A Word To Big Dog about Biffy and Debunkie

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Big Dog:

You seem to have imagined some hidden conspiracy on mine and Decker's part. (Funny you should link us together; I don't think we've ever corresponded.)

If it were a hidden conspiracy, I would never have posted the links to Biffy and the Debunking Y2K Webboard here.

Nor am I the least bit ashamed for you to go over there and read anything that I've written.

Anything that I've said over there, I will be glad to repeat here, too.

Now that THAT'S out of the way, answer a question: How come nothin' happened on April 1st?

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 08, 1999


Submit proof that nothing happened on April 1st. Come on now every company- everywhere! I know my comp. is having tremendous problems w/payroll,expense accts.,401k, shipping ,and production. Yes I do know first hand and I know its remediation related. Look its not up to us to prove this to you. If you don't beleive it COULD happen then LEAVE but if you want to be swayed, then quite being so smug! Ya know Birmingham ain't that great and I bet they come knocking down your door real quick, know what i mean?

-- Sweet as sugar cake (dontbeanidiot@yahoo.com), May 08, 1999.

Poole -- I never said it was hidden, just that most of the regulars here needed a reminder about your real purpose. I know you're proud of your efforts to destroy this forum and prevent people from preparing. You will be ashamed next year if you have any conscience.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), May 08, 1999.

Mr. Poole,

I find it odd that we have never actually spoken. I am pleased to make your acquaintance, at least electronically (no pun intended). Our "connection" may have happened when a reader suggested that 97% of what you say is false. I disagreed, but more on principle than really knowing the percentage. From then on, it has become "Darth" Poole and "Darth" Decker.

You might find my last post, more of a question, of interest. I really want to know what people think will be our economic status next year. I realize the question will generate "guesstimates," but so far the answers have been interesting. Some predict that Y2K will have a greater impact than any event in U.S. history including our Civil War and the Great Depression. In fact, the some scenarios combine the worst effects of both. Feel free to weigh in.

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), May 08, 1999.

MR DOUBLE DECKER, I thought you were tired and going to sleep IS THIS THE 3RD SHIFT DECKER POSTING NOW????

-- Johnny (jljtm@bellsouth.net), May 08, 1999.

Mr. Poo (a salute to you and your playmates at Debunkie who call Ed Yourdung and the forumites Turds) -- You said in your post: "Nor am I the least bit ashamed for you to go over there and read anything that I've written." So you won't mind if I reproduce one of your Debunkie posts.

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb237006&MyNum=9 24493017&P=Yes&TL=924466918

Debunking Y2k webboard

Re: Too Funny!! Check out Dr Dobb's Review of Your-Done-For Sunday, 18-Apr-1999 23:36:57 writes:


I've been trying, via email, to get the Dobbs gang interested in Y2K (and Yourdon in particular) for some time. They've ignored it (just as I did until this year) because they just didn't think it was that big of an issue.

They've only gotten involved now (as have I) because they're tired of the False Authority Syndrome (ala Rob Rosenberger) and misinformation mongering that pervades the whole mad circus. They're tired of uninformed people being frightened by other uninformed people.

Those of us who came up in PCs know all about bugs. Geoff Chappel tried valiantly to warn the public about a serious bug in the WFWG file system (it could cause significant data corruption at random); he told me later that no none cared, so he dropped it.

George Smith and I tried to warn people about the "Cruel Boot" syndrome, under which DOS 5-7 would hang tight -- even when booted from diskette! -- if there was a certain invalid entry in the partition table. No one cared (Microsoft didn't even bother to address the bug until FAT32 came along).

(Shoot, if I run Netscape 4.06 more than a few times between reboots, Windows crashes and panics. That's far more annoying to me than a mythical bug in a fraction of the country's installed computer base.)

The general public is finally getting the message, and the Y2K Circus is becoming the laughingstock that it should have been two years ago.

(Am I the only one who considers it significant that Art Bell gives Y2K coverage right along with UFO sightings and the paranormal? The average American draws a conclusion from this -- but not that desired by those selling wheat and generators.)

The recent fooforaw over Beach and his "Secondary Clocks" -- which merely served as a litmus test to expose the ignorance of ANYONE who agreed with him -- is a perfect example of the level of "rational analysis" that supports Y2K thinking.

