Here's some stuff I've heard from DGIs recently. Gimme something to refute it, now! ;) 1. The power grid will not fail because most of it is over 20 years old. Thus most of it does not have embedded chips. Sounds reasonable. Maybe it's even true. Is it? 2. Food won't stop coming into the city. The government might take control of the supply lines from the farms to the distribution centres, but even in your worst case scenario there'll still be food. 3. What does the date have to do with a microwave computer or a traffic-lights computer? 4. Most software has thousands of bugs in it. They're just little ones that don't get noticed. Y2k could very well be another like that. . 5. HOW THE HELL DO YOU DEAL WITH PEOPLE WHO, when told that "Citibank spent a billion dollars on y2k, and the Bank of America spent six hundred mil", reply that the banks had greedy computer people who wanted bigger budgets, and stupid executives who fell for their crap and gave it to them? (That is, how do you deal with such people WITHOUT resorting to violence?) 6. We'll see what happens on New Year's Eve. If things look really bad in the first few days, we'll stock up then.

That one was told to me by a financial exec who earns in the region of $150k and is obviously a highly intelligent man. "Yeah..you'll easily be able to get a year's worth of food, plus five hundred litres of petrol and all the other stuff that you need, on 3/1/00. Use your credit card!" (I think the stores will be cleaned out WEEKS before 1/1/00.)

-- Leo (lchampion@ozemail.com.au), March 18, 1999

Answers

You can't deal with them,so enlightening as you might want to be ,you are wasting your time.

It's been said on this forum ad nauseum that if I prepare and nothing happens I'll just have plenty of food and heat and if you don't prepare you may lose your life (sorry, shortened it but you know the line about insurance).

Seems to me that those that have the beans and rice,water ,heat and ammo, arein a win/win situation whichever way it goes.

Having a $150,000 job and supposed intelligence doesn't neccesarily make you a GI, look at a good percentage of our politicians for example. Stupidity and denial are everywhere. Need I say Rhodes Scholar?

-- sue (deco100@aol.com), March 18, 1999.

Rhoades Scholar?

Got COMMON SENSE?

-- Sue (deco100@aol.com), March 18, 1999.

If things do go bad in 00, I do not see how the Goverment or military would take control of the USA, this is bigger than any natural disaster, its not a toranado in 4 states, its going to be nationwide! People have to understand the magnatude of this! It's biger than big...Total chaos in my mind...and if there's martial law and gun consfication its going to be hell. even in this little town of 7,000 its hard to get around town at noon time): Prepare now, just in case :)

-- Karen (lost@world.net), March 18, 1999.

I've said it over & over: PEOPLE LIE. They just LIE.

People on this board have admitted to lying about Y2k, when asked about it in social settings. They've got 8+ months worth of food, water, cash, fuel & ammo carefully stashed away, but if you ASK them about it, you'll get a wide-eyed "What's that? Oh, the computer bug, I heard they fixed that. No biggie. Nothing to worry about."

People lie. People lie. Burn it into your memory. THEY LIE.

-- some (are@just.lying), March 18, 1999.

Snap out of it Leo. Can't you see how nuts you have become. You said 'Gimme something to refute it, now! '.

A balanced person may have said "Do you have any information I can share with them". You are not looking for information, you are just hell bent on refuting what you call DGI's. I'm convinced that if a DGI stated that the sky was blue and clouds were white, you'd want info to refute that too.

Seriously man, get a life. Have you seen a mental health specialist? Why not give it a try. You have nothing to lose and it looks like you have a lot to gain.

-- wiseman (snapoutofit@leo.edu), March 18, 1999.

Wiseman- there is no balance here.

DGI's are held to a much higher standard of proof here than are GI's.

Well-documented positive stories are generally dismissed.

Third-party hearsay negative stories are often accepted without question. (See the "No Water in Arizona Thread)

They are looking for reinforcement of their position. It's not really a forum for debate: It's a support group.

Even if you believe there will be disruption and are preparing (as I am), if you question the uneven treatment of DGI's as opposed to GI's, you are thrown in the DGI category. It's easier to discount you that way.

