Is Russ the guy Chris/otfr ran off with?

-- (This@is the .truth), March 11, 2001

Answers

One unsubstantiated rumor at a time, please. First of all, what makes you say Big Dog is a "Religious freak"?

-- (Rumors@and.memes), March 11, 2001.

Look at Poole's web site. CPR published a link there to Russ Lipton's web site. The Lipton web site has references to (gasp) Christianity.

Whether or not they are freaky is in the eye of the beholder.

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 11, 2001.

Do you really think that all that hate you're harboring towards Christians and God in general, is healthy?

-- (cin@cin.cin), March 11, 2001.

I think it unfair to call Russ "Big Dog" Lipton a "religious freak." We should wait to see if Lipton approaches Christianity with the same zeal as Y2K. Perhaps Lipton has learned from his rather obvious mistakes on the old forum. Perhaps he has become less dogmatic and more tolerant. Perhaps his new site will advocate a Christian attitude that doesn't involve censoring or smearing people who don't think like he does.

Lipton was a nasty, little man during the Y2K debate. He squandered his intellectual ability on "gaming" the debate and playing sycophant to Ed Yourdon. He betrayed his St. John's education by turning his back on reasonable discourse. Lipton used every cheap tactic in the book to maintain his position with a badly misguided group.

With some irony, I note that Christianity allows that one change. It is a faith that offers hope... even to nasty, little men.

-- In the beginning (oldtimers@remember.com), March 11, 2001.

Below is a quotation from Big Dog's web site:

>>Many of us won't even own Jesus Christ as exclusive Lord lest we offend against the tolerance of our neighbors as they speed towards eternal destruction.<<

Good to see that Russ isn't getting too judgemental in his old age.....

-- Johnny Canuck (j_canuck@hotmail.com), March 11, 2001.

IF that's his picture, he's pretty damn cute for an old guy. I'm not a Christian, but I read at least one of his articles. He seems to be doing what he feels he should. One would think that he did what he felt he should do regarding Y2k also.

What exactly is the "beef" with Lipton? I didn't know him BEFORE Y2k and I STILL don't know him. He's as innocuous to the world as any of the rest of us. I never understood "hero worship", either from the end of the worshipper or the end of the hero. We're here, we do our best, and [for the most] nobody cares.

BTW, NO...Chris had a brief interlude with Hardliner...NOT Russ. AFAIK, Chris remained with her kids and husband and Hardliner is now with the poster named Wilfred or something like that. That, too, could have changed since I attended Hardliner's picnic last June. It's NOT something I care about, nor is Russ' interest in Christianity.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 12, 2001.

Gosh, Anita, it's swell that you approve of Lipton's personal appearance. It's almost relevant to the discussion at hand.

Apparently, you didn't participate in the original TB 2000 forum and watch Lipton at work (with the other "moderators') and don't know what we are talking about. Lipton used every cheap trick in the book to defend Ed Yourdon and keep the doom herd mooooving in the same direction. When he couldn't beat the pollies in an honest debate, he made an art out of smearing them. He censored those he could bully, and ran when Yourdon folded his tent. I notice that he doesn't include his Y2K efforts on his website resume. Shocking!

Frankly, I don't care about the mating habits of the doom herd. It doesn't surprise me, however, that the holier-and-more-honorable-than- thou Hardliner has feet of clay. It doesn't surprise me that some of the folks who thought America was going to Hell of moral decay on a rocket-powered elevator were busy listening to Aerosmith and pushing the "down" button.

Lipton may have genuinely changed his tune, but I suspect he's a slicker version of Gary North. I'll start believing Lipton has turned over a new leaf when he apologizes to those he censored two years ago. Until then, he's just smoking a cheap brand of Christianity.

-- In the beginning (oldtimers@remember.com), March 12, 2001.

I'd always pictured Russ as a short, stocky, bald guy [Don't ask why...we just get these pictures in our minds.]

I was at TB2000 starting in June or so of 1999. The site had a reputation for "running folks off" that didn't agree with their appraisal of Y2k before I even got there. I never took any of the folks seriously regarding Y2k. Hell, I'd been in the computer business all my life and I'd never even heard of Yourdon, Heller, Lipton, Hamasaki, and all the other purported experts.

The way I saw it, most of the folks WANTED to believe what they did. There will always be salesmen and there will always be people willing to buy their worthless products. That's why I mentioned hero worship. Russ [for some reason unknown to me] was set up as a hero by some. He loved every minute of it. Russ and I even E-mailed each other a few times. HE didn't understand why I wasn't scared, and I didn't understand why he was.

