It just isn't where we expected it to be and it's not among the herd. We've pretty much all fallen into the trap of expecting "The PANIC" to be in bank lines, grocery stores, and gasoline stations as the populace "gets it". It appears to me that we were wrong.

I conclude, in keeping with pshannon's gem of perception, that what we are seeing in the "invasion of the Pollyanna Trolls" (and not just here, but all over the Web) is the unexpected.

Government and banking is where the panic is!

It would seem to be too much to attribute to coincidence that shortly after KO_SKIN_EM's press release to the effect that there was to be a secrecy move and a PR (Propaganda Relations) campaign the Y2K WebWorld gets inundated with the garbage that we've seen here. It's even in keeping with the incompetence of the government to apply such an attack to the strongest point of the target instead of to those unsuspecting or nervous-but-undecided members of the general population who would be most likely to succumb to that attack.

OTOH, the PANIC driven strategy may simply be to "swarm" the Web and hope to drown out the undesired information amongst so much lukewarm swill and evil smelling obscenity that everyone simply wants to get away.

I've observed a great deal of solid logical and practical thinking on this forum, and I am certain that our combined efforts should yield a viable and successful method of countering this attack. One thing that I think is apparent is that we are currently making fools of ourselves by responding as we are (and you may consider this my own mea culpa for getting into it with "Deano" the other day). How about some constructive discussion and planning here toward the objective as originally stated for this forum?

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), January 31, 1999

Answers

The way to do what Hardliner advocates is to do away with the raison d'etre of the forum itself. It must be explicitly morphed into a discussion of topics such as:

- sustainable economy

- personal self-sufficiency being it own reward

- the nature and limits of freedom in a crowded, hi-tech world

But y2k, monstrous and cavernous maw though it is, is too small a bag to hold those three cats.

-RC

-- Runway Cat (runway_cat@hotmail.com), January 31, 1999.

Sir:

Might it not be a reasonable aproach to the problem if we (informally) rotated the duty of quietly, reasonably, carefully, (some might say) soporifically, simply asked the question, over and over, "Where is your data? WHy should we accept this assertion? Show me why I am wrong, but you will need to give me as much data as the other side is giving?"

I know it is severely tempting to stoop to the level of the folks. And the use of the vernacular may be a temptation, also, but we ought to be able to avoid this.

I also am beginning to agree that the level of troll attention, and the vitriol used, not to mention the exeeding of the weekly quota of @ #$%@#$ etc., smacks of someone's planning. Not GREAT planning, but, then again, the groups we're referring to would not understand how to mount the attacks which MIGHT have some results they would consider good.

Thanks for something to think about!

Chuck

-- Chuck, night driver (rienzoo@en.com), January 31, 1999.

Just as a refresher::

This forum is intended for people who are concerned about the impact of the Y2000 problem on their personal lives, and who want to discuss various fallback contingency plans with other like-minded people. It's not intended to provide advice/guidance for solving Y2000 problems within an IT organization.

from the "About" entry above. This is the charter for this forum.

Chuck

-- Chuck, night driver (rienzoo@en.com), January 31, 1999.

"Feds Plan Y2K Spin Control"

http://www.wired.com/news/print_version/politics/story/17527.html?wnpg =all

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), January 31, 1999.

Be that as it may, Cat, I agree with Hardliner that responding to the obviously combatant posts is a fruitless exercise, other than to make us feel a bit better that we have vented. Take a deep breath, wait a minute and it'll go away. Hardliner is exactly right that this sort of effort is in keeping with the bureaucratic incompetence those on this forum expect and revile. To respond is to lend some credence to the outrageous posts, particularly those where the poster, in using foul language is, indeed, a small mind trying to express itself. We know them for what they are, so we needn't respond. There arew enough good, legitimate posts on this forum to capture and hold our attention for a long time. Instead of playing the trolls' games, lets continue the good work of answering questions, providing support and mentally holding each others hands in preparation for the difficult times to come. For what it's worth.

-- Vic (Roadrunner@compliant.com), January 31, 1999.

Hardliner, I have to agree with you. I had always taken a pretty soft stand towards trolls, figuring that even they were worth answering, since somebody reading might learn something worthwhile. But the reality is that it becomes very repetitive, and wastes valuable time for everyone.

For what it is worth, here are some characteristics of trolls that I have observed (based on Deano et al). (Note that, in theory, a troll could just as well be a doom&gloomer rather than a pollyanna, but in practice I don't think that we have ever seen it.)

* Trolls don't work very hard; they make you do all the work, citing references, etc. Trolls always make some breezy, half baked assertion or response, and then sit back and watch all the heated responses.

