"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."

--Diane Squire

If I might make a simple suggestion. Change the forum to "Y2K preparation only." State clearly that 1) forum moderators have concluded Y2K will be a catastrophic event; 2) continued discussion about the potential impacts of Y2K is not relevant given this conclusion; 3) the short amount of time left for adequate preparation requires all posts to be on topic.

Why try different ways to encourage "trolls" (however the moderators define the slippery term) to leave? Why not just revoke Yourdon's initial "come one, come all" invitation and replace it with a clear statement that this forum is ONLY for Y2K preparation.

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

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999

Answers

MAKING MONEY? now that is funny
Tuesday, 29-Jun-1999 18:59:11

209.170.208.28 writes:

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb237006&MyNum= 930697151&P=Yes&TL=930674169

Doc been absent of late. Been sparing with them MIT types over hosting TB2000 ya know. Getting nowhere as one might figure. Phil had the best comeback so far,,,,"don't sweat it, it will all be over by January" not a direct quote but close.

MIT geeks now "doing something" at least I naively hope, right. Doing what? getting TB2000 off taxpayer supported information infrastructure over at MIT for starters. I got a problem with a place where the players condone the impending deaths of BILLIONS of our fellow humans, us too I am told, us dumbasses the Pollys. But then again, these people think this event is preparable. I say you need to think-LYE- TRENCHES-SURGICAL MASKS, or your are stroking yourself. Forget the barrels and seeds, yur gunna need backhoes folks.

But then again, most claim they are "middle-of-the-road" and don't expect Milne to happen. That is why they all were in such a fever debunking the Soybeanhead's Sales Letter, I guess. INSANITY, that is Y2k in a "nut"shell.

Speaking of money....Phil's HTML book is doing swimmingly well. #297 at Amazon as of today. Tom Clancy's latest "Rainbow Six" checks in at #1,981. Even the King of All Media, Howard Stern, can only muster spot 2,533 with his "Private Parts". No MIT, no problem here, none, now go back to sleep. Most Bibles I checked are in the #'s 5,000 or higher.

Only types higher than Phil are Oprah and her guests with their comic- books.

Y2k is just the latest game by a bunch of people who have been around since 1994 running all manner of scams on the constant flowing newbies from AOL. Took even Ed a little time to see the Potential, eh problem I mean. Jackweeds at TB2000 think Ed just forgot he programmed alot of this crap back in the 70's. Same for Bory and the rest of the profiteers. Y2k? please. Nice to see Ed true to form and Flipping again, what a freaking sorry-sack of s--- this guy is, has he NO spine at all?

The BILLIONS dead thing done it for me. How can one even answer anything in this environment? Debunk? for what possible reason? Why waste one's time? All the freaking evidence one could EVER need is here and at BIFFY concern Y2k being basically a web-marketing scheme.

Not to fret, Doc be around just the same.

Doc_Paulie@ihateclowns.com

-- dreck (debunking@doc.polly), June 30, 1999.

Yes, Decker, PLEASE leave. Go to that BFI hellhole of lunatics, including what now even appears to include a deranged Doctor of sorts. (Gawd, it seems that every day I learn more about BFI, and it just gets weirder and weirder. Reminds me of Dante's Circles. I ask yet again: What kind of frigging people ARE these???)

You and Paul Davis and SuperTroll and Mutha and the rest of the gang can spend all day discussing the latest in Meme Theory And Its Application To Doomer Psychosis. Just let us be. And, come next year, when the DOW is at 15000 and soaring, when the world is a better place because of all the Y2K projects that not only were completed on time and WAY under budget, but actually increased efficiency and world production, even allowing the national debt to be paid off even earlier, you can at least know: You tried to warn us. You did all that you could do. But we, the half-memely ones, would not listen. We, with the 2-digit memes. O, how blind we were!

And, perhaps on your to the Cherry Blossom festival over there in Dee Cee that happens every spring, should you see one of us doomers -- homeless, dazed, shaken with disbelief at the totally unexpected turn of events, nothing to show for our delusions except the remaining 8,457,394 cans of food that at least keeps us alive -- take pity on us. (DON'T treat us like we treated you!!!) Be kind. Toss a nugget of wisdom our way. Give us hope where there may be none.

I know that your grandfather would have....

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), June 30, 1999.

To Diane Squire Can`t you just make a separate category and dump the most offensive/x into it? That way we can cease discussing censorship and get back to y2k.BTW Is it all feasible for the U.S. to "island" their banking industry from the world?

-- bud (bud@computersedge.com), June 30, 1999.

Mr. Decker brings to light a compelling case-in-point of a forum moderator's immoderation.

The foaming and frenzied attacks will shortly commence....another chance for the mob of petits esprits from their ant-hill of Belief to viciously beat down a rational optimist...

instead of staying on topic and addressing the issue.

-- Regnauld de Segrais (Segrais@martial.co), June 30, 1999.

Decker,

The topic... was Y2K... is Y2K... will be Y2K... and related issues (for the most part) for the next year or so.

This forum is *still* wild and wooly, despite the De Bunker attempts to bring it down.

You are more than welcome to leave, should you choose to do so. Or stay.

And by the way... I'm NOT neutral about Y2K or the need to keep researching and preparing. Neither was Ed.

'Nuf said... again.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), June 30, 1999.

Optimists are certainly welcome to leave messages here. There's a difference though between honest disagreement and heckling. The heckling has been continuous since Nov. of 1998. It started with a certain Jimmy Bagga Doughnuts around Thanksgiving.

Regulars here don't wait as long as they use to before responding to hecklers. They've seen systematic attacks against this message forum for seven months now and are tired of it. I'm surprised both Ed then and the new moderators now have deleted messages only on exceedingly rare occasions.

Decker requires no strategy. His own words slowly betray his attitudes. Oh and BTW, the TB2000 forum was about potential impacts of Y2k and discussing fallback contingency plans long before Decker ever started calling it.