TB2000 was [essentially] a support group for folks who feared something that the vast majority of the world didn't fear. The same held true of Gary North's site. Debunkers operated the same way, IMO. Both "camps" thought they saw the truth of the situation and were determined to evangelize the "truth." I think it was By_Grace who said in another thread, "A true believer may be wrong, but there's NO doubt."

I'm not a psychologist, and I don't pretend to be one on the internet, but what, exactly, is the point in chasing these people around keeping track of their every internet move? Charlie, apparently, feels that he's saving someone from listening to these folks. If I want to have an obsessive/compulsive disorder, I'd much prefer to have one that INVOLVES me. This stuff is more like "My life is so unfulfilled that I need to gossip about others."

Just my opinion, as usual.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 12, 2001.

On target, Anita

-- Lars (larsguy@yahoo.com), March 12, 2001.

Lars, it's pathetic how you go around sniffin up women's skirts.

-- (L@rs is .a loser), March 12, 2001.

Charlie? huh?

-- (cin@cin.cin), March 12, 2001.

Cin:

CPR is short for Charles P. Reuben. We E-mailed back and forth for a time, and he tended to sign his E-mails "Charlie." I suppose it's just a hang-up I have, but I tend to think of folks by ONE name. As much as I enjoy Patricia, she'll always be Patricia in my mind. I can't call her Trish anymore than I can call Charlie CPR.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 12, 2001.

Anita,

You ask the question and then ignore the answer. The reaction to Russ Lipton is based on his behavior as a participant and moderator of the TB 2000 forum. Unlike Reuben, most of us do not obsess about the characters or events of 1999. On the other hand, the handful of reasonable participants in the TB 2000 forum are not likely to soon forget people like Russ Lipton.

I will not go out of my way to find new website sites by Lipton, Squire, Heller or the other doomsters. If someone posts information about them on this forum, I may or may not comment. Personally, I don't think it's fair to call Lipton a religious freak or to say he "ran off" with some anonymous Internet poster. Some criticisms, however, are justified. The Russ Lipton I experienced on TB 2000 has no more business running a Christian web site than Reuben does hosting a page on party manners.

Personally, I have no idea whether people like North, Yourdon or Lipton were actually sincere about Y2K. My gut sense tells me the doomsters were all pushing other agenda and Y2K was just the vehicle of opportunity.

I don't think there's any point in "chasing" these folks, but I don't think we are well served by forgetting them either.

-- In the beginning (oldtimers@remember.com), March 12, 2001.

Congratulations, Anita. You have proven to be the most two-faced poster once again.

I know you well enough to know you read the original thread at Poole's. Since you did that, you know that Patricia was happy CPR found that link.

You asked "what, exactly, is the point in chasing these people around keeping track of their every internet move?"

SOME people are interested in other people. Obviously, Patricia, whoever posted this thread and the others who posted to it are interested in Russ' life. YOU have no right to question people's curiosity. You hypocrite. You write posts saying people are just people but when it comes to CPR and Oldtimers, you have to do your darndest to discredit them.

I have seen a dark side to your soul, Anita. It becomes more apparent with every post I see from you.

I think it would behoove you to spend your time on your studies and think about what it is about you that makes you want to question people's motives on the Internet.

-- (Time h@s.come), March 12, 2001.

<"Time has come", you sniveling, shadow hound, cowardly piece of trash,

Nice to see you! How you doing? Kids all grown up now, I gather. Have "Time" on your hands, eh? Weather's turning nice. Why not take your uh, pleasant self down to the park for a sit? I'm sure there are squirrels and pigeons out and about to which you can feed popcorn sprinkled with arsenic. Sure beats abusing people anonymously. Or does it?

In the mortal words of Mr. Creosote, F*uck off, I'm full.

-- Rich (howe9@shentel.net), March 12, 2001.

There were two kinds of people worried about Y2k in 1999. One kind worried about the Y2k the computer problem, and the other worried about those who worried about those about Y2k the computer problem.

'Doomers' found out the truth about Y2k in Jan. 2000. Apparently though there are still 'pollys' holding on to their own fears that 'doomers' are going to go postal and shoot their neighbors.

-- No longer a need for (anyone@to.worry), March 12, 2001.

That should have read....

One kind worried about the Y2k the computer problem, and the other worried about those who worried about Y2k the computer problem.

-- No longer a need for (anyone@to.worry), March 12, 2001.