A few simple rules on this forum:

1. If it's good news, they are lying 2. But we don't have to prove that they are lying. 3. We know better than most people what is going to happen. 4. Generalized negative stories are essentially true. We don't need to scrutinize them in the manner that we approach positive stories. Just take them at face value. 5. If a DGI relates a positive experience or conversation that he had someone, he is lying. Ask for documentation or data. Then flame them. 6. If a GI relates a negative experience or conversation, accept it. No need for proof. 7. The sky isn't blue- and the clouds aren't white.

-- john (i'm@mywitsend.com), March 18, 1999.

Were we not all befuddled during our early stages of y2k awareness?

-- Watchful (seethesea@msn.com), March 18, 1999.

John - had a real nice sunset last night. Orange, red and yellow sky, purple and blue clouds. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), March 18, 1999.

Hello, john,

I'm afraid you have misconstrued what is happening here. You said: Wiseman- there is no balance here.

[When was this ever the stated or acknowleded purpose of this forum? See "About" (the TB2000 list): "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." Nor was it intended to be a debating platform. Discussion and exchange of diverse viewpoints merely makes it more interesting and educational---thereby more valuable to Y2K concerned individuals. I assume that unconcerned individuals have other things to do with their time.]

DGI's are held to a much higher standard of proof here than are GI's.

[Prove it! Flint said this much better. Refer to his appraisal]

Well-documented positive stories are generally dismissed.

[Which few are submitted are rigorously investigated, as are the far more numerous and salient negative reports.]

Third-party hearsay negative stories are often accepted without question. (See the "No Water in Arizona Thread)

[The post I read on AZ water was kicked around and challenged energetically. What thread are you talking about?]

They are looking for reinforcement of their position. It's not really a forum for debate: It's a support group.

[See "About TB2000"]

Even if you believe there will be disruption and are preparing (as I am), if you question the uneven treatment of DGI's as opposed to GI's, you are thrown in the DGI category. It's easier to discount you that way.

[I'm sure that, on your home planet, this is never the case. Other fora (not just Y2K) are far more culpable in this regard. GN-IBFI is a good example, as is csy2k.]

A few simple rules on this forum:

1. If it's good news, they are lying [Sometimes they are. That's why it is important to consider the source.]

2. But we don't have to prove that they are lying. [Much bandwidth is devoted to establishing the veracity of reports---both positive and negative.]

3. We know better than most people what is going to happen. [As it happens, this is frequently the case. Considering the breadth and depth of experience brought to this table, I value the concensus opinion more highly than that of reporters, politicians and businessmen.]

4. Generalized negative stories are essentially true. We don't need to scrutinize them in the manner that we approach positive stories. Just take them at face value. [That's why the first requirement for posting a report here is that it be accompanied by an URL or other substantiation.]

5. If a DGI relates a positive experience or conversation that he had someone, he is lying. Ask for documentation or data. Then flame them. [This is usenet. Wear a cup.]

6. If a GI relates a negative experience or conversation, accept it. No need for proof.[See #1, 2 and 4, above...learn to read.]

The sky isn't blue [In fact, that is sometimes the case]- and the clouds aren't white.[As it turns out, this also is sometimes true. Much depends on timing, context and circumstances...just like evaluation of any phenomenon or evidence.]

I'm sorry if the complexity of the dialectic perplexes or confounds you, john. Perhaps you should review your courses in logic, argumentation and epistemology.

Hallyx

"Whenever I find myself arguing for something with great passion, I can be certain I'm not convinced."---Hugh Prather

-- Hallyx (Hallyx@aol.com), March 18, 1999.

Leo,

It's not your job to convince people. Just provide them with initial information (if requested), point them to good info sources, encourage them to "do" their own homework, be available by "e" for coaching, if asked.

Arguing, is a waste of your precious time.

Helping others get ready once theyve shown personal and community initiative, is another matter.

Diane

See also thread...

What are the most compelling reports?

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

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), March 18, 1999.