Question for Mr. Decker re: prep thread querry vs Y2K Newswire Articles : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Dear Mr. Decker (kcdecker)

I read the thread begun by you: "WHAT IS SO COMPLEX ABOUT Y2K PREPARATIONS?". It was a good thread as I enjoyed the many excellent responses. I appreciated the fact that you asked the question even if you had (perhaps) cynical motivations for the posting. Apparently you feel, and I may be wrong, that y2k will be a no-big-deal. Maybe a month or two of inconvenience at worse? I'm not sure what your worse case scenario that you expect or are preparing for so I mean no disrespect. You also indicated that most of the news coming out about y2k was mostly "good news" at this time reinforcing your (cynical cockiness perhaps?) no-big-deal expectations and your thinking that people are making too much of preparations..

My question is this: Have you read the 2 recent articles at, "PENTAGON TESTS REVEAL DANGEROUS TREND" and "Y2K IS SYSTEMIC"?

In the Systemic Article, the point is made that a 2.5% computer failure rate would likely domino to the probability of a likely 24% infrustructure shutdown. A 24% infrustructure failure would more than likely be catastrophic, especially for the unprepared. The "good news" from the Pentagon regarding their recent "massive" test project (44 systems) was an apparent con, pr job designed to make people (like you perhaps, Mr. Decker) feel better about y2k. Would you care to read these 2 articles and comment on them?

Blessings sdb

-- sdb (, July 15, 1999


sdb, there is a saying: "Never wrestle with a pig in the mud. You both get dirty, and the pig enjoys it."

(And no smart remarks, please. This has nothing to do with the exotic world of Female Mudwrestling.)

-- King of Spain (, July 15, 1999.

Hmmm... my worst case scenario. I move into academia and in my first econ class I find Ray, the "King of Spain" and Andy. (shudder!)

I read a "paste" of the systemic piece and thought it was shoddy. It was discussed at length on this thread:

I enjoyed the ranting by 'a' enough to post a separate response thread:

Hmm... this leaves the Pentagon "hoax." I'll have to read the Y2Knewswire story and get back to you. In the mean time... let me leave you with my observation about Y2Knewswire from months ago (long before the authorship and purpose were revealed):

"If I may summarize the Y2Knewswire post... no matter what anyone says about Y2K compliance, they are lying. And where, one might ask, is the empirical foundation for this conclusion? The logic (or lack thereof) underpinning the Y2Knewswire is shared by conspiracy theorists everywhere. Y2K doomsayers have long ago concluded that Y2K is "unfixable." (Just like the folks who concluded aliens landed at Roswell.) Any reports of mitigation, therefore, must be lies, half- truths or exaggeration. Another variation on this theme, large firms or public agencies cannot fix Y2K, but have a vested financial interest in not reporting the true situation. (I believe this was the theme of an episode of "Millenium" entitled "TEOTWAKI.") Because of secret government mandates to conceal the problem or corporate/government conspiracies, false, positive Y2K stories are provided to the media. It is impossible to argue with conspiracy theorists. The most compelling counter-argument: How can we assume the government is coldly efficient at anything let alone activities as complex as conspiracy."

Thanks, by the way, for the polite question. It was a nice change of pace.


-- Mr. Decker (, July 15, 1999.

Dear Mr. Decker:

Thank you for the response but I will wait until you have read both articles so that you can respond to the "systemic" nature of y2k which the article discusses and in the "Pentagon Tests..." article, the "lack of end-to-end testing" anywhere and, where the Pentagon is concerned, 2% of the "mission critical" systems tested is hailed as the "ultimate in testing".

I'll be interested in your thinking on this. I already know that my government can't be trusted and that they lie to us so we do not need to discuss that.

Thank you sdb

-- sdb (, July 15, 1999.

Decker, Will you ever stop whining about the slings and arrows you so eagerly invite? Martyrdom just aint available here.

Your Pal Carlos (apoligies to Ray),

-- Carlos (, July 16, 1999.

Where's the whine. My line about Ray and Pals was meant as humor. The "slings and arrows" don't bother me at all. (How do you think I have lasted this long?)

Lighten up.


-- Mr. Decker (, July 16, 1999.

And if you want free financial advice... be nice. (chuckle)


-- Mr. Decker (, July 16, 1999.

Decker, "It was a nice change of pace." was only the most recent whimper but truly, they're constant.

When asking for advice I've no pride. Have you ever asked for advice? (chuckle)

-- Carlos (, July 16, 1999.


It was a compliment. When someone actually displays civil behavior on this forum, such behavior should be recognized. (Three cheers and tiger for "sdb.") Tour comments have been duly noted. I suggest you scroll past my posts in the future and save yourself the time. With all due respect, do you think I give a rat's *ss about whether you think I'm "whining."


-- Mr. Decker (, July 16, 1999.

Hey. Being constructive here. Detected a theme unbecoming of your station old boy. Blatant at Debunkers when refering to your TB2000 efforts. Subtle here. No lip quivering allowed in battle. Chin up! You're doing fine.

-- Carlos (, July 16, 1999.

Mr. Decker, oh brother, are you in for some real big surprises.

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

-- Glober (, July 17, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