No need to bother, Rich. The person is correct. I DO have a dark side to my soul. [I'm pretty happy with it, actually.] What the poster failed to mention was that I'm ALSO self-centered. I care MUCH more about MY life than I do the folks I meet on the internet, or even politicians, etc. While some folks were obsessing about Clinton's blow job, all I could think about was how *I* could lure SO into a sex marathon. Yep...I'm happy with that dark side. Oddly enough, SO is also, although sometimes before we visit his brother, for instance, he says, "Be nice now."

Are two faces anything like two heads in that two is better than one? Okay...I didn't think so.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 12, 2001.

"Time", how exactly does one translate, "How on EARTH did you ever find that? Un-freaking-believable." (which was my ENTIRE reply on the thread in question at Poole's) into, "Since you did that, you know that Patricia was happy CPR found that link." and, "Obviously, Patricia, whoever posted this thread and the others who posted to it are interested in Russ' life."?

Quite a stretch there.

I have NO -- zero, zilch, nada -- interest WHATSOEVER in "Russ's" life. I never exchanged two words with the guy; really couldn't care less what he's doing now (didn't "then" either). I asked Charlie how he found it; PERIOD.

Please don't "speak" for me; I can do that very well on my own.

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), March 12, 2001.

I DO have a dark side to my soul. [I'm pretty happy with it, actually.]

Hmmm.

There's some deep, profound philosophy in there somewhere.

;)

-- Stephen M. Poole (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), March 12, 2001.

Actually, most people were snickering at the doomsters. Don't you remember the KIA ads? The same worryworts are huddled on their new password protected forum fretting about chemtrails, the New World Order and sublimal messages on cereal boxes. It would be funny, if it wasn't so sad.

Anita, ironically it's selfishness that makes capitalism work, much better than the collectivist models of government so heartily endorsed by liberals. The economy benefits by thousands of people whose interests are as narrow and self-serving as yours.

America--what a place.

It's also delightful to learn your brand of feminism allows you to dismiss Clinton's sexual behaviors out of hand. We'll see if the feminist community is just as forgiving when a married conservative politician dallies with an intern half his (or her) age. I suppose since your interests are so provincal you really don't care about the lying under oath, the selling of military secrets to the Chinese, the fire sale of pardons, etc. After all, what do any of these boring old topics have to with getting your apple polished?

-- In the beginning (oldtimers@remember.com), March 12, 2001.

LOL. I LOVE it. The internet can be SUCH a fun place. The old line "Want to peel the tomato?" will now be replaced with "Want to polish the apple?"

I can't say I understand the statement about "my brand of feminism", since I never claimed to be a feminist. I've never wanted to be a Stepford wife, but no one ever asked me to be, even my ex-husband. I've been in my current relationship for 13 years, and we're both pretty damn old, and have been "around the block" a few times, so few things affect us, including our weirdnesses.

I'll be damned if I'll stand up and defend someone like Lewinsky or Paula Jones. They BOTH knew what they were doing. Lewinsky was a slut in her home town and told Linda Tripp that she would go to Washington with knee-pads. [It's right there in the transcripts, if you'd care to look.] She knew ALL ABOUT Bill's weakness for women, just as we ALL did before he was elected. Paula spreads her legs for ANYONE [photos preferred]. I already expressed my opinion on sex and whether Clinton lied under oath. IMO, sex is penis inserted into vagina. Monica complained to Tripp about how Clinton wasn't willing to engage in sex. If the two people involved didn't see their acts as sex, who the hell am I to suggest they had it?

I haven't seen any evidence to indicate that Bill sold secrets to the Chinese. Yeah, I've heard the rumors, but gossip doesn't interest me.

On a more general note, I don't care whether conservative Republicans or liberal Democrats get their door-knobs polished by young interns. They've all been doing it for years.

I haven't seen any conclusive evidence of

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 12, 2001.

Before anyone asks, I have NO CLUE where that last line came from about the "I have no evidence."

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 12, 2001.

I'm not sure you are a feminist, Anita, but you are a "dream wife" for some men. Apparently, males have no ability to restrain themselves around loose women and only intercourse qualifies as sex.

"Honey, she's a slut and made me do it. Besides, she only gave me head eight or ten times." Right.

Sounds like you are qualified for a card in the all-Republican, cigar chomping trophy spouse club.

