Hmmmmm???

-- a (a@a.a), July 20, 1999

Answers

Why are you on this forum every single day? That's probably a better question for you to ask.

-- (why@are.you?), July 20, 1999.

uh, maybe because I believe that the y2k period will be the most significant event since the Great Depression and first and second world wars combined?

Duh?

OTOH, why in hell's name the pollies would bother to unhabit this place 24/7, addicted to every topic we come up with, hanging on every poster's words....is beyond me. I mean, it's one thing for your spouse to be upset that you are obsessing with y2k prep when you EXPECT y2k to be serious, but how do they reconcile this when they THINK WE ARE JUST A BUNCH OF LUNATICS? Why do they not hang out at alt.conspiracy.hollow-earth and try to dispell the true believers over there?

-- a (a@a.a), July 20, 1999.

Its even worse than that, "a". Consider that they also inhabit "their" forum over at BFI or DE-BUNKY or whateverE hell it is, and actually compose their "attack plans" so to speak. Personally, I think they are just plain sick. The nearly incoherent babbling by CPR that you presented the other week sure seems to support this.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), July 20, 1999.

Please, "a." Let's you and I (and your straw man) have a seat and talk for just a moment. Very few people suggest Y2K will have absolutely no impact. In fact, it already has... at least in terms of IT spending.

Although uncommon on this forum, there are people who actually want to discuss the potential impacts of Y2K. On the other hand, there are people very upset about how Y2K will deny their children the benefits of civilization.

I thought the preparations forum was tailored for those folks who are convinced Y2K will be a global disaster. Why not hang out there and avoid all this unpleasant disagreement? You can wax philosophically about how good things used to be. You can swap recipes and homesteading tips free from the Y2KPro's of the world.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), July 20, 1999.

One thing you gotta say about 'a' is, he has a great ear for incoherent babbling.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), July 20, 1999.

But Decker and Flint didn't answer the question -- just more spew.

-- GI For A Reason (gotalife@this.forum), July 20, 1999.

Flint, which do you consider to be more "incoherent babbling", Milne quoting business, technical and political media reports and attempting to stitch together a worst case contingency plan, or folks like Decker spouting worthless shit like this gem from his 'a' and nostalgia thread:

There are worrisome trends, and I am quite willing to admit a level of discomfort about our current global economy.

WTF?

BTW Flint, KOS has you down to a tee. In case you missed it on the earlier thread:

The Flint approach: Even if some cities do not technically achieve complete absolute Y2K compliance (as if such a thing can be defined), enough work has been done and continues to be done so that we can rule out any bad smelling or tasting problems due to Y2K. Unless we do get a bad problem, in which case it will probably be a very bad problem. But there is no reason to think this will actually happen. Unless it does. But it won't.

-- a (a@a.a), July 20, 1999.

I'm beginning to think that people just like to hear themselves babble and post threads no matter how idiotic, just to see how many people will answer them. I think they get a rise in their Levi's doing this. JMHO.

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), July 20, 1999.

Most of the polly's that post here are paid Government Agents hired to dirsupt this Web site in order to prevent a bank run and a stockmarket crash.

-- freddie (freddie@thefreeloader.com), July 20, 1999.

Gosh, 'a,' I guess you find my writing shallow compared to Paul Milne's penetrating analysis of multinational corporations. The one where he lists the "foreign revenues" and leaps gracefully into the conclusion the domestic economy is "toast." Admittedly, who can compete with his economy of style... or thought? Although, you seem quite intellectually compatible. I remember fondly your gripping recount (if I might paraphrase): Life was better was I was a kid. It's worse now. Sociological or economic data? I don't need that stuff when a subjective personal opinion will do? Heady stuff, 'a.'

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), July 21, 1999.

If you want to see some really incoherent babbling, you'll just have to go to the master. Of course, I'm talking about CPR.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), July 21, 1999.

Yes decker, I thought I pretty well set you straight over there also. Lets post a link here so the newbies can marvel over our discourse as well, shall we?

OT: 'a' and nostalgia (long)

BTW, Ray and I are waiting for your input on the half dozen threads that you so hastily departed when the facts got too gloomy. Are you coming back out to play?

-- a (a@a.a), July 21, 1999.

And Flint, just how many items worthy of discourse have you brought to the forum? Practically none. But that has not stopped you from jumping into every fray to wax eloquently about this or that irrelevant issue, to opine at length over an insignificant detail, or to harangue the messenger when the news is unpleasant. Flint, you have found more ways to express "Nobody knows" than a roomful of monkeys with typewriters could have produced in 100 million years, and wasted almost as much bandwidth in the process. Your style has become more and more exasperated as you puzzle over just what your purpose here has become. At first, you played the role of Lead Debunker, and played it pretty well. But now that the evidence of a failed remediation is heavy and signs of a coming crisis are on the horizon, you are reduced to a babbling fountain of "Nobody knows" noises. Well Flint, frankly a lot of us are tired of accepting that, and we are moving on to the What if phase. Sorry if that upsets you.

-- a (a@a.a), July 21, 1999.

I've wished for a loooonnng time that the author's name would appear at the TOP of the reply, NOT the bottom.

The Happy Face replies are such a waste of time and space. Lacking both susbstance and rationale.

I'll give'm credit though...they're a persistant bunch...can you imagine them begging for food at your door EVERY single day (sometimes twice) after they've realized they're SOL... :(

If I'm wrong...(hope real, real hard I am)...I'll just eat well (which I do now), have some great camping gear (which I do now), and be a lot more self-sufficient which makes me and my family a great asset to my community and country every single day!