* Trolls rarely produce anything even resembling evidence for their statements. More than likely, they will claim that they are in some kind of capacity to know what they are talking about, because they have some kind of important position in their company, specifically dealing with Y2K. Of course, technical details are always hazy, and the grammer gets pretty amazing too, for someone in such a supposed position.

* Trolls whine a lot. They are always complaining that they are subjected to abuse, merely because they try to take an optimistic view of Y2K, when in fact the only abuse is that they are requested to present evidence to back up what they are claiming.

I'm sure that there are other things too, but this seems to be the stuff that I have found. And at this point, my policy on trolls is to just ignore, its better business for everybody.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), January 31, 1999.

"Disinformatzya" if I recall (translates as dis-information), was the Soviet term for planting false and erroneous stories to discredit their enemies during the Cold War. They would do it by planting false photos and and doctored stories in local press outlets.

My favorite one was the photo of heavily armed helicopters taken in Viet Nam, used in a story about US helicopers landing at some Central American airport. And although the mission was a relief mission, the local libertad press ran the story as if we were invading and not delivering medical aid to outlying villages.

Think of the spin-masters our own government is employing for issues nowhere near the importance of Y2K. Do you think that a dis- information campaign couldn't or wouldn't be waged against the Y2K forums if it would be in the interests of government and industry to smokescreen the public? And if the forums could be clogged with flame posts in an attempt to cause them to crash (as some already have), don't you think that some people would try to do so?

I'm not holding my breath to find out if our recent spate of flamers and trolls are misguided individuals or part of an organized effort. But I do think that we might find it necessary to hold our noses as we wade through an increasingly deeper layer of BS. Look for some people to really start shoveling it out here as they try to be as disruptive as possible for whatever their purposes.

I've said it before, as some people realize that their world is collapsing, they will strike out to take down as many around them as possible. And they will attempt to poison the waters taht others need for life, if they themselves are unable to live. Keep a watch on this information watering hole and put a lock on your well lest you find some angry loser trying to poison your water source.

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), January 31, 1999.

We who have been on this forum for many months can recognize who the trolls are and I don't respond to them because it's a waste of valuable time. It is true that by responding to the troll threads, that it just adds fuel to fire and what valuable information has come out of it? Don't be a fool and respond. The newbies that venture here will seek out the valuable information that they are looking for, and are smart enough to know what is garbage. Furthermore, this forum isn't the only source of information for Y2K, but it's one of the most valuable.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), January 31, 1999.

Please, please, please stop answering the trolls!!! We do not have to argue or try to enlighten them. There is enough info in the current threads and the archived ones to do that. It saddens me to see the responses. Chuck the nightdriver's refresher says it all. Let's not loose sight that this forum is for folks who are CONCERNED with the impact of Y2k. To me that would be people who believe that there is going to be an impact. Folks who do not believe that should find another forum.

-- shivermetimbers (zerodegrees@brrrrrr.com), January 31, 1999.

Trolls do it for attention. I'm willing to bet that many of them hardly know what y2k IS, but they've found bulletin boards without much of a sysop and so they want to come here and cause trouble.

-- Leo (lchampion@ozemail.com.au), January 31, 1999.

I am not a troll. I am a newbie who appreciates your well-reasoned responses. Some of these names and addresses are entertaining. I visit this site to see how others having similar concerns regarding Y2K are coping with the nay-sayers and it-can't-happen types, many of whom are in high, influential positions.

Some of these trolls sound totally ridiculous, and I wonder how much time is wasted responding which could be better utilized elsewhere. I think trolls feed on whatever drops off the bridge to the 21st Century.

-- dinosaur (bumblepuff@hotmail.com), January 31, 1999.

Well said bardou. FWIW: May I also suggest that if a person feels they have to respond, let it be a limerick rhyme that is nonsense to deny the troll the sought after response. If enough do it, perhaps it would help. As most of you know, I ignore them, even when they use my name and e-mail, or bait me, which they have done. Too many good threads still, and never enough time. To be honest, I do not think anything will work completely since there will always be some who post well-intentioned answers, and others that either enjoy it or just don't care.

If you will allow me the liberty Hardliner - master of the limerick and ryhme - this is for you:

Whether the person is a troll,

Or they really are a mole,

If upon their threads we rhyme,

They will depart in a short time,

Back into their little hole.

So rather than rise and take the bait,

Let us rhyme without debate,

On their thread,

Until they're dead,

Do you really think they'll wait?

They come here for a reason, true,

To stir things up for me and you,

So if we rhyme instead of post,

They don't get what they want the most,

And leave our forum sooner too.

So if you answer let it rhyme,

On all the troll threads all the time,

They will go,

Don't you know,

Post off topic, on the dime.

-- Rob Michaels (sonofdust@net.com), January 31, 1999.

