Dear Diane : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Dear Diane,

I have been following this forum for what seems like forever and have participated upon occasion. I now feel compelled to butt in with my two cents worth regarding the issue of censoring and moderating. I wont try to razzle/dazzle you with multiple links and quotes and other fancy html graphics in order to make my point. This just comes from the heart and I sincerely hope you give it considerable thought before tearing into me with a suitable flame.

I have been totally enthralled by all of the threads  be they preparation related or the debate of news articles and issues. The foul language and attitude of some posters I accept as part of the package this forum offers. The personal attacks by all parties in the debate on one another has lent flavor and color to what would otherwise be pretty dry material. As I just finished telling my husband, I am neither the optimist (read polly) that he is, nor am I the pessimist (his word  paranoid)(read doomer) that his son is  I fall somewhere in-between. I very much appreciate the whole picture that this forum presents on issues. I read the links, follow the debate, study the various view points  and then arrive at my own conclusions.


Mr. Decker and Mr. Flint have NOT convinced me that Y2K will only be a bump in the road. Mr. Milne has not convinced me it will be TEOTWAWKI. Al-D has not induced me to excessive drinking. The trolls are neither irritating or amusing  they just are.

You, however, have convinced me that your job description needs some serious major surgery or at the very least should be read to you prior to any post you make. By and large, the most viscious posts and personal attacks have come when YOU attempt to control the scene. It is your posts about taking votes to delete or chasing off trolls or having the SYSOPS post rules that has everyone in an uproar. OT threads come and go  but your repeated attempts to limit them just make matters worse. It is you, Miss Squire, that not only continues to stir this messy smelly pot  but I think that you just might be responsible for chasing away some of the most talented folks on this forum. And all because you got appointed (volunteered? Drafted? Selected?) as a moderator and seem to have an innate compulsion to control. Im sorry  thats harsh, but thats the impression I have of you.

Im not sure of all the ins and outs of what a forum moderator should do  but if I were writing the rules, here is what they would include:

1. Provide links to any and all news articles covering Y2K  good, bad or ugly that you come across.

2. By all means, provide commentary that is relevant to the topic  but refrain from picking sides or flaming individuals.

3. Let me repeat that  as it is the most important rule of all.DO NOT FLAME POSTERS. That is not your job as moderator. If you enjoy taking arguments to the personal level  then step aside as a moderator and join the ranks.

4. A moderator should attempt to keep folks on topic GENTLY. If you must, learn how to steer folks back onto the topic of the thread without causing a scene. Dont make it personal.

5. Remember  this is the internet, it is a place where folks gather to vent their daily frustrations, offer assistance and exchange opinions. We come from all different walks of life and backgrounds. Most of us do not lend well to being put into a convenient category, nor do we label well.

6. Lighten up. Have some fun. This forum has brought us together to discuss and learn about the most serious event of our lifetimes. Think about it. We found this forum for a reason  and as long as we are here, we might as well enjoy what little we can while we are learning.

Now Diane  I know this seems like I am picking on you  but you are the most public of the moderators. Please take this message to your other cohorts at your next gathering of forum moderators and discuss it at length. Maybe it will help to shed some light on this heavy burden you have chosen to carry.

EVERYONE ELSE.please do not take this post as an open invitation to flame Diane into smithereens. If you have some constructive advice to give her regarding how she should approach this new calling, then by all means offer it. I would prefer that this thread not be another debate (debaucle) on the issue of censuring and am asking that you refrain from using it as a platform.

(of course, this is a free country, an open forum and everyone is entitled to say whatever they want.)


-- justme (, June 29, 1999


Let justme and Diane do their battling in the Yourdon mudwrestling pit! Yes!!!

-- King of Spain (, June 29, 1999.

puleeze missy diane, pleeze' don,t send ole, al-d to de briar patch. i know you be dea massu, i know this fo-um, be fo W right folks only. please take dat sheet-off, yu beez a scarrin me.why yu so angry??

-- al-d. (CATT@ZIANET.COM), June 29, 1999.

Have you tried the tuna/sparrow sandwiches.

They're really quite good.

-- Jim Smith (, June 30, 1999.

My faith is restored welcome back al-d

-- Daryll (, June 30, 1999.

Personally, I think "moderators" should first make the commitment not to censor. Second, I think they should identify themselves (like Diane.) Third, I think the key to a more civil forum is leadership by example. The moderators should model and gently encourage civil behavior. Gratuitious comments (like Spain's fascination with mud wrestling) should chided. And if the moderators were to stay neutral on issues, it would do wonders for their credibility. When I see Diane weigh in against Andy or Will Continue for boorish behavior, I'll publically thank her. Oh, and stop using language like "trolling" that has a definite negative connotation primarily directed at optimists.