But here's my prediction: I'm not quite as sanguine about this thing finally coming to an end. What will happen is that the True Blue Y2K Doom and Gloomers will simply withdraw further and further into their shells ("Fine! We tried to warn you! We wipe the dust from our feet!"), only to emerge (red-faced) after, say, mid-January of next year.

-- Stephen (they can't say I didn't try to warn them, though ...) http://www.wwjd.net/smpoole

Stephen M. Poole, CET

-- OutingsR (us@here.yar), May 08, 1999.

Big Dog,

I have absolutely no desire to "destroy" this forum. I enjoy some of the posts here, even when I disagree with the premise behind them. Old Git is one of my favorites.

I simply address that which I consider to be bad information.


You've been doing it longer than I have, so I'd have to be Darth II.

(Return of the Darth?)

I'll take a look at the economics question. Take care ...

sweet as sugar cake,

Sorry to hear you're having problems.

The "proof" that you seek is all around you: the economy continues to roar; countless companies and government agencies have successfully made the transition into their FY's 2000.

IF the premise upon which Y2K Disruption was based was correct, we should be seeing widespread (that's the operative word: "widespread") failures by now. We aren't. Sure, there are some problems, but thus far, there have been no bank runs, stock market crashes, or millions of panicked Americans fleeing the cities -- all of which were predicted in 1997 and 1998.

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 08, 1999.


I thought I had posted that over here; thanks!

That's something that everyone here needs to read.

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 08, 1999.

NEWS ABOUT BUSINESS Y2K READINESS TOO OPTIMISTIC May 7, 1999 CNET News reported today: "Large U.S. corporations' optimism about their Year 2000 computer compliance may be unrealistic, according to a study released todayThe findings led Triaxsys analyst and author of the study Steve Hock to conclude that although many companies have made major progress in their Y2K efforts, many are not spending enough to complete the projects by January 1, 2000." Using information reported to the Securities and Exchange Commission, Hock was quoted as saying, "There are a significant number of companies that have a tremendous amount of work to do and they might not make it."

Steve, you know this stuff is only just trickling out I am relating to you what is happening in a Fortune 100 company.

I really don't understand why I am feeling the urge to pull you over but just come on man! We all feel like there are tough times acomin quit makin' newbies feel like its all AOAY!

-- sweetassugarcake (sweetassugarcake@yahoo.com), May 08, 1999.

I guess Steve posted and went to bed (it's 2 eastern), or either the 3rd shift didn't show up either way a coward hits and runs.

-- Johnny (jljtm@bellsouth.net), May 08, 1999.


Hock is another one who's examining how much money a corporation has spent to determine where they're at in their remediation efforts. That's simply not a valid metric.

Among the companies showing least progress as measured by percentage of total budget spent (emphasis mine) are 3Com Corporation (7%), Tele-Communications Inc. (10%), Sun Microsystems Inc. (14%), Union Carbide Corp. (20%), and ConAgra Inc. (26%).

The 3Com example is interesting, because 3Com has stated publicly that they're ready for Year 2000. The reason why they didn't spend the budgeted amount is because they didn't need to.

Simply put, I do not agree with his premise: that you can measure success by the amount of money spent. I know of too many companies who are doing fine, and who've only spent a fraction of that originally budgeted, because they did what the their Remediation Consultants apparently never thought of: replace the old system and software with a new PC-based network running a new software package.

I can't specifically speak to the other companies named -- perhaps some of them are behind in their work. But I know for a fact, for example, that my bank fixed their problem just as I described: with a new computer system and software, and the amount spent was less than that originally budgeted.

They're DONE and they're READY.

-- Stephen M. Poole, CET (smpoole7@bellsouth.net), May 08, 1999.

Yo, poo-poo, your posts at der boonkah are getting painfully short. Afraid you might say something you don't want us Yourdung Turds to read? "Heh." Is that all you can say about the thread on Ed being called to give testimony at the Senate hearing? What -- you thought they were gonna call YOU? Heh. (Laughter)

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb237006&MyNum=9 26146478&P=No&TL=926146478


Saturday, 08-May-1999 02:54:38 writes:


Stephen Poole

-- OutingsR (us@here.yar), May 08, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