Dear All GIs,

I cannot speak as eloquently as you. I should just like to let you know that over the past few weeks you have all helped guide me through this intricate Y2K maze.

I stumbled into the apparent seriousness of this problem at the beginning of the year. It was then that my whole life took a complete about face. I have gone through disbelief and bewilderment, panic, anger, and now I think I have reached a point of some sort of reconciliation. Over the past few weeks I have used this forum as my life line. It was the only place I could turn to try and make some sort of sense of all of this. I have this insatiable need to find out as much as I can as quickly as I can. It is here where I can find sources; dissections of articles and reports, etc.; varying interpretations; and other people grappling with this issue.

I have had to learn a lot in a short period of time and for all the newbies that find their way to this forum time is running ever shorter.

I certainly don't mean to sound patronizing but please don't let yourselves get derailed too much. For those of you that have been at this far longer than us please don't forsake us now.

Anyhow I just wanted to say thank you.

-- Carol (usa-uk@email.msn.com), January 31, 1999.

Dear Hardliner and all oldtime posters,

I agree 100% with the assertion that the troll level has increased here. Quite dramatically in the last two weeks. It seems that I don't even read 60% of the threads anymore. Over the months I have honed my skill at weeding out the troll threads and quickly assessing the troll content in the first 3 lines of a reply. I would have to agree that it is quite a coincidence that the troll level is up and the government is nervous about all those doom and gloomers on the Internet we hear about almost every night on the media. I wish I could find a moderated forum to read and reply on. A troll gatekeeper. A good moderator would welcome newcomers that are interested in learning and trash the trolls for the rest of us. A Good FAQ and a moderated forum would do us all a world of good. Anybody out there? Unfortunately I believe that this simple troll trashing is just a prelude to a much wider deception coming. It will be more sophisticated and backed up by "news stories" that could be fabrications or stretching the truth to support their aims. I can only hope that the powers that be consider the proposal mentioned in the Wired article that supported informing the people.

Mike

P.S. please keep up the good work I don't know of a better group of individuals that can discern the facts.

-- Mike (justmike11@yahoo.com), January 31, 1999.

Rob --

I think you've shown us how to con-troll the problem.

Could you put your rhymes at the start of a "Troll Control" thread?

Could you or someone snip the best of what was said above (and elsewhere) concerning non-response to trolls and create a Best Practices statement after Rob's rhymes to make a pretty complete thread on the topic?

(Make it look like an active thread? May even serve as troll-bait -- troll-paper?--if they get stuck and expend their energies adding their %*%^&W*&$% to it. WE won't bother reading it after awhile -- unless of course that day we feel like going in and dispatching some stuck trolls.)

Could that edited thread of helpful ideas be saved and re-posted, say, once a week while we are under assault?

Any volunteers for Troll Pa-troll?

-- Jor-el (Jor-el@krypton.com), January 31, 1999.

Jack has hit the nail on the head. The question is, why do so many of you vets of the troll wars take the bait? Most trolls reveal themselves quickly. Identify & move on. Perhaps a day away from this forum now & again would help.

Warts & all, this forum is tops!

-- Bingo1 (howe9@pop.shentel.net), January 31, 1999.

Hardliner, I agree with you; we should only answer those who are sincere. Flaming trolls is a total waste of time and bandwidth. We should also spend less time debating semantics with the perennial Pollyannas among us. Time is a precious commodity to us all, and we had better use it more wisely. Especially since the troll invasion will likely get worse as time goes on.

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), January 31, 1999.

I have voiced my opinion regarding trolls before, if you're gonna answer them don't complain about them. Deano is not a troll in my book, he is just clueless and arrogant. Trolls to me are folks like Jerry and Chittum, foul mouthed gremlins who curse and bitch incoherently when awakened from their slumber. Y2Kmyass is borderline psycho, but fun to screw with on a boring evening.

As to gubmint and banking panic, yeah, no doubt they are shittin bricks about the future, and don't kid yourself, WE the aware WILL be blamed for bank runs, not the system which is a fragile house of cards. Here it comes. The finger pointing starts soon.

"Yep, it was those doomers that caused all of this, not us, your faithful civil servants, media moguls, and corporate managers. It wasn't bad code, it was bad vibes. Blame them, not us."

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), January 31, 1999.

Ditto on the post by Carol (usa-uk). This is the best forum by far and if it weren't for ED and Jennifer Yourdon's book I wouldn't have spent another day investigating y2k. I've learned alot since August 1998 and I keep my sanity by reading this forum. My sister lives in PA and we email daily regarding information on this forum and then share it with family and neighbors. Thanks to all of you from many who are benefitting from the time you are spending to keep us informed. Ignore the "trolls" and keep up the good work!

-- Carol 2 (cajun@laci.net), January 31, 1999.