As for selling secrets to the Chinese, I could assemble some data for you... but why worry about an issue so clearly outside of your scope of interest? And I noticed you passed on the pardon issue. These same tactics worked for you during the Y2K debate. Careful avoidance and cool dismissal based on a lack of "data." It has style, Anita, but little substance.

Oh, thanks for clearing up the issue about Hardliner. Appreciate how you transcended your disdain of gossip to give us the scoop.

-- In the beginning (oldtimer@remember.com), March 12, 2001.

It looks like I make more enemies with every post.

It must be the "dark side of my soul" at work.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 12, 2001.

Hey, folks! Look what oldtimer did!

"As for selling secrets to the Chinese, I could assemble some data for you... but why worry about an issue so clearly outside of your scope of interest?"

This was followed within 50 words by:

"Careful avoidance and cool dismissal based on a lack of 'data.' It has style, Anita, but little substance."

Wow! This dude delivered some MAJOR irony!

....Um... OK, dude... what comes next?

-- Break out the cookies and milk (aimless@national_raffle_association.org), March 12, 2001.

What's amusing is that y2k was such a central part of Lipton's ministry for years. He lived and breathed it, and spent great gobs of time telling us who NOT to listen to. He aided in the disappearing of dissenters, and finally became instrumental in deciding which voices to silence when he finally had the power to do so.

And now his web site makes nary a mention of y2k. Do you suppose Lipton went out and hired Winston Smith to rewrite his history for him? He has buried his mistakes more surely than any doctor, just as though the entire experience never happened and the time and effort were never spent.

Sure, it's his web site and he can disappear anything he wants from it. But as a further reflection of character, it's classic.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), March 12, 2001.

nevermind

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), March 12, 2001.

who the fuck should 'nevermind'?

Please explain

-- (doo@da.day), March 12, 2001.

Flint:

It looked to me [from the website] like Russ is/was looking for a job.

I wouldn't advertise every goofy thing I've done in my life [and there are surely enough to fill a book] if I were trying to woo someone with my skills, either.

Just as a self-centered aside, did I ever tell you that I would never have started posting on TB2000 if it weren't for you? I'd met a lot of nice folks discussing Y2k online, but they were all either working on remediation [which started it all for me], or folks who had heard about it and wandered in to ask questions. When the "doomers" started entering the fora, I left for several months. THEN, one day I found myself with time on my hands and started lurking at the Yourdon forum. I'd already heard about it from folks who had been "run off", but it took until June of 1999 for me to even glimpse at the place. There you were, fending off attack upon attack.

I won't even suggest that I helped you provide any balance. I'm simply saying that I saw this lone person on a forum which made no sense overall, so I jumped in. I'm not sorry I did [not that it would do any good if I were.]

The world is full of weird people [and I include myself in that category.] We tend, IRL, to associate with people much like ourselves, so we never get to know much about the other weirdos. We still don't get to know people from our interactions on the internet, but sometimes we get the opportunity to meet the folks IRL in a safe setting and we generally walk away thinking "Nice person. We don't have ONE thing in common, but I like the person ANYWAY."

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 12, 2001.

doodaday,

I was trying to insert a wav file but did not have enough time to tweak it, it was screwing up contribute an answer so I deleted it, thus, nevermind.

Other than that, fuggetaboudit.

-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), March 13, 2001.

Once I hear someone saying, "Dude," I can just about count on some asinine remark. Listen, "Cookie," irony is not delivered like pizza or a nickel bag. Irony is more subtle than a contradiction. Let the pot smoke clear a bit and then read more carefully.

In a classical liberal fashion, Anita sidesteps issues she'd rather not discuss (or where her point is difficult to defend.) It's easy (and so urbane) to say, "Clinton did what every middle-aged man in power does" and "His sex life is his business." Sure, he's just a scalywag, that impish charmer... and laying the wood to the hired help is just what men do. Come, dear, let's be adult about this. And really, all of this China talk gives me a headache. Who really cares about those dreadful world affairs. What I really want is good hard romp with pool boy. Of course, it isn't really sex, not really.

Anita has every not to care about life outside her bedroom, but what is she doing here? Why say she's not interested in gossip and then offer a tidbit about who ran off with whom? Clinton's little sexual games pale in comparison to his other wrongdoings. Perhaps Anita can explain the Rich pardon for us?

If you want to have a serious discussion about the sale of our military secrets to China, let's go. Anita apparently isn't interested, and why should I bother bringing dozens of references and a carefully crafted argument to somone who doesn't care about the issue? This is not "sidestepping" Anita's argument. First, Anita doesn't have an argument. Second, I stand ready to have a serious discussion with anyone who is really interested.

