I have had the chance this weekend to sit down, relax, and think. This posting is not one of the famous "returns from retirement" a la George Foreman, but simply a single response to the developments on the truce (and related) threads over the weekend.

Once I'm done, I'll be keeping my word and butting out, until such time as I think the forum is worth returning to. (No offence meant, but underpinning my position on all this is that right now theres a lot of time being wasted in semantics, and one thing we agree on is that there's not enough time left for playground antics. If this place stays exactly as it is, then I'll seek out a new place to discuss my views, and I'm sure many here will rejoice at that).

A couple of non-partisan posters (I prefer to call them "moderates") interjected into the truce threads, and a few true gems of insight were forthcoming. The idea that this forum could be MORE productive, and more useful, with less stupidity and adversorialism, seemed to strike a chord with some. I can only reiterate that my agenda stops right there. I dont have any interest in destroying this forum. None whatsoever, and while I'm certain Outings, lisa, a, will and KoS (and probably even Diane) will post eloquently and vociferously to propagate the idea that I'm "just another destructive troll from de-bunky", its not those people that I'm addressing here. In fact I think, given some time, that I could probably draft their responses for them, and build the case for my personality assassination myself.

So I'm not really bothering to cross swords with those people here. This post is addressed to the larger body of moderate and sometimes silent readers, who may share my concern that too much yelling is done here at the expense of insightful debate.

Those who see Y2K as important, and who actually spend time and even money to participate in forums such as this one, I believe, deserve the chance to read and participate in debates of the highest quality, full of well-stated opinion, ideally expert analysis, and local viewpoints on anything related to the subject. Is that what people are getting right now ? I dont think so.

So what kind of forum am I referring to ? Maybe I should describe it, because as was pointed out over the weekend, (and has been seen in real-life negotiations recently in such diverse places as Ireland, The Middle East and Pakistan), there is fear and distrust present on both sides, and those who wish to perpetuate an environment of conflict can utilise those natural instincts to further their ends. The kind of change required is, I believe, minor. Imagine a forum where the kind of postings which trigger-off the nonsense ad-hominem distractions are removed REGARDLESS OF THE IDENTITY OR POSITION OF THE POSTER . . in other words, if it doesnt add anything to the discussion except personal invective . . its toast. (yeah, yeah, censorship . . but ask yourself WHO WANTS THOSE POSTS LEFT IN ?? ON EITHER SIDE ?). That means we get the discussion, and we dont have to wade through the noise. Sound good ? The only question many will ask is . . what safeguards are there that this censorship will be carried out fairly and openly and without bias ? Well, none I guess, but you dont have that now, so it couldnt get any worse. And youll easily be able to see if there are problems, because a one-sided arrangement always comes across as what it is, and it cant really be disguised behind smoke.

The only thing required for this to work, is a democratic team of moderators who can apply the rules objectively. Thats all. The analogy with a baseball game was made over the weekend. Good analogy. Right now, its the grey team against the blue team, but the umpire is wearing blue, and decides who's gonna win before the first ball is pitched. Would you bother to go to see such a game ? Someone asked "where would we find a moderator with no opinion on Y2K ?" Good question . . you never would. BUT THATS NOT IMPORTANT. You dont need an umpire who's not interested in baseball, nor is it impossible for him to do his job well even if he DOES personally support one of the teams playing. That happens all the time. What you need is someone who can put aside their personal position in order to do their job. Like an umpire. Like the chairman of a committee. Sure they get a vote, but they dont use their position to influence the result further than democracy will allow. It can be seen all over the place in everyday life. The problem is, its not happening here.

So I get asked "why do you feel like the underdog" ? I get called a paranoid. I get told to like it or leave. Well, right now, if thats the option on the table, then fine . . I'm leaving. However, I'm hoping that fair-minded game fans here will pick up on the idea and add their voices. (No doubt the usual handles will pitch in and try to distract the discussion from here on, but you know thats going to happen. Ignore it). Say what YOU think anyway. If you'd prefer a forum where we can cut the BS and get down to talking about Y2K, and really debate the information, so as to be sure that we're taking our preps in the right direction, and adjusting for each new development, then what have you got to lose by saying so ? Those who have sent me mail privately over the past weeks have been instrumental in my determination to at least make this message heard. (PREDICTION :- IF she decides to reply . . Diane will say . . "its about Y2K, like it or leave, nuff said". Its up to you to decide whether thats good enough. (Its NOT Diane's forum, its yours - as the people who breathe life into it with your postings, and if you decide not to put up with it, shes either gonna have to listen, or sit here talking to about 6 other people. Remember, this isnt a crusade against Diane, if she can change her stance, and do the job right, then I'm 100% behind her. It's the end, not the means that matters ).