GI's aren't gonna be the ones in LINE panicing...it'll be the Happy- Go-Lucky (HGL's) crowd saying, "but, but what do you mean you don't have anymore?"...let's face it Polly's...LINES WILL FORM and it's all because your types procrastinating in DENIAL.

So Please STOP posting all your BLAH...if 1 person doesn't prepare because of what you said and things do head way SOUTH...I think it's called KARMA...sleep tight...

-- Nailbender (Ready_or_not_Here_I_come@12/31/99.net), July 21, 1999.

Not a very productive thread, folks. Let's get over the buzzwords (i.e. Polly, doomer) and let bygones be bygones. Thanks.

-- Root (metric@linuxdptx.com), July 21, 1999.

I think you're confusing Pollys and Trolls here. Accordong to the recent poll , there are quite a few pollys here. But they do GI. So why then are doomers and pollys so antagonistic? We are each allowed to form our own opinions on how bad it will get.

Trolls on the other hand, are the ones who are disruptive,DWGI, and add nothing to the forum. They are the ones who must have problems or they wouldn't stay around so much, you're right there.

Pollys belong here and give some balance to the forum whether you agree with them or not.

Trolls on the other hand should take a walk and get a life. Goodbye,Mutha, Y2KPro, and doomers@suck!

-- sue (deco100@aol.com), July 21, 1999.

"a,"

In fact, 'a,' you summarize my point neatly. The thread you refer to provide a wonderful example of how you (and many others) argue. You start with a conclusion and work backwards. You ignore the data that doesn't fit your hypothesis. You attack those who disagree and substitute personal experience for real data. Here comes my favorite part... when it's over, you declare victory no matter how the discussion is played out. Thanks, 'a.' I have a much better idea how your mind works when it comes to Y2K.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), July 21, 1999.

I sure do wish I knew where you and Flint *actually* stand, Decker. You two are like trying to pin down an octopus with a toothpick! Naturally, this only leads me to conclude that you have warped intellects....prepare but don't worry, don't bother preparing but be concerned, prepare but not too much, Y2K=baseball game? Patriots never retreat? I'm going to remove my money from the system, you know, the same system that is the furthest ahead in remediation?

Kiss off, both of you! You're opinions flit around without any substance, far more than a professional politician seeking office! Neither one of you could take a stand if you had four legs.

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), July 21, 1999.

BTW, any of us who HAVE taken a stand about Y2K, are ridiculed and labeled and made to look beneath your superior mental capabilities. We're pitched into the 'cultist' pile or the 'extremist' heap.

Beware.......we are unpredictable lunatics, just looking for an excuse to wrap ourselves with ammo (jungle style) and seek and destroy your friggin' 401K plans, trailing Skoal spit balls with Nazi insignias tatooed on our foreheads.

-shiver-

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), July 21, 1999.

I love a making a fool of himself and Will's writing with no substance. That's why I come here. I do miss Diane, though. She's even more of a marvel. Tell me, without Ed infamous predictions would any of you have decided Y2K would cause a ten year depression. Could any of you have figured this out on your own? Again it's a wonderful display of sheer stupidity and a joy to watch people argue this depression with no clue of any of the workings of Y2K.

BTW, what I do with my free time is only a concern to me, not you, a.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), July 21, 1999.

I "declare victory"? Reread your own words man, you AGREED with my main point:

If you actually read what I wrote, I speculated that the crime rate may not be a reliable indicator due to external factors

Regards,

- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), July 16, 1999.

So you half assed addressed one of my contentions, and ended up shooting yourself in the foot. Now go back to the original thread, halfway down, and cover the other two or three dozen that you conveniently ignored.

-- a (a@a.a), July 21, 1999.

Here you go, huckleberry.

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=0015mK

While I realize this may be difficult for you, 'a,' acknowledging the weakness of violent crime statistics as a general indicator of societal well being is not "agreeing" with you. It's thinking carefully about the issues. If you want a real, adult discussion about the contrast between the U.S. in 1973-74 and 1999, let's go. You present your FACTUAL case of the social and economic decline. I'll present mine on the advances. A rational fellow like Don Florence would agree that we can both make valid points. But please spare me the pretense that your personal recollections of the times are valid as a basis for your argument. One of the reasons I am here, 'a,' is to remind folks the scientific method is not a form of birth control.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), July 21, 1999.

Yo, a -- here, catch this can of Raid.

-- OutingsR (us@here.yar), July 21, 1999.

Apparently Maria still has mud in her various cavities....LOL! Still wearing a tail above your head too, Maria? Doesn't it interfere with your overblown self-important ego, or is it useful for keeping the flies away from your various theories? Perhaps you even used it to swat 'the bug'?

The Almighty Queen of Remediation......we bow in your presence.

(somebody order more rose petals, would ya?)

-- Will continue (farming@home.com), July 21, 1999.

Whoa, reminds me of a wet meme that I had recently: Maria and Will continue, doing their battling in the Yourdon Mudwrestling Pit, their fury exhausting, their passions inflaming....

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), July 21, 1999.

You do have to ask the question. When the spouses of the polly posters ask why they are spending so much time on the internet, are they saying things like:

"I'm busting up random thought processes"

or

"Just experiencing my daily constitutional, dear"

or

"You don't understand. These folks are NUTS. Someone has to ridicule them, and that someone is ME"

*** Since I have never visited any of the debunker forums, and have no interest in them (I know that if they had valid contrary information, they would immediately post it over here...axiomatic), I conclude that visitation to the debunker sites by regulars of this forum is limited to those that have the extra time to do so and for those that are curious.

-- OR (orwelliator@biosys.net), July 21, 1999.