Deedah is correct. For self-protection this forum should turn to general considerations of our now being aliens on our own planet, with the complex life-support systems this requires and the human self-cyborgization that this implies. Then we don't have to be the whipping boys and girls for y2k specifically, plus we can continue the discussion if by some miracle y2k doesn't bring the net down.

This is not meant to imply that our specific y2k concerns are unfounded. In expecting failure, we are following absolutely standard engineering practice, as Persig writes eloquently in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

In any industrial situation a machine that isn't checked out is a 'down' machine and can't be used even though it may work perfectly.

-RCat

-- Runway Cat (runway_cat@hotmail.com), January 31, 1999.

I agree on the troll response business.

late night ramblings on this, fwiw:

While some of the stuff is counter-propaganda I've noted at least three distinct types of sources.

Type I. The incoherents (a la jerry) who would be psychologically dysfunctional in any arena, and are sort of the street people of the net.

The 'gotta prove we're smarter/cooler/more in the know than this y2k crowd' types - jbd being a primary example of that sort. All ego, all the time.

Type III - The slick ones like NA. What amazes me about this third type is that they don't realize their polish is what gives them away. It is as though they are operating from a perspective somewhat similar to the type IIs in that they seem to think they're target audience lacks the intelligence to spot their ploys.

Now I've run into I's and II's before in other forums - any hot topic tends to accrue a certain number of them from time to time...but I gotta say this is the first time I've seen III's on the net. The level of professionalism exhibited by the IIIs generally bespeaks of some training in the area of propaganda techniques and psychological warfare.

In other words I agree that we're seeing intentional efforts at game playing against the forum, and that some of the players are reasonably sophisticated. On the other hand, I would submit that it would be dangerous to assume that all, or even most, of the gameplayers are coming from any single source. Too many interests in this one, and the styles are such as to suggest differing backgrounds on the parts of some of the players in any case.

anybody have any thoughts on how to start differentiating between the college kids, the dysfunctional types, and the intentional counter- prop sorts?

just wondering, Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), February 01, 1999.

I've attempted to outline in a useful way all that's been said so far. Everything that you've p0sted convinces me that we can put paid to this attack and continue to work toward our stated objective.

I've tied a few things together in red that seem to belong together.

One other point that I'd like to add; the term "troll" is being bandied about without an agreed upon definition. Leska has previously posted a generally accepted 'net definition that I've referred to before. How about agreeing to a "troll" definition, so that we all mean the same thing when we say it?

************************************************

I. What's going on

A. Feds plan Y2K Spin Control - Kevin

B. The campaign is designed to thwart widespread hoarding and extreme reactions to Y2K, including the possibility of bank runs and stockpiling-sparked shortages.

C. WW - Do you think that a dis- information campaign couldn't or wouldn't be waged against the Y2K forums if it would be in the interests of government and industry to smokescreen the public?

D. Leo - they want to come here and cause trouble.

E. Dinosaur - how much time is wasted responding which could be better utilized elsewhere?

F. Mike - Unfortunately I believe that this simple troll trashing is just a prelude to a much wider deception coming.

G. Arlin - In other words I agree that we're seeing intentional efforts at game playing against the forum, and that some of the players are reasonably sophisticated. On the other hand, I would submit that it would be dangerous to assume that all, or even most, of the gameplayers are coming from any single source.

II. Who is Doing it?

A. Jack - * Trolls don't work very hard; they make you do all the work, citing references, etc. Trolls always make some breezy, half baked assertion or response, and then sit back and watch all the heated responses.

* Trolls rarely produce anything even resembling evidence for their statements. More than likely, they will claim that they are in some kind of capacity to know what they are talking about, because they have some kind of important position in their company, specifically dealing with Y2K. Of course, technical details are always hazy, and the grammar gets pretty amazing too, for someone in such a supposed position.

* Trolls whine a lot. They are always complaining that they are subjected to abuse, merely because they try to take an optimistic view of Y2K, when in fact the only abuse is that they are requested to present evidence to back up what they are claiming.

B. Arlin - I've noted at least three distinct types of sources. Type I. The incoherents (a la jerry) who would be psychologically dysfunctional in any arena, and are sort of the street people of the net.

Type II. The 'gotta prove we're smarter/cooler/more in the know than the y2k crowd' types - jbd being a primary example of that sort. All ego, all the time.

Type III - The slick ones like NA. What amazes me about this third type is that they don't realize their polish is what gives them away. It is as though they are operating from a perspective somewhat similar to the type IIs in that they seem to think they're target audience lacks the intelligence to spot their ploys.

this is the first time I've seen III's on the net. The level of professionalism exhibited by the IIIs generally bespeaks of some training in the area of propaganda techniques and psychological warfare.

anybody have any thoughts on how to start differentiating between the college kids, the dysfunctional types, and the intentional counter- prop sorts?