KCDecker is a supercilious optimist given to frequent bouts of didacticism.....but he is not a heckler. Folks like Paul Davis, Hoffmeister and Maria aren't hecklers either. I *would* however call Y2K Pro, Mutha Nachu and SuperPolly hecklers. IMHO.

Hecklers by definition don't add to a conversation -- they just badger and bitch. And we've had to deal with them since November.

-- A regular (since@Oct.1998), June 30, 1999.

Mr. Decker

My response is in the next two threads. If you need anymore indication that there are indications of problems at high levels them I would be glad to post them. As a rule I resist posting "doomer material" as the prep stuff is more my consern. As a archivist (as I see myself) I collect information from the sources not the press. Sometime articles such as the links above appear and they seem far beyond my mandate to post them. Most folk can do nothing about the UN and the Chemical Industry. This doesn't mean that the problem doesn't exist.

I can imagine there are plenty of folk lurking or posting that don't pull all the stops at posting all the damaging material they find. I don't. But if you wish to have me continueing posting in this manner please continue posting the head in the sand comentary, forum attacts and childish twadle. Pardon me if I spelt twadle wrong. But it seemed so right.

By the way you still have never answered if you have ever have raised a child - childern and the feeling of protection that you have when their young arms are around your shoulder. That is why this forum should exist. For those that are uncertian of their childs future. That is evolution. The true universal principle.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 30, 1999.

I guess no one will address the issue head on.

Diane, this forum is not just about Y2K as the frequent "off topic" posts suggest. It also is not about Y2K in the broader sense. It is ruled by a group who reject anything but the worst case scenario.

In fact, the serious pessimists try to bully anyone who doesn't agree with them. If a new person comes into this forum and asks reasonable questions or expresses a middle of the road viewpoint, they'll get the "troll's rush." You are not the forum "moderator," King of Spain, Will Continue, Ray, Andy, etc. serve in that capacity. They are the bullies on the TB 2000 block... and you, Big Dog and the other moderators support their tactics. I can deal with the Hardliners of the world, but I feel for the person who honestly wants answers to Y2K and instead gets a mud wrestling invitation from Spain or Ray's rant on fractional reserve banking.

I have never had much patience for bullies, and this forum is thick with them. I dislike the threat of censorship, but even more, I detest the false pretenses. Just label the forum accurately. "Anyone who disagrees with us will be attacked personally, called names, accused of having ulterior motives and of being on the gov't payroll." How about that truth setting you free?

Brian, I have not answered personal questions about my family, military service, etc. I know you really want to know, but I respectfully decline. Whether I have children or not does not matter.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999.

Decker said [I reply]

I guess no one will address the issue head on.

[If things were much more "head-on" around here, we'd all be headless, but I'll give it another shot.]

Diane, this forum is not just about Y2K as the frequent "off topic" posts suggest.

[In principle, yes, about Y2K. In practice, because this forum is not censored and is only lightly moderated, off topic posts are permitted. Functionally, you are correct.]

It also is not about Y2K in the broader sense. It is ruled by a group who reject anything but the worst case scenario.

[This is very inaccurate. Diane, Chuck and myself are the only ones of the mod squad who have identified themselves (reasons for that have been discussed elsewhere). Diane, for the most part, holds Y2K views not unlike your own (recession-intensity). Chuck is only slightly more pessimistic than you are, though he is preparing for a worst case scenario (somewhat like Flint on that score). Yes, I am quite pessimistic.]

In fact, the serious pessimists try to bully anyone who doesn't agree with them. If a new person comes into this forum and asks reasonable questions or expresses a middle of the road viewpoint, they'll get the "troll's rush."

["Reasonable" is in the mind of the writer-reader as is "middle of the road." No doubt, the forum has become more polarized over the past nine months. This has been due to the actual attempts by some to "debunk" and destroy the forum's emphasis on Y2K as a crisis event (as Ed frequently described it) deserving major preparation on the part of communities and individuals. At times, some, including me, go "over the top" in responding. This is regrettable. Arnie Rimmer is a classic example of a middle-of-the-roader whose views are highly respected. Critt Jarvis is another. There are others.]

You are not the forum "moderator," King of Spain, Will Continue, Ray, Andy, etc. serve in that capacity. They are the bullies on the TB 2000 block... and you, Big Dog and the other moderators support their tactics. I can deal with the Hardliners of the world, but I feel for the person who honestly wants answers to Y2K and instead gets a mud wrestling invitation from Spain or Ray's rant on fractional reserve banking.

[My experience is that most, not all, newbies are treated kindly and/or apologized to if not so treated. As is often pointed out, this forum is *very* lightly moderated. You can't have it both ways. OTOH, I suspect you are asking why "jawboning" pressure isn't brought on some of the doomers, some of the time. That is a fair question.

In my case, knowing how frustrating it has been to watch nearly the entire media spin Y2K, I suppose I am "understanding" of those on this forum who *sincerely feel* real people are going to be terribly hurt over the next year and react with intense emotion to certain types of posts.

In your case, many people on this forum from various perspectives doubt your interest in getting any "honest answers" to Y2K that you didn't bring ahead of time to impose on others. Obviously, I have questioned your sincerity and more. That wasn't lightly done. If I turn out to be wrong on that score (time always tells, in the end), I will apologize.] I have never had much patience for bullies, and this forum is thick with them. I dislike the threat of censorship, but even more, I detest the false pretenses. Just label the forum accurately. "Anyone who disagrees with us will be attacked personally, called names, accused of having ulterior motives and of being on the gov't payroll." How about that truth setting you free?

[By comparison with many Internet forums, including Y2K forums, this one remains remarkably civil on the whole. The reactions you have drawn include those (as you have often pointed out) who agree with you. Likewise, Flint, to take another example. Some people who come to this forum do have ulterior motives and it is probable that a few of these are on the government payroll. Given the emormous "smoke of war" surrounding Y2K in the public space and the efforts over the past nine months to disrupt this forum, it is unsurprising that some individuals here have sought to discern "who is who." Obviously, the disrupters are not going to place a public sign on themselves.]

