Why do so many of the people posting polyanna messages on this forum do it with undeliverable or false email addresses? Are they children? Or do they really believe the survivalists online are going to spam them?

Like anon@ymous.com .. or newbie@large.com? I know I've seen posts by them before ...

Maybe there should be an age limit on here.

-- Lou Navarro (lanny1@ix.netcom.com), January 28, 1999

Answers

Lou Ferrigno:

You know, big brother is watching you all the time. You better be careful what you post and say here, maybe one day your going to get a visit from Men In Black. After all , look how many address you sent your post to when you hit the send button. I wonder how many of those addresses are actually government agents.

They are probably watching you right now with a high powered telescope...

Quick, close the curtains, the MiB know everything you do and say!!!

-- (RedChina@USA.com), January 28, 1999.

I think it's important to make the distinction between "mischievous" and "disruptive." Quite often, political disinformation and disruption is cloaked as mere mischief or madness. They do it because it works: most of us seem to be buying the idea that "lone nuts" are the cause of the Kennedy and King assasinations, for instance. Think: if people panic, really panic, about Y2k and start preparing en masse, the game's over. No more money-making and profit-taking. The longer panic can be delayed, the more money can be made and preserved in the short term. Isn't that worth an effort to disrupt and discredit those exchanging information about the problem and trying to prepare, and teach others how to prepare? It may come in the form of an obvious troll, or it may come in the form of someone warning us that we're all going down on some list of potential terrorists somewhere. Fear, derision, division. Classic. Does anyone, given a moment's reflection, really believe that the recent Time and USA Today items aren't calculated to STOP PEOPLE FROM TAKING ACTION about Y2k? That's pretty deep, if you think about it. It means those publications are about as trustworthy as PRAVDA. So they're going to hit us from above and below. And we shouldn't "become what we hate" and try to censor it here. We should acknowledge it for what it is, label it clearly, and move on.

E.

-- E. Coli (nunayo@beeswax.com), January 28, 1999.

I wrote and posted the above before I saw the "RedChina" post, but it illustrates my point perfectly. This person is highly motivated to make people AFRAID. And it looks like adolescent humor, therefore individual and anonymous. But the meme is planted, nonetheless: "You are being watched by authorities who are more powerful than you." When the message is an threat, appealling to fear on an emotional level, the poster doesn't need to be rational or credible in order for the message to have it's intended effect. In fact, the seeming stupidity or madness of the messenger serves to cloak the concerted effort behind the message. Hence the phrase: "crazy like a fox."

The presence of these disruptors is a good sign, though. It means the people prompting them are starting to get really scared. And they should be.

E.

-- E. Coli (nunayo@beeswax.com), January 28, 1999.

If only somebody *were* watching. We attribute too much brain to the Y2K game. It is blind stupidity, greed, and short-sidedness, and systemic ignorance.

The stupidest thing the govt could do would be to put a lid on preparation efforts. Prepare now while the system is up and running and capable of increased production. Lubricate the output wheels with your orders. Get ready now so you're away from the rush. If everybody were like the majority of YourDoneEres, calmly preparing sensibly and reaching out to the community, there would be no civil unrest. Set the example; you don't need to say anything; thoughts and quiet actions set a pattern, a blueprint in the ether and collective subconscious. Pray that everybody do their job, the code continues to get worked on, and that people wake up and prepare. Support your local government to approach Y2K with simple factual information freely given to neighborhoods. The solution is with *us.*

Looking to govt for help or conspiracies or anything else is now a waste of time. It's an interesting side-hunting-for-clues but let NOTHING deter your preparation. Remember, Mother Nature gives us all plenty of reason to be ready for nasty surprises. Make yourself as self-reliant as possible. That's being a good citizen!

xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx xxxxxxx

-- Leska (allaha@earthlink.net), January 28, 1999.

There you go generalizing again. Many doom & glooers also post with false e-mails. Why don't you take a count first before asking such a dumb question?

Your typical pollyanna

-- Anyone (now@youdoneit.com), January 28, 1999.

Leska,

The maxim "what you don't know won't hurt you" does NOT apply to propaganda and disinformation techniques. All very well to make positive efforts and not get hung up fighting useless battles; but let's not gloss over the fact that we're being MANIPULATED AND LIED TO by the news media (falsely so-called) and their ultra-wealthy controllers.

E.

-- E. Coli (nunayo@beeswax.com), January 28, 1999.

I notice a somewhat different pattern. Those who have nothing substantive to offer are anonymous. Those who have been there and thought about it, well, Paul Davis and I use our real names and addresses. What are 'a' and Big Dog ashamed of?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 28, 1999.