I am willing to give the current moderators a chance to operate in a more fair and even handed manner. I'll be honest and say that I am skeptical. Between BD and Diane, they have over 5000 posts on this forum... with a distinct point of view. They may be able to move this forum into a more civil and productive direction... or it may be more of the same.

We'll see.


-- Mr. Decker (, June 30, 1999.

Smoking junk is everyone's privilege including Diane's. If you see junk smoke it to hearts content. Whatever Diane's role is as a moderator doesn't preclude her opinions expressed here. If you have a beef about a moderator's censoring, show me. Otherwise your bitching about Diane's bitching is exactly the bitching you're trying to protect. Got it?

-- Carlos (, June 30, 1999.


I am so moved by your willingness to "give the current moderators a CHANCE to operate in a more fair and even handed (sic) manner" that I could just crap. Who in the hell are YOU? Who are you to even dare to try to dictate TB2000 policy? Dictate at DeBunkys. Dictate at Fibbys (sorry Biffys). Strech at home but not here. I've defended your posts but this effort sucks.

-- Carlos (, June 30, 1999.

Who on earth would count all the posts that somebody makes? Does anal retentive have a hyphen?

-- bean (, June 30, 1999.


I find the threat of censorship appalling... whether I have been censored or not. It is just my opinion, but I'd prefer a neutral moderator who simply encourages good discourse. Diane can speak her piece on any subject, but when it becomes apparent she has a definitive agenda... it impacts my confidence in her ability to address forum issues with impartiality. If you were a African- American man and heard the presiding judge telling a racial joke, would you be concerned? Or would you simply believe he could put aside his personal feelings and judge your fairly?

There are people I respect on this forum who I also disagree strongly with. Unfortunately, none of them seem to sitting in the judge's chairs.


-- Mr. Decker (, June 30, 1999.

The top 20 posters are listed on the statistics page of this forum.


-- Mr. Decker (, June 30, 1999.

"As a group were ALL--Moderators and Sysop(s)--trying different ways to encourage the trolls to leave. A very few [] bracket warning/ comments were made quite early on, then stopped. We decided on a different strategy... letting you hang yourselves... by your own words."

Lest you think our moderators do not have an agenda.


-- Mr. Decker (, June 30, 1999.

thank,s mr. decker, i wonder' how many, are the under the sheet-gang? why are me-me,s so mean?? they put on the sheet, & delete,delete. cliquety clack--cliquety clack, if you ain,t in you gotta get back.

-- a.r.d. (dogs@ZIANET.COM), June 30, 1999.

decker looses his cool

-- double (, June 30, 1999.

Decker, your blatant hypocrisy appalls even OutingsR. You have shown disdain for and disgust with this forum, its founder and its "pessimistic" participants from the very beginning, and have attracted personal attacks as efficiently and easily as a lightning rod. Here's a small sampling of your belittling words --

On March 2, 1999, at, you said --

...By the way, I have not bothered to visit Mr. Yourdon's forum. Quite frankly, the Y2K sites I have visited where there are public fora the topics tends toward "how to live off the grid, preserve foods and repel boarders." This board [Gary North is a Big Fat Idiot] has been one of the few places the economic and technical issues have been raised... although at higher decibal levels, from time to time.

If you might suggest another area where reasonable people exchange ideas, I am willing to visit and share my ideas and learn from others. Of course, I do plan to continue visiting here. Despite the occasional outbursts, tantrums and fits... there are posts worth reading.

(end cut & paste)

Apparently, you weren't too impressed by that board either. Then soon after you wrote on BFI at --

I read the Yourdon forum (for the first time) and added a few posts. Some of the responses were actually quite good. Some were idiotic. A few suggested I was preparing the mount an assault myself. Of course, I let everyone know I am out of the "gun for hire" business (laughter). The rather disconcerting thing was how earnest everyone was. They really seem to believe the world is ending. I hope this is not a mainstream thing.

(end of cut & paste)

Your tut-tutting and patronizing attitude come through loud and clear. Then at midday yesterday you posted this on Der Boonkah --

Who wants to "end" the TB forum? It doesn't matter a bit whether the forum exists or not. The regulars on TB 2000, including the censors, have a very specific view... unlike 98% of the population (and the real professional IT community). "The code is broken" and "we started too late." Need I say more? I have posted on TB 2000 to offer an alternative to these bean and rice storing mentality. It has not done much good.

Card carrying members of the paranoid fringe, the serious pessimists see gov't agents behind every tree. I've been accused of being on the gov't payroll a dozen times. (laughter) I suppose they feel validated when they can concoct a story about people "out to destroy the forum."