Brian, I have not answered personal questions about my family, military service, etc. I know you really want to know, but I respectfully decline. Whether I have children or not does not matter.

[Agree. However, you, like many of us, have referred to elements of your history and experience often in support of your convictions. To the degree these are veiled, it makes it difficult to discern your intentions.]

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), June 30, 1999.

Mr. Decker, surely you don't think Diane and her gaggle of Y2K Goons are going to respond to your logical request? If they were logical, they wouldn't be Doomers - would they?

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), June 30, 1999.

Decker, I was having a good time, browsing the reactions to your supercillious comments, when -- once again -- you made my blood boil with your arrogance. Let's consider two statements in your last post on this thread:

If a new person comes into this forum and asks reasonable questions or expresses a middle of the road viewpoint, they'll get the "troll's rush."

Since you have shown yourself unwilling to discuss y2k without attempting to talk down to your audience, statements of this nature seem to fall readily from your word processor. What is "reasonable?" What is "middle of the road?" Well, by definition, you choose to define these terms -- and anyone who disagrees with you must be unreasonable or horribly biased.

For the most part posters on this forum are middle of the road, a fact you conveniently ignore.

And, this gem: I dislike the threat of censorship, but even more, I detest the false pretenses. Oh, my goodness, you detest false pretenses? Then how can you possibly live with yourself? You, sir, are absolutely false, to the core. You come here under false pretenses. You post under false pretenses, not to add nor subtract to reasonable discussion on this forum, but to have something to carry back to other forums and laugh about.

Decker, your own words brand you. You are what you detest.

De

-- De (delewis@inetone.net), June 30, 1999.

Decker, Pro(?) etc.

Those that spend most of their time talking about other people, are of small mind.

Those that spend most of their time talking about events, have an average mind.

Those that spend most of their time talking about ideas, are of great mind.

Need a new life?

-- BiGG (supersite@acronet.net), June 30, 1999.

Mr. Decker, as a long time Biffy and Debunker poster, this is kind of amazing coming from you. You have a gentleman there named CPR who uses the tactics you claim to so despise here. Yet, you continue to post there, and never publicy challenge CPR on using the same (if not worse) unsavory methods for dealing with people who go against the "conventional" grain of the forum. To me, that speaks volumes about you.

Just for the record, IMHO, people like Will continue, Ray and CPR just prove how closed minded people can be, and add nothing to the "quest for truth" that the majority of the people here have come for.

-- Bob (bob@bob.bob), June 30, 1999.

Big Dog:

Without question, the majority of the posts (not all of them) by Andy, Ray, Will continue and King of Spain have no content at all beyond personal attacks. Yes, some of their posts actually address y2k (and some, especially Andy, only raise largely extraneous issues when not attacking). Conversely, Mutha Nachu and Y2kpro attack most of the time but also occasionally contribute a worthwhile on-topic observation. In general, attack posts by doomers outnumber attack posts by pollys in about the same proportion that doomers outnumber pollys here, which is a wide margin.

Diane has repeatedly self-reported herself as being in the middle of the road. Yet EVERY complaint she's made against "trolls" and attacks, has been against the polly variety (the small minority). So OK, calling someone a mindless jerk is a valuable contribution if you agree, right? One gets the strong impression that if Diane weren't told who was being attacked, she wouldn't be able to tell if that were a "troll" post or not!

But I disagree with Mr. Decker that preparation is the real focus here. There are useful preparation threads now and then, but most of the threads consist of either agreeing that any suggestion of future problems is proof of coming catastrophe, or choral mockeries of any progress reports. Most of the 'preparation' threads discuss various aspects of subsistence living. The techniques discussed are interesting, but few ever question the assumption that such techniques *will* be required.

The best way to deal with posts you find disagreeable is to skip them and move on. Nobody is required to read them.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 30, 1999.

Flint said,

"The best way to deal with posts you find disagreeable is to skip them and move on. Nobody is required to read them."

Agree. 99% of the discussion about censorship remains a tempest in a teapot. This forum is awash in useful/bizarre opinions on more topics than I thought existed in the known universe, precisely because it is *lightly* moderated. Some find it edifying, some entertaining, some outrageous. Different strokes.

No one has any intention of changing that.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), June 30, 1999.

My, my. It appears that I am less than popular in certain 'circles'. Thank God. At least I will never be questioned about which camp I place my sleeping bag in. Obviously some people have more than one.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 30, 1999.

(Will, Someone who is more concerned with loyalty than with popularity? My God, it has to be too good to be true.)

Mr. Decker the fact is you DID come here to taunt us, rile us up to the point of making us "look" like alarmists, extremeists and so forth. And then your going to trot back to DeBunky, Biffy, and GNBFI like a good little lackey and have a great big guffaw over how right you all are about "The Swamp".

Little minds indeed.

I thought you were on a mission to debunk Y2K? So far it's painfully obvious that your just out to prove how crazy we are, which has nothing to do with that is really happening in businesses and industries across the world. Where are your facts and figures? Where are your secure audits? Where are your lists of compliant companies?

No....instead we get...

Why try different ways to encourage "trolls" (however the moderators define the slippery term) to leave? Why not just revoke Yourdon's initial "come one, come all" invitation and replace it with a clear statement that this forum is ONLY for Y2K preparation.

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

Thanks Mr. Decker, your a little mind indeed and it's nice to know that you'll never be on my side of anything.

Regards,

Mr. Edwards

-- (AtlantaAS@aol.com), June 30, 1999.

Flint? Was that really you in the post to BD above?

Inaccuracies in each paragraph -- my impressions of each of those participants has certainly been widely different than yours (esp. will continue). I'd have to go back and count to verify, but I won't waste my time like that.

