preparations were adequate for most people. We also had the temerity to disagree with the lunatics at the old forum.

As has been well documented, the "pollies" were correct. What most forget is that Flint and others provided some decent advice about prudent living. Sysman's attack is completely without foundation.

You see, Bemused, if Sysman wants to attack me for my failed prediction of a recession this year, I'll accept his criticism. Mea culpa. Of course, his criticism would be more interesting if he actually had some countervailing economic data or analytical insights instead of a few newspaper headlines.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), December 10, 2000.


Yo, Sysman. Long time no tick. :)

Actually, it annoyed me last year when I was called a "polly," precisely because of that characterization -- that I would be the type to pathologically ignore possible dangers, wear rose-colored glasses, etc., etc.

I've never been that naive. Last year, I said that the markets should correct themselves, that oil prices could go up, that I might get an ear infection, that the Braves could lose the World Series, that I could have a blowout while going 70MPH down I-65, you name it. Life happens. Stuff happens.

I just didn't think that computers would cause very many problems due to Y2K bugs. I also didn't think that they (as opposed to, say, stock market crashes and hurricanes) could cause the amount of harm that was being projected in the Infomagic-level scenarios.

In fact, you should recall that one of my most oft-repeated arguments was that things break all the time and we have to work around them. If you really think about it, that's hardly a "polly" view. :)

This election has me very concerned. The Chinese have me concerned. The Middle East has ALWAYS had me concerned, as has my health (I need to get in shape!) and dozens of other things. I'm not a chuckling Pollyanna who thinks that everything will be alright because, well, it just HAS to be.

But then again, I guess there was a lot of name-calling last year -- a lot of it UN-called for. :)

(On both sides.)

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), December 10, 2000.


Man...I can't believe anyone is still having this debate. Some people were right, some people were wrong, and most people just ignored it. We need to coin a new word to describe people who are still using words like "polly" and "doomer". It's like y'all are speaking in secret code that only those of your ilk can understand. Guess I'm one, too...whatever it is. Hmmm...a new word for the Y2K obsessed...

-- (Yawn@stretch.scratch), December 10, 2000.

Ken and Flint,

You guys can lighten up. I'm not attacking anyone. In fact, even though Flint and I were on opposite ends of the scale, I consider him an old friend, and I would never "attack" a friend.

Stephen and "yawn" got my point. Y2K is over, and it's time for the name calling to end. I'm so sick of the words DOOMER and POLLY. Here we are on a brand new forum, and what is the title of this thread?

I've said this many times before, but I guess I need to say it again. Stephen and I managed to "make up" soon after rollover. I've made up with many of my former "enemies" including people like Chicken Little. Now if I can get along with these guys, after all of the late night, heated battles of last year, WHY CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG!

Flint, you and I were tied for the number of posts on the old forum, although I'm sure that you posted a few more words than I did (grin). Haven't we said enough about Y2K, with the things that are going on in the world today, things like the stock market, energy problems, the election?

Can we please drop this polly vs. doomer crap?

That's my point.

<:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), December 11, 2000.


Sysman,

Until you sauntered in and asked for the "rose colored glasses" worn by the "pollies," this thread was a nonevent. Like "B'rer Rabbit" with the tar baby, you then attacked "polly" thinking (a straw man of your own invention). You made the sweeping statement that "pollies" ignore any kind of problem. They "ignore the facts," discount any risk and live in a constant state of denial. In the words of Prince, you "partied like it was 1999." (chuckle)

Your comments were a personal attack, Sysman, though not one grounded in fact or logic. If the time for name-calling is over... why do you keep calling people "pollies?" If you want to "get along," why the gratuitous attacks? If you want to argue a position on the stock market or the energy sector, why not lay out a factual case? Why not present your data suggesting the problems are serious and warrant personal actions? I may not agree with your conclusions, but I will respect an honest attempt at analysis on your part.

Instead of analysis, you made some groundless attacks against "pollies" earlier on this thread. Apologize... or stand by your remarks. Either choice is preferable to your sad attempt to shift focus and blame.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), December 12, 2000.


Your bias is showing, Ken. The first person on this thread to use the 'd' or 'p' words was the person who started this thread.

Blast from the Past: Selected doomer quotes

You have to love these warm, sentimental feelings projected by the doomers and their master Cyclops:

Sysman needs to apologize for saying 'polly' and 'rose-colored glasses' only if the person who started this thread needs to apologize too. I think it's a safe bet Sysman interacts better with his friends and co-workers than 'Andrew Raymond' does.

If the time for name-calling is over... why do you keep calling people "pollies?" If you want to "get along," why the gratuitous attacks?

The same applies to the person who started this thread, Ken.

-- (Bias@bias.everywhere), December 12, 2000.


Ken,

I took the "rose-colored glasses" thing as exceedingly tongue-in-cheek dry 'yumor. :)

Sysman,

If we've made up, don't I owe you a bucket of fresh blackberries? Remember, I said the blackberry bushes lined the road to my FM tower shack ... and you said . .. . . .. . :)

(Didn't pick any this year, but NEXT year, I plan to be busy.[g])

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), December 14, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