Paul Milne and company are busy hiding from enemies created in their own imagination.

What concocted story are you talking about? The one where Cherri and friends discuss taking over and defusing this forum? We can cut and paste the original posts and URLs again if you want.

You came sweeping into this forum, looking down your nose, with the sole intention of showing us the error of our ways. Most of us didn't listen. Well naughty old us! You have chosen to mock and deride at every turn and now you complain because people haven't been nice to you. They're not nice to you because you haven't earned their respect or affection, Decker. You should have learned how to earn such rewards from your superior officers in the Navy. I'm sure there were a few good ones.

You have learned nothing from this forum, Decker, because you didn't come here to learn, you came to lecture.

-- OutingsR (us@here.yar), June 30, 1999.

"justme" you wouldn't be "finally at home" across the border would you? If you are who I think you are, you've been missed. Our "battle" is still legendary. :-)

-- Gayla (, June 30, 1999.


Mellow, accomodating mush won't get it done this time. You challenged the right of a moderator to be a contributer also. Who would you pick to take her place? Who would you pick to silence instead of her? You're blowing it Decker. Your carefully crafted image universal tolerance and understanding and (shall I say it?) moderation is getting swallowed in this argument. Quit now.

-- Carlos (, June 30, 1999.


So you would like this to become another "bash Decker" thread? Why not stay on topic and address the issue? Decker has raised some good points here. Why not address the substance of the argument instead of going Hardliner?

I personally find Decker's contributions to be some of the best on the board. But it becomes quite a boring place when every rational or reasonable person on the board is continually subjected to mindless personal attacks (such as Flint). And the "who's he working for" mantra which Diane (a moderator!) has taken to unceasingly chanting is frankly so ridiculous it belies belief.

Why can't we all just stay on topic and leave our personal grudges by the wayside? Can't this board become a place of civilized discourse, not vengeful and unreasoning personal attacks? Couldn't we all work together toward an Idea of sensible, sane discussion?

-- Lurkin' (, June 30, 1999.

justme ( ,

Thank you for the from the heart advice. If sincere.

Youll excuse me if I suspect youre a De Bunker. And do excuse me for jumping to conclusions if Im wrong. (Doubt it).

At any rate... from my heart then...

This is an all volunteer Moderator team... quite large actually. None of us is Ed Yourdon... nor do we try to be. A few of us were willing to go public, most werent because of the targeted troll attacks. Perhaps you can see why now? I doubt that will change any time soon. Although Decker professes to be a gentleman... he appears to be an illusion.

Cest la vie. Were all posters first... including me. Moderators second.

When weve wanted advice... weve asked for it... over and over and over again. And weve received great advice. There are now suggested guidelines for posting.

And Decker... Im personally NOT neutral on Y2K, the local, national or international situation or the need for preparations. Neither was Ed.

Nuf said.

Diane, just me

-- Diane J. Squire (, June 30, 1999.

Lurkin': It didn't work for Rodney King, I don't think its going to work for you, dude.

-- King of Spain (, June 30, 1999.

Well, King of Spain, you can keep trying to drag everyone down into the mud pit with you, but I think most here prefer to remain on somewhat higher ground.

-- Lurkin' (, June 30, 1999.

"Youll excuse me if I 'suspect' youre a De Bunker. And do excuse me for jumping to conclusions if Im wrong. (Doubt it)."

My God, Diane! The woman makes a plain heartfelt appeal, says she loves this forum, and you immediately accuse her of coming from Debunking Y2K (as if posting to other fora was in itself some kind of shady criminal act!).

Diane, you are clearly NOT neutral and if you have any capacity for self-honesty you will voluntarily relinquish the role of "moderator."

-- Stunning (wow@can't even believe.this), June 30, 1999.

Mutha Nachu,

As I've recommended, several times, and as is openly linked at the bottom of the top level web-page, read Phil Greenspuns book on how this MIT Forum software works, that Ed choose to start the forum on. And do recommend that Super Polly read it too. Then he might not assume.

Philip and Alex's Guide to Web Publishing< /a>

Its an open book. Do your homework.


-- Diane J. Squire (, June 30, 1999.


It's been a very long day. And right now my mood is not "neutral." Why would you expect it to be? About this or Y2K?

justme says...

"Now Diane  I know this seems like I am picking on you  but you are the most public of the moderators."

Well yes, it DOES rather seem that way.

"I would prefer that this thread not be another debate (debaucle) on the issue of censuring and am asking that you refrain from using it as a platform."

And then justme "qualifies" that statement with...

(of course, this is a free country, an open forum and everyone is entitled to say whatever they want.)