I thought that accuracy would be the very coin you carry to maintain your strenuously-held position as a disciple of logic on this forum. I'm a bit disappointed and I hope you'll hew more tightly to the facts. We *need* you to do your best to bring your perspectives here.

But then we are posting on a Decker "censorship" thread, aren't we? I confess to wasting *my* time by clicking in -- check the new threads (quickly), over to Gold Eagle (even more quickly), and see about a 3-yr old who needs readying for pre-school.

Damn! I was just gonna call Decker a Pompous Ass and leave... 20 good minutes blown!

-- jor-el (jor-el@krypton.uni), June 30, 1999.

I find myself agreeing with Flint... If you don't like the topic on the thread, skip it... I do it all the time...

BTW, Decker has contributed to a bunch of threads I have researched. He is an asset to the forum, and has/had an opinion that makes people think. I personally will miss his objectivity. His differing opinion is needed to have a balanced look at a topic. He has a much more civilized "debate" than some of the more rabid on the forum....

gettin' a drink,

The Dog

-- Dog (Desert Dog@-sand.com), June 30, 1999.

People, when will you realize that Decker is just an insidious troll? Can't you see that he's (laughter) his ass off when he taunts you with threads like this? I mean, come ON man -- y2k is days away, and he's complaining that we "bullied" Mutha and censored al-d. Give me a fucking break.

-- a (a@a.a), June 30, 1999.

Decker: "It is ruled by a group who reject anything but the worst case scenario."

As is so often the case, Decker, you've got it wrong again. I have posted here many times, NEVER in support of the "worst case scenario." And I've never had a post rejected, or even objected to. Your allegation is ridiculous.

Most of those posting here are doing so because they have some degree of concern over the potential for disruption presented by Y2K. Given the stated subject of the forum, this seems unsurprising.

Your denial that any concern is appropriate is evident, and you're certainly at liberty to hold that opinion. Clearly you're not alone in that. What is extraordinary is the level of effort you exert in trying to convert others to your position. Why do you bother? If I find myself stuck with several surplus kilos of rice and beans next year, your life is not likely to be affected.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), June 30, 1999.

Decker, Y2K PRO, MUTHA, FLINT etal;

If this forum is full of mindless, doomer goons and the discussion of Y2K preparation and worst-case-scenarios aggrivate you all so much---- -----

GO THE FUCK AWAY!!!!!! Don't let the Forum door hit you in the ass on the way out!!!!

But you won't. You're here to taunt, aggrivate, confuse, debunk, muddy and deteriorate the forum discussion of Y2K, its possible impact and preparations.

You're on a mission to ridicule and to scoff, disguised as clever debate, which is really nothing more than diversionary.

If you hate this forum, and its participants, then I suggest you leave, spend time at GNIABFI or START YOUR OWN DAMN FORUM!!!!

Diane and the SYOPS can regulate, censor and demand codes of conduct and direct discussion as they see fit because the man who started the forum in the first place GAVE THEM the authority to do so!

If you don't like it, TOUGH SHIT!!! Start your own forum and set your own rules! (BTW, I notice that the Biffy forum and your pal DOC PAULIE are ANYTHING but tolerant of opposing opinion. Why must you demand tolerance here if your colleagues don't offer the same? Hypocritical of you I think).

Regulars here are not about to let your divisive ilk take down this forum!

But if you're not here to destroy this forum, then I suggest sir that you, YPro, Mutha and the other trolls are simply Sadists.

Why stay involved in a torturous discussion forum....unless you love torture??

Anyone got ball-gag for Decker?

-- HADeNufADem (NotTakinit@ny.more), June 30, 1999.

Jor-el:

Like you, I haven't spent the time categorizing everyone's posts. And of course we might legitimately disagree as to what constitutes an attack, or a troll. To me "XYZ is a moron" is *always* an attack no matter how strongly I may agree with this opinion. I also include posts that focus on how someone expresses themself, rather thay what they say. Also, posts that put words in someone else's mouth (that were never written), and then criticize what they put there. This is all very subjective, I'll admit it upfront.

However, based on your observation I reread what I wrote very carefully, and I didn't see these inaccuracies. I saw that I was expressing an opinion, which (naturally) I consider valid. But we can make different judgments about specific posts without either of us being inaccurate.

So let's consider this thread alone (as of some while before I can post this response).

First response: A long quote from addle-pated Doc Paulie, hard to tell if it's on-topic since Paulie always meanders around. But it is signed by "dreck", clearly a mild attack on Decker, and certainly doesn't address the points Decker raised.

Second post, from King of Spain: A demand that Decker go away, followed by a sarcastic diatribe. Attempts to smear three other posters in the process. Fails to address Decker's point about the purpose of the moderators. Nor does any of this sarcasm reflect anything Decker has posted. Oh well. This is an attack in my book -- it doesn't contribute, that's for sure.

Diane (a moderator) makes a subtle dig at Decker, by claiming (baselessly) that debunkies are trying to destroy her forum (she knows Decker posts there as well). She makes it clear that she'd be glad to see Decker go away, and NOT because he's off-topic or impolite. He just disagrees with her.

"a regular" defines a heckling as what y2kpro, Mutha Nachu and Superpolly do. Now I ask, just what did King of Spain do, if not heckling? But no mention of that. Interesting.

A sarcastic post from y2kpro. Adds no insights to the topic.

Posts from de and BiGG that are pure attacks against Decker, don't address the role of the moderators, and contribute nothing.

Following this, Will continue prides herself for her decisions, and then Mr. Edwards chimes in with more sarcastic attacks against Decker. Neither one addresses the subject (the role of the moderators).

I see that 'a' has now joined in with the most vicious (and profane) attack yet posted. I defy you to find ANY post where anyone who hasn't been directly addressed by 'a's vicious attacks has EVER chided him for it. Yet it's his specialty.

The Dog supports Decker's posts here. It doesn't address the role of the moderator but by now, this thread has degenerated into a contest to see who can attack Decker most creatively.

