I don't mean to be a whacko conspiracy nut.... but I was thinking.. Wouldn't it be convenient for our government if there was a widespread computer virus right around the end of the first quarter of 1999 ? Just about the time that some government (here and abroad) agencies and corporations' fiscal year was about to turn over... just about the time that the US gov't agencies have a major deadline (March 31,1999) for Y2K compliance. That would provide an excellent cover for any Y2K problems and could be brushed off as the work of some demented virus writer. Imagine that ! Just 5 days before the quarterly rollover, "Melissa" starts... and then "Papa" shows up - 5 days before the US gov't agencies deadline.

And it also is a mutating macro virus. So it is harder to spot and stop. I can hear it now, Example excuse: "Due to the damage done by the recent computer viruses, we've been unable to compile all of the recent compliance data." I know this idea may sound nuts... but really... to what extent is our gov't willing to go to bury the Y2K threat. They have been discounting every Y2K related accident so far. Peachbottom : Ooops human error - typed in the wrong date GIVE ME A BREAK! - These scientists are running tests on a NUKE and they don't double check every entry - every step - every procedure ?? NJ Social Services: Oooops human error - typed in the wrong date GIVE ME A BREAK !

It baffles me that the spin meisters are taking this " No big deal - don't worry - don't prepare" attitude.

-- Tom Quinn (tquinn@pa-posse.com), March 31, 1999

Answers

You're stretching the envelope just a bit too far there Tom........

Any computer literate person would not be fooled by such a tactic as viurses like Melissa simply don't affect Y2K.

Besides, the government agencies and many companies are doing just fine by redefining "mission critical" and extending the completion date. The completion date will shift to June 30th, leaving 6 full months for testing.

I kind of miss the old mantra though..........'will be finished renovating our systems by December 31st, 1998 leaving one full year for testing.

But the virus excuse seems to be just too much of a stretch IMIHYBO (In My Incredibly Humble Yet Brilliant Opinion).

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), March 31, 1999.

Come on Tom...dont be silly!

Young Prodigy

-- Young Prodigy (eheh?@canada.com), March 31, 1999.

Hey guys... It was just a thought. We are in the presence of greatness. Clinton has developed the most amazing propaganda spin machine in history. Worse things have been perpetrated in his "Wag the Dog" life.

-- Tom Quinn (tquinn@pa-posse.com), March 31, 1999.

Na, Melissa doesn't do any real damage. Now if it started zaping hard drives you could be on to something. The day is still young though. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), March 31, 1999.

Aw, you're just paranoid ! The government wouldn't DO that. Well, only if it would work.

Got paranoia?

-- Sue (deco100@aol.com), March 31, 1999.

Hi, Craig! Long time, no see.

-- Lisa (lisa@awl.bidness), March 31, 1999.

>I don't mean to be a whacko conspiracy nut.... but I was thinking.. Wouldn't it be convenient

One of the characteristics of conspiracy-thinking is convenience.

Do you want convenience, or do you want factually-supportable reality-based verifiable thinking?

-- No Spam Please (No_Spam_Please@anon_ymous.com), March 31, 1999.

Some Factually-supportable reality based verifiable thinking would lead any IT systems manager to realize that the US public is being fed a line of garbage with regard to the reality of the Y2K situation. If they are willing to mislead our nation like this, I simply cannot put anything past them. Yes... maybe I'm getting a little paranoid... "Are you still paranoid if they really are after you ??" LOL

-- Tom Quinn (tquinn@pa-posse.com), March 31, 1999.

I'm with you Tom--My theory is, if I would think of and consider something like that, then why wouldn't someone else? Everyone, you are know bigwigs in the gov. Someone says, "We have GOT to stall--our deadline is coming up fast and we have a ways to go. Give me some ideas peaople." I think there are some who are just wacky enough to spread a relatively harmless but frustrating virus and then balme it for any problems. I would consider the idea if I knew someone who could pull it off, and the gov. has people who can pull it off. So, why not? Let's just see how compliant everyone is today, hmmmm?

-- GI's Daughter (GIsDaughter@school.com), March 31, 1999.

My poor Mom is wincing at home right now--sorry about the spelling, guys--it's not my fault, it's this nasty computer lab keyboard. :) (Or could it be---da-dummmmmm---Y2K? Maybe I'm having a quarterly roll-over problem?)

-- GI's Daughter (GIsDaughter@school.com), March 31, 1999.