Sorry, but it appears, to me, to be an open invitation to flame.

Que sera.

Perhaps tomorrow her words will seem different. Or not.


-- Diane J. Squire (, June 30, 1999.

Hint: Read Chapter three Mutha. It's not a date bound issue.

-- Diane J. Squire (, June 30, 1999.

I stand opposed to this censorship... but make it clear this is a member's only club... and I will take my leave.

Fair enough?


-- Mr. Decker (, June 29, 1999.

[That's once.]

I'll leave. How's that for an incentive? (laughter)


-- Mr. Decker (, June 30, 1999

[That's twice.]

You know that joke, KC?


Miss Piggy's Fourth Law: "Never try to eat more than you can lift."

-- (, June 30, 1999.

Stunning, in regard to Diane's response to Lurkin', you say, ". . . The woman makes a plain heartfelt appeal, says she loves this forum, and you immediately accuse her. . . ."

Would you please show me where Lurkin' indicates any gender? I fear you are not quite as objective as you might wish to appear.

-- Old Git (, June 30, 1999.

I'm curious as to who Mr. Decker would like to see as moderators.

-- Unc D (, June 30, 1999.

Dear Old Git,

Please re-read the post. 'justme' refer's to a husband and his son.

Of course, 'justme' could be a partner in a homosexual relationship. There is nothing wrong with that in my book.

But, in society, when one refer's to one's husband, one is more commonly thought of as a wife. Wife is the term for the female in a marriage, as in 'man and wife.'

I never really liked that line in the marriage vows and think it should be 'husband and wife' instead. 'Man and wife' sounds demeaning to the woman and to me is not a great way to start a marriage for the woman who will shortly carry most of the load. Again, not fair. It just is. Fortunately, most women are strong enough to handle that!

-- J (, June 30, 1999.

Sorry, I thought we were referring to Lurkin', not Justme. Happens, especially when you're an

-- Old Git (, June 30, 1999.

Dear Diane,

I have been reading the forum since fall. Your posts have been some of the most informative I've read. You have diligently researched this subject and kept us aware of on-going developments with a generosity of spirit that I deeply appreciate. You, along with many others, have brought substance to this forum. I am sorry tht someone has chosen to make you the focal point for an attack. Please do not be disheartened.

-- Jean (, June 30, 1999.

Dear moderator,s, please stop mis-using my name. i placed an ON TOPIC POST this morning. WHY did you delete it so QUICKLY? I THINK I KNOW WHO THE BIG SPOONER IS.---WHY DOES THE JIM JONES MENTALLITY, COME TO MIND? THERE IS A PATTERN HERE. TALK ABOUT A WEB.

-- al-d. (, June 30, 1999.

al-d--go to de bunky

-- al (, June 30, 1999.

I'm curious as to who Mr. Decker would like to see as moderators.

-- Unc D (, June 30, 1999.

I think Dave Walden would make an excellent host. In fact, I'd try to find a balance of optimists and pessimists. The folks who earn my vote would swear off censorship and promote good manners. Perhaps you'd consider the job, Unc?


-- Mr. Decker (, June 30, 1999.

Oh crap, don't say that about me, Ray will never let me live it down. Then will come some sort of inquisition, or worse, an audit.

But I will say thanks for the kind thought, but it has taken me quite a while to get a handle on the "Why don't you try to take over the world" voices as it is.


-- Unc D (, June 30, 1999.

Whew  long day. Heres to catching up

Gayla  nope Im justme  not someone else. Sorry.

Lurkin  right on target  youve got it! (reference your first post on this thread)

Diane  yes I am being sincere. I am not a debunker. I applaud the formal guidelines. I welcome your comments, opinions and thoughts on the post topics. Please continue to march on in this arena. All I ever asked (very long-winded and badly) was that as a moderator  you refrain from jumping into the personality bashes. I have read the most recent posts and you are doing swell. Thanks. (in fact  there is a noticable difference in the tone of the posts today  from everyone) ps. Debated about adding that qualifier to my original post  because it did sound bad  but I in no way wanted to sound like a censorguess I flubbed that one. Apologies. Peace?

J.  thanks (I think) LOL

Jean  will you be my editor? Very well said.

All others - thanks for the input

-- justme (, June 30, 1999.

Perhaps I am an old foogy but I find the flaming and four language to be detracting from the purpose of this board. I came here looking for help in preparing for Y2K and in caring for 2 small little girls during what, I am afraid could be hard times. I have found a lot of help here, much of it from Diane and Old Git. I do not give my friends the URL of this board because I know they would all be turned off by the foul language and flaming. Why can't you all just be civil?

-- Homeschooling Grandmother (, June 30, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