Finally, if HADeNuf hasn't posted a pure, vicious, gratuitous attack, I cannot imagine what you would consider an attack. This is sheer, mindless raving, and it ain't no Polly doing it either.

Add it up, Jor-el. How far off-base am I, really?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), June 30, 1999.

The #1 poster on this forum is Diane. We're fortunate to have a calm, level-headed person like her around. OTOH, let's have a look at the thoughtful (?) optimist who is arguably the #1 y2k debunker.

======================================================================

Date: Feb 20, 13:10 From: CPR

Have you been dead long or is it a recent event??

My "credentials" are given in: Kappelman's Y2k book from the Society for Information Management where I predicted the Y2k impact on Investment real estate and the REITs. Two years ago, bozo, I said Retail would crater and the REITs would have some problems with cash flow in Malls. I also predicted a shortage of Industrial and Commercial storage in warehouse because of stockpiling as JIT levels were increased.

Theory 2 years ago. FACT today. You can also take a look at : http://www.russkelly.com/ "Experts pages" and see some more. What is missing which I have to get Russ to include is the breakdown of my rating of Y2k impact: 6.9 where 4.2 is for the technical and economic part and 2.7 is for the 'panic/hysterics' of the general population. (With all the de-bunking now going on, I think that will die away.)

But I do have some real "expertise" in a "niche" subject.

SURPRISE: My expertise is in.. YOU and your types. But the effect of the North/Yourdon Meme on people like you is a minor chapter in American History even though it is very interesting to me as a direct descendent of a line that goes back to the Know Nothings of the Mid- 1800s. Now we have the Net enabled one like you.."The Know Littles".

Just remember this: I was USMC and I learned to "take no prisoners". Academic niceties are for the "Mr. Deckers" and the Tea Party Set. I believe in direct frontal approach and exposing the Fear Mongers for what they are, cheap Quick Buck Artists or Political/Religious NUTS.

The danger is not from North or Yourdon doing anything. The real danger in Y2k is from the irrational actions their Bull Shit inspires. Ratcliffe addresses that in his ripping of Yourdon's 10 Year Depression Essay now. I said it last year: Yourdon knows NOTHING about Economics or Finance, thus any "scenarios" he dreams up with his keyboard and a glass of white wine, are FICTION that people like YOU... take as fact. You do so because you hide behind his constant chanting: "I, Ed Yourdonefor, have 30 years experience" and accept his views as yours.

When the "rush" from that isn't enough, you go out looking for more and find Gary North's IDIOTIC "Mad Max" craziness and then use that to justify whatever you do no matter what your Family or friends (if you have any) or neighbors might say.

Then,,, wrapped in your Cocoon of thinking insulation, you claim that ALL OTHERS are "in denial" or "don't know enough" or "are lying to themselves".

IN REALITY, it is people like YOU who can't deal with "reality".

Next year or several years from now, you will find another Y2k to shiver about.

North and Yourdon are not going to screw up OUR Country with their BS causing panic. It will end with North back in his hole under the rock he crawled out from and Yourdon retired by his FORMER Peers in I.T.

I'm fairly well known in the media but not to the public as the source of information on the "extremists" of Y2k. I have files on over 100 of them and willingly provide "deep background" to any legitimate writer or reporter for FREE. I can afford it.

It goes without saying that every file is available to the local and state Police and the Federal authorities who are now monitoring the Y2k Extremists in an effort to prevent any terrorism whether from domestic or foreign sources.

Any threats ever sent me are sent immediately to the authorities and don't ever believe that "anonymous" email is anonymous.

Actually, just keep in mind also,,,,I might be working here.

If I ever write a book on the "History of the Y2k Gloomers"; part of it will be about the sucess of GN is a BFI in De-Bunking IDIOTS.

People like you are only a minor subset. My real targets for DE- BUNKING have always been North and Yourdon and it looks like Mr. Yourdon's turn for "exposition" has come thanks to ZD's Ratcliffe and others.

If you send me your real email names and actually names I might actually include you. Other wise your adorable screen names will have to do. Thus, YOUR 15 minutes of fame will be lost.

Occasionally, I dabble in harder core technology and was the one who pretty much expose the Fraud of "time dilation" over a year ago.

The "Texas Fire Engine Myth" was another little story I gave to Declan M. to let the world know.

I was the first one to expose North and his associations with Yourdon on the I.T. Professional lists I am on. After revealing to the Professionals what North was and some of his choicer remarks, he has posted maybe 7 times in the last 1 1/2 years.

He and Yourdonefor took their act to the world of the Techno- Illiterates, Know-littles and BS artists LIKE YOU where how to turn a PC on makes one an instant expert.

Don't feel bad, I save my very best shots for liberals and leftists.

======================================================================

http://206.28.81.29/HyperNews/get/gn/719/3/1/1/1/1/1/1/1/2.html

-- (who@is.cpr), June 30, 1999.

In response:

I can quote the responses to my first few posts on this forum. One was a cross-post where someone cut-and-pasted an essay from BFI. The next was a compilation of my thoughts on Y2K. As a "new" person, I received the "troll's rush." In fact, I had never visited this forum until I investigated after a poster on BFI told me of the cross- posting.

During my first month or two on this forum, I really tried to remain polite. Lately, I have lost my temper and been drug into the losing battle of personal attacks. I see this thread is headed in the same direction. I am sorry. I regret sinking to the level of some forum posters and will try to avoid such behavior in the future.

I believe Y2K will be more than a nonevent. My promotion of common sense financial preparations, however, have been largely ridiculed as insufficient. So be it. But I am hardly a poster who uniformly wastes bandwidth without trying to add something to the discussion.

After my Virginia gathering, I am convinced the people who think Y2K will be a catastrophe are very sincere. In point of fact, I am open to the possibility it will be much worse than I think. I cannot find a substantive argument to support this... at least not at this point.