So, this is MY sayonara speech, or "Hastaluego" speech really. I dont pretend that its anywhere near as important as Mr Yourdons, but in my own way, I hope that at least I made a few people ask some questions.

I wish everyone the very best of luck now, throught the rollover, and into what is (by mutual agreement) bound to be a very interesting new millennium. Y2K isnt about being right or wrong, its about using our (God-given if you're that way inclined) human talents for questioning, seeking out, analysing, debating and above all adapting. Thats what will get us through.

Kindest Regards

W

-- W0lv3r1n3 (W0lv3r1n3@yahoo.com), July 26, 1999

Answers

To new answers

W

-- W0lv3r1n3 (W0lv3r1n3@yahoo.com), July 26, 1999.

I'm sorry, you must have mistaken this forum for some other. Forums for the moderate to very optimistic point of view are here:

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/mbs.cgi/mb237006

http://206.28.81.29/HyperNews/get/gn.html

This is more a forum for the moderate to very pessimistic point of view, as indicated by its originating from Ed Yourdon's book, Timebomb 20000, which discusses various pessimistic Y2K scenarios, and by the information in the About section. Why should it change to a moderate to very optimistic outlook just to please you and a virtual handful of others? This has been discussed ad infinitum, ad nauseum, and ad absurdum. Enough.

-- Sick (and tired@this.constant.replay), July 26, 1999.

"This forum is intended for people who are concerned about the impact of the Y2000 problem on their personal lives, and who want to discuss various fallback contingency plans with other like-minded people."

About

-- (about@about.about), July 26, 1999.

W0lv3r1n3

I have made an offer to CD and now I would like to make an offer to you. If you would like a forum developed in your vision I would be more than happy to set one up for you. The vision that you are asking for is worthy yet hard to acheive. BD and Chuck have developed a forum that is strict and works. It can be done. But there is no "team" at the delete button here and I think that none should exist.

You are correct that on both sides of the debate personal attacts have been thrown. This is a shame. But IMHO a close moderation of all posts would do more harm than good.

Unfortunately you have choosen to be the squeaky wheel. If you were really interested in chatting about Y2K then do so.

For example, I expect to have a dial tone, power (in short order), a bank with a door open and a local Government that will operate in some form or fashion.

I have no fear of saying this on the forum. Exactly what is your problem?

So if you would like to have another forum that you can have a conversation with like minded folk then feel free to contact me and I will set one up. Takes less than an hour for a simple one.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), July 26, 1999.

Tired, depressed, bored, disillusioned. (But still genuine)
Friday, 23-Jul-1999 13:30:05

193.243.244.12 writes:

http://www.InsideTheWeb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi?acct=mb237006&MyNum= 932751005&P=No&TL=932751005

Well,

anyone whos noted my recent spate of posts to TB2000, attempting to get some kind of movement (or weight of opinion) going among the more moderate people there with a view to injecting fairness and logic into the way the forum is run, I am coming round to the sad realisation that it's all to no avail.

The moderates there are powerless. Either they choose to ignore the wrongdoing which has become systemic in that place, or some force is exerted to keep them from expressing any reservations they may have.

I collected a few unexpected allies on certain threads. No lesser man than Hardliner revealed himself as a thoughtful and insightful individual with no small amount of spine. Likewise, others, on other threads, dared to admit that they found some element of my argument to have sound foundation. But the end result was, Im sad to say, failure.

CPR, I know your views on some of the reasons behind some of the phenomena on view there. I'm beginning to see where youre coming from.

In any case, having crossed swords with Lisa once or twice, I'd have to say that she's not the person we thought she was. (Intellectually, and in terms of honesty and motive).

My apologies to those here who liked the idea of a little more debate, and a little less invective, but I fear I'm all in.

Regards

W

W0lv3r1n3

-- spend time making (changes@de.bunker.instead), July 26, 1999.

W: "Once I'm done, I'll be keeping my word and butting out, until such time as I think the forum is worth returning to."

Don't hold your breath W. Bad manners will be on display until the very end. Such is the way of the vast majority of our species. Compassion is not, it seems, a desireable trait for most to cultivate.

Also, as you fully understand, the consensus of the new Sysops/moderators group will continue to foster venomous attacks from the doomer end of the spectrum until such time as they decide to take a firm hand by warning publicly, & then censoring posts which contain personal attacks, regardless of who is being reamed. Unless Chuck has plans for a coup detat, this ain't gonna happen!

