Hot Link

Ratcliffe continues to demonstrate that he's out of his depth.

-- Dan Webster (dan_webster@flashmail.com), June 03, 1999

Answers

* * * 19990603 Thursday

DW:

... as the audience demonstrates by ballot ( MR-40 to JW-17 ) the SAME!!... *sigh*...

Regards, Bob Mangus

* * *

FINAL VOTE

The audience submitted written ballots.

Question 1: Which debater's arugment was the most convincing?

Vote: MR 40 versus JW 17.

Question 2: Did this debate change your views on the outcome of Y2K?

Vote: Yes 9 versus 48 no.

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus@hotmail.com), June 03, 1999.

Skimming the linked summary, seems that all the arguing boils down to:

Serious recession? Will be/Won't be.

Cascading failures? Possible/Impossible.

Serious infrastructure problems? Probable/Improbable.

U.S. affected by disruption overseas? Certainly/No way.

Since I can't affect those outcomes, the best I can do is do what I can to be ready for whatever, meanwhile hoping it's not too bad.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), June 04, 1999.

Ratcliffe SPANKED John W. !!!

Go Mitch! Well done! time for common sense to prevail.

-- (.`.`@.`.`), June 04, 1999.

The banks are not at risks because of their IT but because of their portfolios.

This is the point that the media will not talk about. Loan losses? Try to pin that one on the fear-mongers. This is a real danger, folks.

-- Codejockey (codejockey99@yahoo.com), June 04, 1999.