I've been writing political stuff for years. Only one threat! (So far) One guy in the Federal System told me I was on their Kook List. Big Deal! I don't do anything illegal and do not intend to do so. I will however do what is legal within the Constitution of the USA. If the wienners don't like it let them come and talk to me. I think they are capable of finding me even if I post with a goof address. Some of you out there are probably able to figure out who I am even though I post with a goof address. Worry or worry not but do not worry if you are not illegal. It would be fun to take them to court over some form of harrasment situation.

-- freeman (freeman@cali.com), January 28, 1999.

Ah Flint,

You might want to rethink what you just said.

At any rate, some live by creating fear and secrecy, some don't. And it's not tied to their e-mail being "real" or not. Read the words, as you would any good book. Decide by the content, not the cover.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), January 28, 1999.

Lou,

You never had a herd of lawyers chew on you?!

-- fly .:. (.@...), January 28, 1999.

freeman -- "It would be fun to take them to court over some form of harrasment situation."

Only if you have Gerry Spence on your side. And you can afford to pay him.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), January 28, 1999.

Far and few between Diane, I agree with you on this one.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), January 28, 1999.

Lou,

I've outlined my career in other postings - three decades in systems and application programming, including lots of assembler, for oil, electric, computer, and financial companies. Where do you want to draw the age limit? :-)

I explained my anonymity, as much as I wish anyway, in the thread Sooner or later- No Spam Please (anon@ymous.com), will drop the mask at http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000KVe

Do you consider my postings polyannish?

-- No Spam Please (anon@ymous.com), January 29, 1999.

I, like No Spam Please, used my real e-mail address when I first started coming to this forum. In addition to a ton of electronic spam, I received several messages from individuals who asked a lot of questions that made me feel uneasy.

Flint, you wound me.

Where I live, what I do for a living, is rather on the 'inside' of the Men in Black world. I will never compromise my oath, but I have been known to send a smoke signal or two. If I were candid about my identity, I could not do so without revealing much more than I should. If you knew exactly where the signals were coming from, I would be telling too much, period.

Anonymity grants freedom to any of us here who wish to speak their mind without fear of reprisal.

I would also advise everyone here NOT to reveal too much about their preparation plans to anyone. Spread the word, make them aware that they should prepare, too, but DO NOT be overly open about what your plans are.

While you may think me paranoid, I think myself to be cautious. In fact, I know it.

-- Arewyn (nordic@northnet.net), January 29, 1999.

Good point, Arewyn.

I too used to give out my real name and e-mail address, thinking it was the right thing to do. I didn't know why I was getting nasty-grams until now.

Many things crawl out from under rocks on the 'net.

HAL 2000

-- HAL 2000 (hidave@hal.gov), January 29, 1999.

I have to agree with Arewyn.

There are good reasons for anonymity. I'll be honest enough to admit that Annie O'Dea is not my real name, although it is my prefered one for internet use. I did not sign up for my Yahoo account under my real name (sorry Yahoo!). I did noy get my usrrent job under my "real" name, although it is legal. In fact I have been living under different names for the past 10 years. I think only my parents know what I was born as.

I have done this because I have been a member of a group "conspired" against. I will not go into detail here, if you want more this is a valid e-mail and I check it almost daily. But I have been the victim of both virtual and real-life flames, and using multiple names tends to keep the heat down to a manageable level. I also tend to change my apperance according to the situation.

It may be a strange way to live, but it works.

-- Annie O'Dea (tarotmaid@yahoo.com), January 29, 1999.

This seems to be a consistent, re-occuring theme: being more focused on the messenger rather than the message. Who cares whether the address or name are genuine or not?

And I am a card carrying doom and gloomer, and I use a false e-mail address.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), January 29, 1999.

After several hours of counting, I confess I can't see any pattern to real vs. bogus addresses.

For what it's worth, I've posted often enough to this and other y2k forums for two years now, and I have yet to receive a single y2k- related, unsolicited e-mail from anyone. I also post answers to questions posed in several assembly language newsgroups, and I get more unsolicited e-mail from those than I can deal with.

If anyone's out to get me, they're keeping it a total secret from me.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), January 29, 1999.

I believe someone earlier got it correct. Both sides use fake e-mail addresses when they have nothing substantial to say. I'm living proof.

-- Butt Nugget (Butt Nugget@buttnugget.net), January 29, 1999.

That was funny!

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), January 30, 1999.

Lou,

I used a real name/address for a while and only got about three different e-mails. Two were very positive (Richard Dale was one, I believe) and the other was a hate-filled chap that had me wanting to strangle someone. I don't give a damn about Big Brother as I'm sure he has bigger fish to fry than me. I just don't want my 16 year-old reading my incoming e-mail from a moron.

-- Slick (slick@hucheemama.com), January 30, 1999.