Some of the flak I take is due to a writing style I developed on BFI. In real life, I am not an arrogant ass (although I do not lack self confidence.) I tried politeness as an alternative to hack and slash posting. I have challenged BOTH sides in the debate (including CPR) to be more civil. When he started talking about "list making," I had no problem speaking out. CPR and I exchanged email about this where we simply disagreed. I have tried to do the same with those people from this forum who have contacted me directly.

While the majority of the people on this forum may be moderate, the loudest voices are those of the "doomers." I will continue to post on other fora. I think suggesting I ought not to post elsewhere is simply another bullying tactic. I sign my posts on every forum with my real name. I don't try to duck and hide.

As for why I am here, I'm not on a mission to "debunk" Y2K. I take it more seriously than 90% of the population. I simply question the routine leaps of faith the serious pessimists make. [Along with their version of history, economics, etc.] I can post the litany of positive media reports from companies who have completed readiness testing. The good news flows every day. It is largely a waste of time, however, because almost every positive report is attacked as "propaganda."

The IEEE letter was touted as a watershed event. Need I say more?

I'm glad the forum moderators have taken a light hand, however, I am concerned about Diane Squire's comments and the threat, real or implied, of censorship. I think the three to five votes rule is silly. But I appreciate the reasonable responses of Big Dog, Flint and the others. Thanks.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999.

In real life you are not an arrogant ass? Just here? This is how you try to make friends??

Do your cats have Decker-induced inferiority complexes? Do you chide them for non-frugality? Do your parakeets live at the bottom of their cages to avoid you?

I can't hardly imagine what it's like to live with you... since you're not an arrogant ass at home.... huh.

-- Lisa (just@make.believe?), June 30, 1999.

I do not like cats or parakeets. I'm more utilitarian when it comes to pets, working dogs being a personal favorite. You are welcome to attend a Y2K gathering, Lisa, and make your own judgement about how I am in person.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999.

Mr.Decker, they,re trying to tell you>your,s is not question WHY. your,s is just'to do or die.be a good little SHEEPLE.

-- al-d. (dogs@zianet.com), June 30, 1999.

I should like to point out, that if in fact CPR was *ever* USMC....he has obviously suffered tremendous frontal lobe damage from his repeated 'soap in a sock' treatments. Come and get me girly boy. Every Marine I'm related to will slap you like the helpless bunny you are.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Decker on 'Y2K and Risk' - 26 March 1999
http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000eh6

-- (e@rly.decker), June 30, 1999.

Here, let me shut my office door so I can moon my monitor - Virginia's too far away.

If I saw you in person, you'd have to look deeply into my eyes, then I'd hypnotize you and get the truth out of you.

-- Lisa (lisa@work.now), June 30, 1999.

This modest article will be lost on the true believers. Without doubt, I will be labeled a troll. If you believe Y2K will be a significant problem, make a concise, logical case. Argue it on any grounds... economic, technical, anthropological, theological... just make your assumptions clear. I am open to the possibility the world will end are you to the possibility it will not?

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), March 26, 1999

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=000eh6

-- (e@rly.decker), June 30, 1999.

Mr. Decker. Lovely , eloquent parting words. Youwillbemissedbymany, not me...Aloha.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Will continue, do you *ever* contribute anything useful to this forum? Or is your sole contribution to denigrate others? really, I'd like to know.....

-- Bob (bob@bob.bob), June 30, 1999.

WELL, Bob....I did spell that correctly, didn't I? B,O,B. Yes, frontwards, backwards, it still comes out BOB. Contributions are made at many levels by many different people with many different skills and knowledge. If you don't care for mine, kiss Decker's monkey.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 30, 1999.

decks, sorry you're leaving. i'll try to carry the torch. there are certainly a lot of big silly willys in these parts.

miss ya hon

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), June 30, 1999.

silly willys????????????????

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Ya know - tracking trolls is fun work. Each personality has a hue/tint - recognizable with practice.

I just snapped to who Corrine is - "hon" gives it away - get ready for some [laughter]...... from an old-timer.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), June 30, 1999.

Come oooooonnnn Lisa. Give me a clue. It sounds an awful lot like Flint to me.....HAHAHAHHOOOOOO...hehehe....ahummmm.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Will - (Lisa! hey, think I'm gonna hafta come up with a handle: getting too crowded here) this is some of Corrine's early work. Warning: ugly language. Corrine was also TB's original - that is, first - troll.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), June 30, 1999.

Will Not Think said:

Contributions are made at many levels by many different people with many different skills and knowledge. If you don't care for mine, kiss Decker's monkey.

Translation:

I am a semi-literate hairdresser with an IQ less than 80 and no more knowledge about Y2K than Decker's monkey

. "On January 1, 1999 they will experience many more, and it will be much more difficult to sweep them under the rug. On April 1, 1999 we will all watch anxiously as the governments of Japan and Canada, as well as the state of New York, begin their 1999-2000 fiscal year; at that moment, the speculation about Y2K will end, and we will have tangible evidence of whether governmental computer systems work or not."-- Ed Yourdon

-- Y2K Pro (2@641.com), June 30, 1999.

Gee Pro. How many times do I have to tell you...I'm not interested in you. Corrine, up there, seems pretty desperate though. Give it a shot. She thinks your willy's silly (don't mention your wart problem).

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Y2K Pro,

It is nice to see you had the strength to post the quote from EY, I was starting to wonder if you had it in you. Of course if you ever had anything to post besides that it would be a miracle in its own right.

Your Buddy, Sgt Schultz

P.S. Just because you own a p.c. doesnt make you a pro.

-- SgtSchultz (SgtHansSchultz@stalag13.com), June 30, 1999.

Aside from the fact that this thread has me in stiches, because most of the responses struck me as funny, I wasn't going to pay much attention to it. But I just have to know why there is this major effort to jerk CPR around. He doesn't post here. I'm not even sure he lurks much.

I admit I have wondered who all those names on the email list REALLY are - but I haven't cared enough to try to find out.