III. What is our Objective?

This forum is intended for people who are concerned about the impact of the Y2000 problem on their personal lives, and who want to discuss various fallback contingency plans with other like-minded people. It's not intended to provide advice/guidance for solving Y2000 problems within an IT organization.

IV. What to do about it

A. RC - change forum to topical discussion For self-protection this forum should turn to general considerations of our now being aliens on our own planet

B. C da ND - Question What? Why? Where? Who? Be reasonable and unemotional

C. Vic - responding to the obviously combatant posts is a fruitless exercise, other than to make us feel a bit better that we have vented.

D. Vic - continue to discuss preps & techniques & continue mutual support

E. Bardou - We who have been on this forum for many months can recognize who the trolls are and I don't respond to them because it's a waste of valuable time.

F. Rob - May I also suggest that if a person feels they have to respond, let it be a limerick rhyme that is nonsense to deny the troll the sought after response.

G. Carol - please don't let yourselves get derailed too much. For those of you that have been at this far longer than us please don't forsake us now. This struck me as a heavy responsibility -Hardliner

H. Jor-El - Could you or someone snip the best of what was said above (and elsewhere) concerning non-response to trolls and create a Best Practices statement after Rob's rhymes to make a pretty complete thread on the topic? Could that edited thread of helpful ideas be saved and re-posted, say, once a week while we are under assault?

I. Bingo1 - Identify & move on.

J. Nabi - Time is a precious commodity to us all, and we had better use it more wisely

K. Uncle Deedah - if you're gonna answer them don't complain about them.

L. Carol 2 - Ignore the "trolls" and keep up the good work!

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), February 01, 1999.

Sounds like a plan, Hardliner! Trolls MUST be fed, otherwise they go elsewhere. Is not always easy to figure out a troll initially (that lady with her worries about being able to water her garden if the water stopped flowing for instance), and sometimes their antics can be kind of funny. But here is a Feb 1 1999 resolution: Ignore the trolls.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), February 01, 1999.

Hardliner,

I didn't mean to lay all the responsibility on you guys. Each and every person has to take responsibility for ones self and in my case also two young children that are relying on me to try and do the right thing. Believe me thats a big responsibility. Upon first discovering this whole god awful mess my concern was directed immediately toward the welfare of my own family. I harbored concerns for others, however, my initial reaction was to prepare and protect my own. I have got beyond that now and feel the need like you to outreach to others and try and make them aware and prepare. I am printing up scads of info obtained over the net, copying it and giving it to everyone I know. I realise that some may think I've gone totally whacko. That doesn't matter. It doesn't even matter if nothing does happen next year and the jokes on me, because I know it will blow over. However, the joke won't be on them if things don't go well.

I am sure that more and more mainstream people like me will be reaching out for knowledge and seeking some sort of guidance on their own path of responsibility. Just to reach this forum they will have taken their first steps of individual responsibility in their pursuit of dealing with this problem.

Again, I don't mean to lay the responsibility for all of this at your feet. It was my way of trying to say thank you and encourage you to keep up the good work.

I have also been reflecting on what I said and on some of the posts that have been produced. You have to realise that within the last three weeks I have been trying to take in so much information and understand it. My mind is bursting at the seams with information that is totally new to me. I am coming from my own place and realise that I didn't take into account the place that you guys are coming from. It's not my place to tell you how to post. I also realise that people will get the information and guidance they need no matter what. If they reached this far I don't think some flowery posting is going to put them off. To be honest some of it lightens the mood. So go ahead and do what you do I am sure I will only learn more about things I never encountered before.

Anyhow thank you again.

-- Carol (usa-uk@email.msn.com), February 01, 1999.

Let me add my two cents here about something else, and that's when all this started. There were two things I saw more than a week ago that struck me as being odd.

First, there was a message on another forum that Gary North called attention to. See Gary's January 21st comments on a well-crafted guilt-trip at this link:

http://www.garynorth.com/y2k/detail_.cfm/3608

"Avoiding Paralysis by Guilt Is Basic to Y2K Survival"

Then on January 22, someone going by the handle "MAP" started a thread here on Ed's forum called "Poll of Y2K Awareness":

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000Pn2

MAP left several messages on the thread he started that, to me anyway, indicated that he had an agenda. Seeing the guilt-trip message at Gary North's site and MAP's thread here, within a day of each other, caught my attention.

This was a few days before we all saw Declan's "Feds Plan Y2K Spin Control" article from Wired News.

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), February 01, 1999.

Carol,

I don't perceive the responsibility of the "longer-time GIs" to be THAT heavy! You're absolutely correct about each of us being responsible for our own future. The responsibility that I was referring to was the one to not let ourselves get sidetracked by this attack. That is within our control and therefore within our responsibility.

