After screwing around with some pseudonyms, I'm going with the real name (and fake email).

Just to update the readers. I posted come conerns about y2k including some about Cornell under a pseudonym "Dave Cornell" and "Dave". Robin (who I've actually met) enthusiastically called called me to task. So here they are.

(1) Saying you're not calling me a liar is calling me a liar.

(2) PeopleSoft is certainly part of Cornell's y2k plan to the extent that it replaces remediation. Forget what the web site says.

(3) The opinion of a CEO from a 50-hacker consulting company that is fully involved in y2k fixes does indeed mean alot given the circles he runs around in for 14 hours a day.

(4) The story of the Cornell enconomist was simply to convey that someone who ought to at least be interested hadn't gotten to step one.

(5) The representative from the FDIC (admittedly in November) was indeed VERY pessimistic. The fact that he had just finished an upbeat presentation is what makes it interesting. the fact that he would be honest to a total stranger when away from the microphone is typical of this problem -- people are dying to vent their frustrations.

(6) The personal experience with a 2 day fiasco at a 1200 room hotel was indeed a y2k remediation problem. Why do I know? I asked.

These were all simple anecdotes to convey some of the spookier components of this problem that I have experienced Robin, you are certainly welcome to question me, but you'll have a tough time finding a motive beyond simply trying to barter information where normal channels do not exist.

Best Regards Dave Collum Out-of-the-Closet Lurker

PS-I would be happy to here from other Cornell people. You know how to find me.

-- Dave Collum (aaa@aaa.com), May 24, 1999

Answers

Hi Dave,

Glad you feel comfortable enough to use your real name. I can't imagine you getting into any trouble from Cornell's administration for posting here. After all, an institution of higher learning has to promote, or at least tolerate, freedom of speach in order to foster an environment for academic inquiry. If anyone in the Administration tried to squelch you then the University would end up looking pretty hypocritical whenever someone representing it talked about the necessity of maintaining an environment that fosters free inquiry. Getting to some of your points:

(1) Saying you're not calling me a liar is calling me a liar.

I am not calling you a liar! Are you calling me a liar? . I have questioned your interpretation of the facts. Not your integrity. The closest I've come to calling you a liar is saying that your discussion with the FDIC representative didn't sound authentic. It is hard to believe he would come right out and say to a perfect stranger that the other representatives would lie to cover up the problem. Sometimes misunderstandings occur when people talk to each other. He could have said something that you interpreted in a way that wasn't quite what he meant. For example, perhaps you asked him if he thought the others would lie to cover up the problem. I could picture him saying "I wouldn't rule it out", or "Anything is possible", or "I'd rather not say". All of these are noncommital answers which could be interpreted, especially by someone with a pessimistic outlook, as a declaration that the others would lie.

I would not consider such a misinterpretation, if indeed that is what happened, to be lying on your part. Reading between the lines is not unusual and it is a well-known principal of psychology that people interpret ambiguous evidence as supportive of their pre-conceived notions. This doesn't mean you are lying. It just means you are human.

(2) PeopleSoft is certainly part of Cornell's y2k plan to the extent that it replaces remediation. Forget what the web site says.

Are you saying that what is said on the web site is a lie? Are you saying that it misrepresents Cornell's y2k readiness status? I tend to believe it is the most accurate information available of Cornell's status. Certainly more accurate than your claim that Cornell will be toasted because they can't implement People Soft on time.

(3) The opinion of a CEO from a 50-hacker consulting company that is fully involved in y2k fixes does indeed mean alot given the circles he runs around in for 14 hours a day.

It is hared to know how much weight to put into what he says. Does he hang out with executives in the electric utility industry? Does he hang out with those involved in y2k remediation for those industries? Do you know what utility companies they work for? And in what capacity do they work for those cmpanies? Most importantly, how long ago did he make his statements? What was considered true 6 months ago is very outdated material now.

) The story of the Cornell enconomist was simply to convey that someone who ought to at least be interested hadn't gotten to step one.

I can buy that. It sure seemed to me that you were using the story to show how someone who is brilliant was able to conclude that we were in for some very big problems. It looked like you were using his brilliance as a way to make your conclusions look more justified. But I obviously misinterpreted your intentions because of my mindframe. As I said before, people often misinterpret ambiguous evidence, depending on the mindset they carry into the conversation. (See the rebuttal to point 1)

Point 5) Already covered in rebuttal to point 1.

(6) The personal experience with a 2 day fiasco at a 1200 room hotel was indeed a y2k remediation problem. Why do I know? I asked.

I can easily believe this. I am not surprised that it took them two days to sort out the fiasco. This falls well within the Gartner Group's estimate that 90% of all critical system failures will be repaired within two days.

Again, I don't think I attributed any particular motive to you. I said that you were wrong, not sinister.

Best regards (I hope Mr. Decker doesn't have a copyright on that line :-),

Robin Messing

-- Robin S. Messing (rsm7@cornell.edu), May 24, 1999.

Robin,

No, decker usually closes with,

Regards,

Mr. Decker the Pompous Ass

-- Mr. Heckler (1@2.3), May 24, 1999.