This came from a client today: Details: *Purchased program from vendor 3 months ago for $11,000. Were told it was 2000 compliant. *We examined program and without testing called and talked to the president of the software company. He admitted they weren't through. *Client demanded money returned for software. *Letter received today was there answer. By phone they previously informed client that fears were ungrounded, even though it was their president that admitted to me personally non-complaince.

Snip from letter:

"...I can not give you a flat guarantee that ***** and **** are 100% year 2000 compatible. I believe that we are pretty close to being completely compatible. I further believe that as the year 2000 rolls up we will have made the necessary modifications to insure the longevity of your *** and **** software systems. I will promise that if we have missed something, we will make the necessary corrections post haste."

Well now, don't you all feel better? It's obvious we're all being silly. After all, this guy "feels" they're close to being compatible. (He wouldn't even use the word complaint) And if they miss something, you've got his promise.

-- Greg Sugg (gregsugg@bbnp.com), December 08, 1998

Answers

"Compatipliant" *see earlier postings on y2k sniglets

-- Lisa (LisaWard2@aol.com), December 08, 1998.

They lied - they got caught.

This was real good for future business relations wasn't it?

-- Robert A. Cook, P.E. (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), December 08, 1998.

Robert,

The best part is that the guy suggested in the letter that we were telling the client this just so we could design them a new system. Keep in mind, this is the same guy that told me on the phone that the system wasn't ready yet. I've already received one call telling me I would be sued if I persisted. Trouble is, I can't figure out what they're suing me for. I just repeated what their president said himself!

-- Greg Sugg (gregsugg@bbnp.com), December 08, 1998.

Gregg: they can threaten to sue you and even file a frivilous civil suit , knowing that will stop 95% of people. They can't sue me. I don't live in the U.S. They can't touch me. These unscrupulous thieves need to be exposed - if it's true.

-- PNG (png@gol.com), December 08, 1998.

PNG,

You don't have to worry about whether or not we'll pursue this. If you read this letter in its' entire context, you'd understand why I'm not worried about a lawsuit. It would probably be amusing seeing the guy try to defend himself based on the utter absurdity of his letter. Not to mention the cost he'd incur to either bring suit, or defend himself if my client files against him.

-- Greg Sugg (gregsugg@bbnp.com), December 08, 1998.

I won't weep if some of these jokers go out of business due to Y2K. They give everyone who tries to do a good job of programming a bad name.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), December 09, 1998.

Should the correct term for a company trying to "con" their customers with Y2K compliance double-speak be:

"CONPLIANT" ?

-- Sara Nealy (saran@ptd.net), December 09, 1998.