A lot of us have been through the same process that you describe so well. Most of us are empathetic and desire to assist in whatever way that we can.

I certainly did not intend my remark to be a complaint, but rather to indicate the importance I attached to your absolutely understandable and quite reasonable request.

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), February 01, 1999.

Hardliner,

I didn't take your remark as a complaint - it just struck me that what you said was true.

I have come to realise that life is very unpredicatable. My own life hasn't always gone according to plan. Four years ago I had planned on re-entering the work force after being at home with our two children. As far as my husband and I were concerned the plan we had mapped out for ourselves was going according to plan. Have the two children; be a stay at home mom until they were old enough to go to school and then get a job that fit in with the school hours. However, God; or who; or whatever you choose to believe in had a different plan for us. For numerous reasons we ended up taking a different path. We chose to do home-schooling. Home-schooling - something of which we weren't even aware of until five years ago. We went ahead and flew right in the face of convention. But before we embarked on that course we had to do a lot of reading and soul searching. It was something alien to us and daunting. However, we got through the researching and soul searching and made our decision.

You may be wondering what the hell does this have to do with the subject at hand. Well something wonderful happened to this family. We took back a big responsiblity for our own family and its well- being. Our children have become independent learners as well as being able to work within a group. They have developed socialization skills relating to all age groups and not just limited to their peers. We discovered just how much responsibility for our own lives and our children's lives has been happily handed over to the government.

My oldest son decided to continue with his home-school education through high-school. I spent the first half of 1998 researching and identifying the best curriculum for this objective. We took a break through the summer before embarking on high-school and my youngest starting middle-school by visiting their grandparents in the UK. We returned stateside in October and set about our homeschooling activities and dealing and preparing for all the upcoming holidays through the New Year. Through all of this we were unaware of the seriousness of Y2K. Our life was going according to our new plan and rewritten map.

Then at the beginning of the year it's WHAM! BAM! THANK YOU MAM! the Y2K bug came swarming into our life. It didn't take long to ascetain that UH! OH! our life may not continue as planned again. Only this time the consequences would seem somewhat dire. We are all trying to research and soul-search a situation that is totally new to us. We have no idea what is going to happen. The unknown is what makes this so difficult.

It would seem that some of us see enough evidence to indicate a need for preparing by way of stock-piling food, water, etc., and some of us don't. As a person that feels there is overwhelming evidence to indicate the need to prepare I am puzzled why others do not.

Anyhow it would seem that the only real inidividual responsiblity that is mine and yours and whoever is to address the situation, read what you can about it, ask questions and hope for answers, assess what it means to you and act accordingly. That is really all that anyone can do.

I thank you again for your input, answers, and insight. It has helped me a great deal and I agree that you would make a great leader.

-- Carol (usa-uk@email.msn.com), February 01, 1999.

Hardliner,

Thanks. It does seem like the trolls are a more "total force" these days. Instead of WTSHTF, it should be noted as the day WTTHTF.

Perhaps, keeping in mind the newcomers, whenever a troll posts, the "old threaders" can just post a "Warning: Troll Posting -- Just Ignore" notice, for the record.

Our forum is likely to see many posts increasing at all levels as we fly through "the goo" on final Y2K approach.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), February 01, 1999.

If you don't recognize a poster's handle, take the question at face value in answering it; the person could very well be a newbie who does not deserve to be flamed to a crisp with the first response. After that, however, it is not that difficult to discern the trolls by their droppings. Don't respond! Don't respond! Don't respond! I said this four months ago, (and I am sure I was not the first) and the compulsives among us still don't get it. I tell you twice: Once they've revealed themselves, Don't respond!

-- Elbow Grease (Elbow_Grease@AutoShop.com), February 01, 1999.

Could you expand on that please, I'm dense. Thank you.

-- Uncle Deedah (oncebitten@twiceshy.com), February 01, 1999.

Elbow Grease, I had a funny thought when I read your post. Maybe we should have a "Wanted" poster with the names of all those who keep posting on the thread of a troll. :-)

-- Gayla Dunbar (privacy@please.com), February 01, 1999.

This is a FASCINATING thread, and I wish I'd gotten here much sooner. So in the spirit of helping to further the cause of clear communication, I'd like to offer this very brief lexicon for the collective consideration.

Anybody whose motives or methods come into question or are obviously intended to garner negative results can be called a TROLL.

Inside of this, there are subsets.

PROLE: The Type I that Arlin suggested-

"The incoherents (a la jerry) who would be psychologically dysfunctional in any arena, and are sort of the street people of the net."