As to Diane, I'm at a loss. She had been a shining example of intelligence & compassion motivated by her inner drive to help others. The results were spectacular! Month after month Ms. Squire contributed more to the cause, informing ourselves as to the latest Y2K news from myriad sources, than any TEN regular posters.

The handing-over of the sysop reigns to her has not been disastrous to the forum IMO. It probably has caused Diane much heartache. Quite unfortunate.

My gut feeling is that Diane is being unduly influenced by the most paranoid members of the sysops/moderators group, whose membership roles remain a mystery to me (though I have a guess or two), in that the fear of a hostile takeover of this forum by so-called "organized pollies" requires the cultivation of an "attack squad". These lesser- lights are used in an attempt to drive away those who may be conspiring to usurped this forum.

I have stayed away from this forum much of this month. Why? My preps are now 95% complete. There is little change in the positions of TPTB. The media is still asleep. The sheeple are likewise snoozing. And the meek will not inherit the earth in the very near future.

I'll continue to check in from time to time. I have & will continue to consider TB2000 as the place to be for all things Y2K.

Best Wishes,

-- Bingo1 (howe9@pop.shentel.net), July 26, 1999.

W, I'm new to this board, so I have no idea who these people are and what rude and/or slanderous things they may have said about you, but I've been on other boards and have been flamed a time or two. And, yes, I've had my blood pressure raised more than a few digits, by the experience on more than one occasion. I know you can get to a burn out point from the endless, pointless arguing over small details. I've allowed myself to get sucked into arguments with people I essentially agreed with over things as silly as semantics. It sucks the worst and sometimes you come to the decision that you're better off to just drop out. However, censorship? That's where I make the sign of the cross and call you the evil one. No. No way. ABSOFUCKINGLUTELY NOT! There is, to be sure, no shortage of seriously deranged people on this board. In just two days of reading the postings here, I've already identified enough to fill the average asylum, But, in a free exchange of information, they get to say their piece, too. Derangement is a verrrrrrry subjective concept. So, not incidentally, is the judgement that what a particular poster is ranting about is irrelavant/pointlessly contentious/destructive/etc.. It might be just so much ugly noise, to you, but to another reader, it might help him or her come to a conclusion about a long grappled-with issue (even if it's just that it helps them to decide that the holders of a particular point of view really are crazier than bat shit). If it's overwhelming to you, just take a break. As for me, give me liberty, or give me death. High Ho! Bok

-- Bokonon (bokonon@my-deja.com), July 26, 1999.

Bingo, you might be surprised to find that Di and I are pretty much on the same page in most things, Forum-wise. Or at least I think we are (and if i'm wrong my e-mail bell will ring soon enough!). we have TRIED to maintain the very odd, nearly organic, mix of views here, that were here when the reins were turned over. This has been an experiment. If you had been privy to the (there has to be a -est past blizzard, but I don't know it flurry-blizzard-??) ?? of e-mails that went around as the first few days of anarchy occurred, hyou would have seen much soul searching, much debating, much cautioning, about just how to go about this thing called a Forum. The forum had become a community, fairly close knit, with all of the usual curiosities that a community or a family gets. There was weird Uncle Harold, over under the mistle toe, couldn't move him. There was Uncle D out on the porch, holding prayer meetings, with out any spiritual ritual (figure it out if you are too young to remember the term), there was a guy who claimed to be a driver at night but nobody could figure out what he drove, or where. There were a few folks who were crying from the roof tops that we were all domed (well close but I meant doomed), and a few who were crying from the front lawn that it wasn't that way at all, and a couple who kind of tended to float froom the roof to the lawn and back again. There were also some folks cruising around the block in a couple pick- up trucks, tossing pumpkins at the mailboxes, and throwing their beer cans on the lawns in the neighborhood. None of the family really thought much about them as they didn't stick around to talk about anything, they just tosed and ran. And then a couple started to stick around, and seemed to have an inexhaustable supply of empty cans to toss on the yards. Not surprisingly, those who had their yards trashed by beer cans put up a fuss. And it got a bit louder, and the cops came in and shut it down for a bit, but the marshall decided to retire. In a SURPRISING lack of foresight, he forgot to do things in the proper order. He SHOULD have appointed a new marshall, BEFORE he retired. He did not and the folks with the pickup trucks came back and indicated that they were here to torch the houses, run the residents off because they were contaminated, and close the neighborhood. At this time the marshall had been appointed, and had not wanted to be publicly acclaimed, and didn't want to come on as the fastest deleting gun in cyberspace. Her style is much more of a conciliator, a person who lurks, asks, and watches before doing anything rash (by her lights). A consensus builder, not an autocrat. It is open to question whether this is the best type of person to have in the role as sysop/senior moderator. If we were sufficiently adult enough to only need a facilitator, I do NOT personally know of a beter person or personality than Diane for the position. I am convinced that this is where this forum MUST go in order to do what is needed, what I see as needed. As long as we continue to make Paul Milne look polite, and that is what we are about down to at this point, we will be unable to assist people in seeing that the situation has a cetain non-zero probability of a sub-optimal outcome, and assist them in preparing for that possibility.