-- Paul Davis (davisp1953@yahoo.com), June 30, 1999.

Paul While I have little arguement with you CPR makes his veiws well known on his forum as to his opinion about this forum.

Debunking Y2k webboard 
and
BFI Forum

As to him posting here, we will really never know.

I think that any sane individual would need to see both sites as to the interest in CPR. His posts speak volumes as to his opinions. And his bias.

Personally I respect your opinions Paul and you are a smart person that posts his name and E addy. Just how can you lower yourself to contributing to the forums above that are indications of a sick, retoric filled mindset. Having opinions on Y2K good or bad is one thing. Insults and closed minds are another.

On the next thread I have posted that my region is in pretty good shape. I expect the major players in "my" society may make it. I am not a doomer. Yet few of the regulars would slam my opinion as I respect the opinions of others if it appears to be well thought out and considerate of other positions.

That aside, my experiance in life is extencive in regards to the enviorment and dealing with harsh weather and I will always be an "alarmist' in regards to dealing with cold weather and power failure. For this I would be labled a Doomer. I am not a Doomer, I have been there and done that then came out alive.

So for those like you and Flint that know the problem and realize that it can be fixed, realize also that if it is not fixed then some people are at HIGH risk during the rollover.

CPR may be a smart man but I would love to discuss the abilities of people to handle an extencive power loss regardless of Y2K. Y2K is just an event that increases the risk. You folk in the warmer climates have little idea of what it would be like to go though such an experiance. Just try living in it.

The Quebec Ice Storm was a wake up call. They were lucky that the temps. didn't drop to -30c. The next time they might not be so lucky.

Keep warm, fed and hydrated. The rest is gravy.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Paul

This is a good indication of why folk fear CPR. A total lack of heart. First a post (true or not?? what ever)

 Debunking Y2k webboard - Average European country could lose electrical power for 7 days.

Here is the level of compassion that CPR has for people elsewhere. And by the way it is alot colder in Europe that Texas in the winter.
 

Debunking Y2k webboard - TS for them. GREAT NEWS for USA!!! Seven extra profit days for AMERICAN COMPANIES.

Basicly he says tough shit. He has no idea.

And you and Decker support Charles R. positions as frequent posters to the debunker forum? An answer to this would be nice.

Oh and this is an international forum, I am a Canadian not a US citizen. His bias towards US Companies over peoples lives speaks volumes.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 30, 1999.

It might be important to note that Paul and Decker are two of VERY few posters (supporters) to that forum. As mentioned before at least you have the guts to use your own names

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Does the fact I post here indicate I support the "views" of the TB 2000 forum? I found BFI quite by accident and starting posting there. My view of Y2K has been pretty consistent since my first post... regardless of the particular forum. There are fewer reactions at Debunker, but there are also fewer people accusing me of being the AntiChrist. It's a trade off. (laughter) There are excitable folks on each of the Y2K fora... and this is no exception. If the stated purpose of Debunker contrary to my principles, I would probably not post there. This is why I have asked the moderators to clarify their position. If Y2K as Apocalypse is a foregone conclusion for this forum, my presence here is largely a waste of time for all concerned. Understand?

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999.

What a waste of time. The only good advice is to skip these threads.

-- Mike Lang (webflier@erols.com), June 30, 1999.

cpr--Beyond a Joke--Debunking Forumite Says He is Collecting Background Files on Yourdon Forumites http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 000q7k

-- cpr (watcher@trollbusters.anon), June 30, 1999.

Yes Decker, your presence here is a waste of time for all of us concerned.

Go play with your debunker buddies. It's where you obviously belong.

-- 08B21A (--..ast@webx.net), June 30, 1999.

Does the fact I post here indicate I support the "views" of the TB 2000 forum? I found BFI quite by accident and starting posting there. My view of Y2K has been pretty consistent since my first post... regardless of the particular forum. There are fewer reactions at Debunker, but there are also fewer people accusing me of being the AntiChrist. It's a trade off. (laughter) There are excitable folks on each of the Y2K fora... and this is no exception. If the stated purpose of Debunker contrary to my principles, I would probably not post there. This is why I have asked the moderators to clarify their position. If Y2K as Apocalypse is a foregone conclusion for this forum, my presence here is largely a waste of time for all concerned. Understand?

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999.

You know I actually like your tenacity (spl?) but to my amazement you contribute the idea of religion and Y2K. Once agian you stick your foot in your mouth Ken.

Apocalypse - another name for revelations, the last book in the bible. Also thought of as the final days before the return of Christ.

AntiChrist - will come speaking the name of Christ under false pretences. Also found in Revelations, a follower of the beast, Satan.

You have this latent connection in your mind about Y2K as a religious event. No one else mentions this. Why do you?

I am positive that not one of the moderators considers that Y2K will signal the Apocalypse nor the return of Christ. Of course we can copy and paste this question on the top of the board for clarification by the multitude of the Y2K faithful?

I think not. You have read far to much Hal Linsdey Ken.

Try Lao Tzu, Jung, Buddist texts, Einstien, Lovejoy, Kant, Spinoza and a whole host of other great minds and learn the balance, humility, wonder and scope of the universal way. The bible is a Jewish History Book. Divine? The King John version just maybe. The Hebrew version would have even more validity. But you have no right to use these spectors (memes) to make your point in any manner or form.

Looking at it from this point of view, you do not need to be here if you think that Christ's return is the focus of our Y2K concerns.

Diane answered your other consern. The year 2000 is a point in time of mans creation. We are talking about the possible future of the year 2000.

Understand?

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Decker? I thought you'd left. Hurry up please, your lei is wilting....Aloha...wave....AloooooooooooHAAAAAA.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Flint said:

I see that 'a' has now joined in with the most vicious (and profane) attack yet posted. I defy you to find ANY post where anyone who hasn't been directly addressed by 'a's vicious attacks has EVER chided him for it. Yet it's his specialty.

