Cory Hamasaki's signature from Usenet..

cory hamasaki 381 Days, 9,146 Hours. WRP 104 is on line at http://www.kiyoinc.com/current.html Editions in development WRP 105 - Bugs, System flaws, Fix on Failure WRP 106 - Infomagic III, Why Infomagic is a pollyanna, Y2K terrifies me. WRP 107 - Disease and Y2K WRP 108 - Spring Planting.

Infomagic- a pollyanna????

Anyone who can produce a reasonable argument in favor of THAT viewpoint......

--Leo

-- Leo (leo_champion@hotmail.com), December 16, 1998

Answers

maybe sarcasm or its a stretch but:

Pollyanna's aunt (Aunt Polly) owned the whole town. Pollyanna was despised by her Aunt. Maybe the script should have had Pollyanna with an uncle named Sam.

MVI

-- MVI (vtoc@aol.com), December 16, 1998.

Maybe if we knew who Informagic was, then we could produce a reasonable argument in favor or against his/her viewpoint.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), December 17, 1998.

Bardou, Infomagic (*not* "informagic" is an extremely pessimistic person who writes on the Hamasaki reports, http://www.kiyoinc.com/current.htm.)

-- Leo (leo_champion@hotmail.com), December 17, 1998.

fuck you you ugly dicey brrodiou bitch

and leo your dog sucks docksd and fucks fellasio. he is a fucking canine 62er!!!!

and other bithc you suck too you fat slobby hwore with no brains and shit breath aappening all over town.

-- jerry (jubba@job.jobbles), December 17, 1998.

bridges bridges

UNCLE!!!

-- Chuck a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), December 17, 1998.

"Infomagic- a pollyanna???? Anyone who can produce a reasonable argument in favor of THAT viewpoint....."--Leo

"Poisonfire," Leo, is a term I've heard used to referto the ridiculously large amount of nuclear and/or toxic-chemical material, whether product or waste, currently being contained, monitored and controlled by our technological culture. Should the population of technologically-informed and qualified individuals decline, the risks of those toxicants escaping into the biosphere increase. This is possible without any nuclear weapons events or accidents.

As to how detrimental this may ultimately be to the planet, as with many things including Y2K, this is open to research and opinion. You might start here:

http://www.context.org/ICLIB/IC28/Macy.htm

Perhaps this might interest you:

http://www.ratical.org/radiation/WorldUraniumHearing/index.html

As far as earth-threatening conditions go, Y2K is a crisis-come-lately. If we didn't have this to worry about, our kids would probably have a lot more horror in store.

Hallyx

"Of course I could be wrong. It could be worse." --- Infomagic

-- Hallyx (Hallyx@aol.com), December 17, 1998.

bardou;

What "Infomagic"'s qualifications are is absolutely beside the point. The issue is his logic as presented in "Set Recovery On".

I cannot fault that logic. I have tried for quite some time now, and the best that I can come up with is that the "carrying Capacity" of some of the truly isolated peoples life systems MAY allow for the survival of the species.

That is one damn small consolation.

I know "Infomagics name and E-mail address. I listen in on some of the disussions they have on a certain news group. His name is not relevant and I will not divulge it.

Cory Hamasaki has stated that "Infomagic"s qualifications are there. That ,to me, speaks volumes in and of itself. I respect the qualifications of Cory. I know nothing of computers, and very damn little of PC's, but I do know expertise and experience when I see them. The group that posts to that news group are the "top dogs' of the computer world. Infomagic is respected and listened to by his peers. That says it all.

Fault his logics if you can. PLEASE fault them.

S.O.B.

PS; Linda A.

This answers my original post to you regarding "Infomagic". I'm sorry that I can't find the error in this one.

-- sweetolebob (La) (buffgun@hotmail.com), December 17, 1998.

sweetolebob, you are on target here. The best that anyone seems to be able to do with Infomagic's treatise is on the order of "Well, he can't actually prove it." Which is correct, no one can really "prove" anything with Y2K, optimistic or pessimistic -- its just too complex, there are too many variables.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), December 17, 1998.

Putting this thread to the top.

-- Richard Dale (rdale@figroup.co.uk), December 18, 1998.