VOLE *: the Type II -

"The 'gotta prove we're smarter/cooler/more in the know than this y2k crowd' types - jbd being a primary example of that sort. All ego, all the time"

MOLE: Type III -

"The slick ones like NA. What amazes me about this third type is that they don't realize their polish is what gives them away. It is as though they are operating from a perspective somewhat similar to the type IIs in that they seem to think they're target audience lacks the intelligence to spot their ploys.

(* Webster - Vole - any of various small rodents that typically have a stout body, rather blunt nose and short ears, inhabit both moist meadows and dry uplands and do much damage to crops and are closely related to muskrats and lemmings)

Suggestions, changes, feedback etc. more than welcome. If people like these terms, just start using them. If I get enough responses, I'll refine the terms and post them to a new thread.

-- pshannon (pshannon@inch.com), February 01, 1999.

Deedah: You're ornery, you're ornery, you're ornery! :-)

Gayla: It would certainly be a looong list, wouldn't it?

-- Elbow Grease (Elbow_Grease@AutoShop.com), February 01, 1999.

Hardliner, off-topic, but here's an article from today about Posse Comitatus (sp?) on CNN... know it's one of your favorite topics..hate to start a new thread anymore.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9901/31/BC-MILITARY-TERRORISM.reut/

-- lisa (lisa@work.com), February 01, 1999.

ROFL! P. Shannon you've out done yourself: prole, vole, and mole are exactly right!

LOL! Arlin

-- Arlin H. Adams (ahadams@ix.netcom.com), February 01, 1999.

My last message on this thread was about early troll and shill messages from January 21 and 22. To find out about a January 21 Y2K White House meeting, and about White House news from January 22, see my first and last message on the following thread...

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000OYG

-- Kevin (mixesmusic@worldnet.att.net), February 02, 1999.

Lisa, Hardliner::: Am I dense?? (Careful how you answer that, there are women and children present) The above referenced article did not mention Posse etc. at all.

Or is that the point???

Of course, given some other stuff we've seen, the planners may be actually planning to use Navy and Marines, who are not covered?

Chuck (who may borrow Cory's other nickname)

-- Chuck, night driver (rienzoo@en.com), February 02, 1999.

Chuck,

I wasn't too sure either. All I can see is that the general (mis)understanding is that Posse Comitatus applies to all the military.

You are correct in that the Navy and Marines are not included (it wasn't entirely clear in your post whether you were asking that or telling it). My understanding is that the act came about because the Union Army was heavily tasked for civil law enforcement in the South after the War Between the States. Of course, there was no Air Force then, and the Navy and Marines, as far as I can determine, were never even intended to be covered.

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), February 02, 1999.

Fried the motherboard on my home computer. Only get in here on the fly on rare occassions. God, I miss you people! See you're holding your own against the trolls. Pesky, gnat-like, aren't they! Just keep on tellin' it true. You're the light here.

-- Faith Weaver (faith-weaver@usa.net), February 04, 1999.

Faith,

What'd you fry it for? Don't you know that they're no good to eat?

Good to know you're still around!

-- Hardliner (searcher@internet.com), February 04, 1999.

Worthy of re-perusal.

-- Top 40 Blast from the past (dick@clark.immortal), May 06, 1999.

A Golden Oldie

-- Alan Freed (BeBop@Lu.La), November 20, 1999.

To understand part of the troll dynamic, grit your teeth, read every word and look deep into the mind of a major troll cheerleader.

No, there were about 15 more threads of all sorts about this. Chuck set off a Fire Storm which will destroy their Church Home.

Posted by (208.188.23.39) cpr on November 20, 1999 at 07:14:14:

In Reply to: Re: Censorship Day on TB2000 posted by Anita on November 20, 1999 at 06:25:43:

"Chuck" called it "our little Cyber-home" and he was wrong: Church Home is more like it. They go to church worship and serve the Meme and then go about their jobs and homes keeping the "secret membership" quiet. Now they must be so embarrassed that only the most hard nosed will ignore the laughing.

AND.....Family Thanksgiving Meals (always a wonderful time for being reminded of your humble status in life and many past errors....by the rest of your family) is next Thurs.

Whoever is posting the multi-"don't post here" is dedicated to one thing.

Forcing the issue and making sure that in the next few days everyone who goes there will know. I doubt he is alone.

They are very wrong. It will die anyway.

In 1995, I read a site about "how list serves" live and die. It is always true. Without the "right Moderator" list wander. If they wander too far OT, they die. NOT the AOL crap which is "social" but the Knowledge topic lists.

Joel A. keeps RX2000 clean and it does what 100s of members wants: info about Y2k and Health Care. I send him the info on the Fruitcakes who post but he knows most of them also.