What I wonder, Flint, is if Lipton was really sincere. My personal theory is guys like Lipton and Yourdon--terminal geeks--became swept up in Y2K fame. The adoration of the doomsters was like crack cocaine. They got hooked on the rush of having followers and after awhile it really didn't matter what the hell was going to happen with Y2K. Whatever Lipton does now is no skin off my backside, but he was a nasty player in the Y2K debate. And I think he was sharp enough to know exactly what he was doing when he was playing smear tactics against the pollies.

-- In the beginning (oldtimer@remember.com), March 13, 2001.

Ken, right?

My posts really seem to have bothered you. The poster who started the thread asked the question about someone running off with Russ. I felt I was simply correcting the information by stating that nobody ran off with anybody. Hardliner and Wilfred are both single, so there's no gossip to be spread.

I made a mistake in mentioning the obsession some folks had/have with the Clinton BJ's. The mere mention of his name triggered YOUR obsession. My point was to suggest that if I WERE to have an obsession, I would like it to be one that affected MY life. I had a house-cleaning obsession several years ago. We'd moved into a BEAUTIFUL apartment [our first here in Texas] just to learn that it had roaches. I'd never lived with roaches before and wanted to be sure they didn't stick around. I ALSO became obsessed with communicating with my daughter's high-school teachers, as her grades slipped upon the move to Texas and I wanted progress reports WEEKLY, as well as face-to-face meetings once/month to see if we could identify the problems. I about drove them nuts.

It's true that I steer myself away from political discussions here. I visit many other places for political discussions and fact-finding and simply enjoy the process more elsewhere. I wouldn't have entered this thread if I thought it would evolve into a political discussion [although I realize that my bringing up the 'C' word led to it all.] I'm sure I steered away from many discussions on TB2000 as well. I was there to discuss computers and computer problems, and actually spent many hours in chat with Hardliner about computers, companies at which we worked, etc. I had a few reservations about attending his picnic [thinking I should wear a name-tag stating "Token Polly"], but everyone was nice and we talked about other things of interest. Y2k wasn't mentioned at all.

I agree with your analogy to cocaine for both Yourdon, Russ, and a few others. I think they actually believed in what they preached and feared that their evangelism wouldn't work if folks were exposed to another viewpoint, and maybe even thought they'd lose hero status. Yeah...they even used smear tactics. Pollies did as well, and I might add that the above reference to Republican cigar something-or- other might well qualify.

-- Anita (Anita_S3@hotmail.com), March 13, 2001.

OTFR and Lipton may or maynot have had a "thang"....who cares? the guy is a super hypocrite.

in one sentence on his "about" page he says

"...to love our human neighbors"

YEAH. the way he treated others in the y2k debate REALLY shows nice good true christian love, yea sure.

Russ can join the parade of dumbass christians that attacked censored and ridiculed people who "poo-pooed" y2k as a disaster (Chris Bayer, Dwuane Schwingle, Gary north, etc) and then try and "erase" what the did from the minds of people.....but they forget one thing....

God doesn't forget.

Put THAT in your theological pipe and smoke it.

-- (super@sleuth.spy), March 13, 2001.

Keep guessing, Anita.

I suppose what bothers me is the veneer of thoughtfulness that seems pretty thin when you gush about how Lipton looks or give us a bunch of gratuitous information about anonymous Internet posters like Chris, Hardliner, etc. It's the off-handed comment that I have an obsession and the diffident manner you avoid anything that smacks of intellectual heavy lifting.

I don't care about Clinton's sexually impulsive behavior any more than I care about what you do in the bedroom (or office or elevator). In fact, I don't think his oval office antics met the impeachment standard of "high crimes." Unfortunately, the whole affair made Clinton's opponents look like a bunch of waspish prudes while he and his administration were doing far worse than poaching interns.

But you have made it clear you have no desire to discuss politics here. You have made it clear that you are not interested in Lipton, "gossip" or the other content of this thread.

-- In the beginning (oldtimer@remember.com), March 13, 2001.

why does anyone pay attention to this guy anyway? I do find it NONsuprising that there is NO MENTION of Liptons y2k fearmongering on his website....but would you REALLY expect him to put anything there about that?

-- (blah@blah.blah), March 17, 2001.

Why doesnt everyone leave him alone? Who shives a git?

As for an affair, or not, that is between him and God.

-- morph (morphed@here.now), March 18, 2001.