Flint are you inhaling butane again? This is what I posted:

People, when will you realize that Decker is just an insidious troll? Can't you see that he's (laughter) his ass off when he taunts you with threads like this? I mean, come ON man -- y2k is days away, and he's complaining that we "bullied" Mutha and censored al-d. Give me a fucking break.

a (a@a.a), June 30, 1999.

Please explain how my post was "vicious".

-- a (a@a.a), June 30, 1999.

decker attacksdecker looses his cool decker lies

-- double (decker@king.debunker), June 30, 1999.

Really Flint.....If anybody's 'vicious' around here it's ME. Most especially towards you and Decker...jus 'drippin' with venommmmm. "Hoiiily venamous". Vicious, cruel, hateful, dispicable bully. The bitch from hell. (sorry, did that damage your delicate little satellite dishes?) Be a man, Flint. Gahead....suck it up, before somebody puts some soap in their sock and heads YOUR way. If there's one thing I will never tolerate, it's a multiply-faced individual.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Sorry, Will, read my original post. When the moderators change the forum ground rules to "members only" I'll depart. Brian, I am not the only person to make the connection between the current end of the millennium hysterias and Biblical prophecies. Obviously, Gary North thinks there is a strong religious connection. On the whole, though, I use the word much like the phrase "end of the world." I don't think most pessimists think of Y2K in terms of the Book of Revelation. I do think there is an element of millennial hysteria around Y2K. But, hey, we can disagree.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), June 30, 1999.

Well darnnit Decker. I stand corrected. Ahhhh well, perhaps in light of this, it would be best if I retired for the evening, to sharpen my fangs! See ya 'round Deckhand.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Ken

Gary North doesn't post here. That is BS and you know it. Try agian.

That is the problem with you, bringing in stuff that has no relevance to the topic.

I thought you brought up >> If Y2K as Apocalypse is a foregone conclusion for this forum, my presence here is largely a waste of time for all concerned. Understand? <<

And in the past you have made extencive referance to the religous nature of Y2K. You mean you post what you don't mean??? EGadS?????

I think that this is the problem. You don't know what you mean!

Ergo how are you able to determine what the forum meaning is if you have no meaning of yourself or your words? This is a serious matter and you are still wafting in life eh?

Look for understanding young grasshopper. When you can snatch the pebble from my hand you are ready to leave the forum

(PS I am playing with you :o) Kind of

-- Brian (imager@home.com), June 30, 1999.

Actually Mr Decker, if the forum moderators change the rules to "members only" you will not need to take your leave, you will, in that case, have already been "departed."

Cheers!

PS, Though I do not see that as likely to happen, if it should, I shall do my best to see that the door hits your ass on the way out, rather that mine. (It's a Three Stooges thing)

-- Unc D (unkeed@yahoo.com), June 30, 1999.

as long as we are taking a vote (??????) I could not have said it better than Dog -

****BTW, Decker has contributed to a bunch of threads I have researched. He is an asset to the forum, and has/had an opinion that makes people think. I personally will miss his objectivity. His differing opinion is needed to have a balanced look at a topic. He has a much more civilized "debate" than some of the more rabid on the forum.... ******

so - DITTO. Mr. Decker - do not leave, I value your input as I do many other contributors.

-- justme (finally@home.com), June 30, 1999.

agReED To yOU, JusTME!!!!!! mEEstOR DEckER MusT REmaiN HERe!!!!!! iF He wERe tO LEavE, diETEr wOULd mISS The FRotHY MoutHED insANItY Of tHE HyenA ANdy'S reSPOnseS!!!!!!!

-- Dieter (questions@toask.com), June 30, 1999.

Right on, Dieter!

In return for letting Decker stay, can we get y2kpro, corrine1, SuperPolly and al-d to leave (as a trade off to cpr, of course). Actually, I find Decker's posts entertaining. I don't agree with most of his stuff but he makes the more militaristic posters come out and justify their answers. Frequently I learn something from the overall posts and I would miss that.

However, there are some I would miss not at all.

-- Lobo (atthelair@yahoo.com), June 30, 1999.

Flint said

"Without question, the majority of the posts (not all of them) by Andy, Ray, Will continue and King of Spain have no content at all beyond personal attacks..."

Bullcrap. When I start a thread I'm not attacking anyone. If I wade in on a thread I may or may not "attack" - bad choice of words Flint. Fact is time is running out, my patience is running out - especially with wishy washy fools like you who have split personalities and argue on both sides of the LINE simultaneously.

This is an art form in itself Flint and you have mastered it, nobody can possibly take you seriously Flint - you have no convictios, no sense of what is about to happen, all you do every day is come along and wibble

"we don't know"

"we don't know"

"we don't know"

"we don't know"

"we don't know"

"we don't know"

"we don't know"

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), July 01, 1999.

angie, i picture your eyes flashing when you write lines like the ones above.

keep it my my cuddly karate king.

.

-- corrine l (corrine@iwaynet.net), July 01, 1999.

Andy:

There is no "line". We're considering an incredibly wide range of possible impacts, from hardly noticeable to the meltdown of civilization, globally or locally, and everything in between. Your projection of a "line" somewhere in this vast spectrum is a conceptual error, and you can never understand the issues so long as you are making this error. Attacking me for your inability to understand only underscores this inability. It isn't my problem, and you'll never recognize that it's yours.

Meanwhile, I'll continue to try to show how those who insist on farfetched extremes must use distortion to do so.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), July 01, 1999.

I'm sure you will Mr. Flint. There are *many* dangers highly likely to appear, that fall well short of the 'extreme' that you so thoroughly enjoy passing off as some religious cult or mental condition. Therefore, I shall also continue to point to your inability to recognize this fact, as well as your careless habit to tend to dismiss these possibilities as 'unlikely'. You can wrap your words and intentions in any color of silk you so choose, but beneath it all a 'worm' will still be found.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), July 01, 1999.