De Jager's list needed a strong powerful guide but it was a full time job and the person he needed was a $100,000 yr. level person. They did the next best thing and tried to keep it on tech topics until late 1998 when it was swamped with crud and I left. (I was one of the most active posters).

Most of EY's "guests" could read the posts to Rx2000 or Year2000. And five of us keep them off the International lists. I don't even have to post. I simply send the info to someone in London and he axes the troll with typical British: "Pardon sir, but may I suggest that you need some facts about this matter? Let me help you extract your head from its current location ......"

Letting the Insanity continue is the very best thing that could happen. People are not dumb. They will judge for themselves. That alone will back fire on the censorship efforts. If they shut the list to password, they will die. It will defeat EY's last shots at fame. HUMPTY is nowhere, no interest in it.

I know at most there are only 100-200 there and most of them only lurk. 1/2 are probably luke warm and the forum is probably monitored by watchdogs and maybe the Law. Even North's people know the rules because they don't want the attention of the Fuzz thanks to Herr Gary.

It couldn't go on much longer. The mind control and the efforts to dominate will not go on.

"INFORMATION WANTS TO BE FREE" is the first commandment of the Net. Just like the Naked Nuke Protestors, they can spin the info but people will LAUGH AT THEM.

I have been on some of these lists since they started dealing with Y2k. At the start you might remember "Candy of the Dome" Turner who got some publicity by claiming she was moving to the hills and changing her Reefer Manufacturing Biz into making Pre-fab domes for people as shelter for Y2k in the sticks. She had a list. Now Ms. Candy is a sincere if nutty Christian who "really" believes what she believes. FINE.

She started a list and at the core were some people who from the beginning directed the show. It was the "worst of the worst". I signed up once and unsubscribed in one day. Later, after exposing a de Jager poster as a fan of Gary, he put me on that list again about a year ago with my postings of facts and about him. The sheer hatred that poured back should have tipped me off.

They asked the one question that I now know is the "question": "What are you doing on a Preparation list??" and "What have you done to prepare?"

THAT is the filtering question on EY's forum and has been for a year. That is the Survivalist Network ID mark. That is NOT DEBATEABLE. They are in the business of "expanding" and recruiting. We know how it is done and we know why (vendors, ego and true believers). It is not a game and in and of itself there is nothing wrong with it. HOWEVER, like anything on the Fringe there are always a few who "get carried away".

THAT is going on now on EY's Pit. It could have been stopped long ago but when you look back it is clear that TIME BOMB 2000 WAS WRITTEN FOR THEM. Not for the "average citizen". It was a targeted market and they milked that market. How big is it?? 1/4 of a million copies of which you may be sure, the True believer bought 10 copies for their friends. They would post to EY's forum that they did so.

WHY?? Because "THIS TIME ,,,,family, ,,,you will see that I am right and if you don't listen to me this time,,,here is the Expert who proves it..,.ETC".

TB2000 was the MANUAL FOR ACTION and used by the Vendors for the Survivalist Crowd.

NOW...in the slide down into chaos...NORMAL PEOPLE WILL LEAVE.

EVEN THOSE WHO CALL IT..........as "Chuck" did: THIS IS OUR CYBER-HOME AND WE ARE A LITTLE FAMILY..(IN THE TEXAS A&M Thread.)

Only the enormous "staying power" of a few are keeping that thing afloat. All over the forums and lists are collapsing from lack of interest. Its the "hard core" of a few and using multiple screen names keeping it going. All the techniques we know and have been analyzed over and over won't work.

They shut off "debate" with a few flames or the thread just "dead ends". (Paul Davis described that 6 months ago.) But it all comes across as the actions of "rabble rousers" or city street pamphleteers.

Unless the members live in a cave, they have to interface with the rest of society. The social pressures on many of them are causing doubts and that is leading to backlashes from the "Core".

The real spam is someone like RC posting page after page of a Baker Hughes site and then when you dig into it, you see it contradicts his whole point.

Even the worst of them are THAT stupid. So the attacks get worse and worse and out come the INVARs. Even Milne has enough sense to stay out of it (of course, he has little credibility even there).

NOW ...I...am getting email from the doomers themselves asking *me* what they should do to save their home or end it. I'm telling them all the board has been seized and controlled by survivalists and vendors and shills for a long time (long over a year). Yourdon was oblivious (or was he??).

cpr

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), November 20, 1999.

Poor ol' cpr is in dire need of a high colonic.

-- I'm Here, I'm There (I'm Everywhere@so.beware), November 20, 1999.

Over in DeBunky, cpr is so hard up for company that he answers his own posts! How is that for being pathetic??

-- Forum Regular (Here@y2k.comx), November 22, 1999.

And yet look who was RIGHT....

-- NOT (the@doomer.dumbshits), June 24, 2001.

yeppers

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), June 24, 2001.