I suspect that were I or anyone else to "admit" that we were currently constitutionally unable to perform the above task, in italics, regardless of how much weight that "admission" might have, or how close to an accurate description it might be, there would be rejoicing on at least two fora/bbs's immediately post that posting. I say this because the "leaders" of the fora I refer to have said that their goal is to render this forum incapable of doing exactly what I have defined above. These "leaders" would have succeeded.

The folks in the pickup trucks would have run the families in the neighborhood off, and would have secured themselves a place to deposit their empty cans, empty their bladders and etc.

It is just this type of attack that we have been trying to stave off. UNFORTUNATELY, several folks from the family have not been helping. This is as it will be in most families. There is always a cousin who hasn't read the bulletin board and leaps out in fromt of the pick-up truck and throws the pumpkin back. Unfortunately, this is usually the rather slower of the cousins and he manages to throw the pumpkin back at the Marshall's truck. Or the school principal's car.

In closing, (WHEW! Thought he'd NEVER quit! PIPE DOWN IN BACK)I would DEARLY love to see this forum monitored as closely as the prep forum, and would even step up, take the arrows and do some of the deleting. There is ONLY ONE problem with that. I CAN see the Y2K relevance in Andy's NWO "crap", in KoFE's (or is it King of Spain (?)'s you guys all runtogether) invitation to mudwrestle, or even (I think ) Rob Michaels "Koo Koo KuJube" . I suspect that I would make NO ONE happy, which just may be where we need to go to get back to the evolved purpose of this forum, which I italic'd above. The REAL problem, though is that there can NEVER be as clear a definition of purpose for this forum as there is for the Prep Forum. And BECAUSE I CAN see the relevance to the above, there can never be as clear a "line in the sand".

If we take the italic'd statement above, and try to draw a line in the sand, as we have in the Prep Forum, we have to, of right, invite a valid cross section of opinion to the forum. There are serious posters that this does not make happy. On alternate Thursdays, when the bishop is wearing blue, I agree with them. (Which bishop? well, ...) We should probably try to do this anyway. And, as the flames are sparked, we should try to extinguish them immediately. Sound like a fun place to be?? Not to me. I have a fairly high tolerance for BS, and flaming, Lord knows I had BETTER! So I might leave a lot that might offend people. That's the problem with the inability to draw an objective line. There is TOO MUCH that has relevance (even if only for comic relief). If someone can show me how to draw the line, (let's do this discussion by either e-mail or IM chat) I, as one of the LOUDER (but not necessarily best heard, which is OK, i guess) members of the "Gang of 18" (or is it only 13?) would be HAPPY to toss it around among the rest of our moderator team.

Otherwise, I suspect that what W0lv3r1n3 called the misplaced fear may have a chance of succeeding.
BTW I do NOT for a MINUTE believe that the fear was misplaced, due to the quoted articles (I stretch a term) from the neighborhood of the pickup truck drivers. Chuck Rienzo, a night driver, and part time sysop on the Prep Forum

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), July 27, 1999.

"to assist people in seeing that the situation has a cetain non-zero probability of a sub-optimal outcome, and assist them in preparing for that possibility."

Chuck

That is a beautiful quote. Is it yours?

Oh and as to moderating the forum.... what about the dirty little secret??

The fruitcake thread(s).......

-- Brian (imager@home.com), July 27, 1999.

Brian;

Yes, it's mine. Something about the effects of an Emergency Medicine hobby on one's vocabularly.

As far as the "dirty little secret" of the fruitcake threads, they are not the only outlets the forum denizens have or have had. Look for the Assylum threads for Haiku, and the Circus threads for humor.

there is nothing out of order to have a humor thread going, after all, even YOU have a sense of humor, and need some comic relief now and then. Besides laughing is much preferable to the other option, as one considers the areas of one's world at risk.

Besides, at this point, they are the only place that some people can recapture the kitchen table feel of the older forum, the virtual kitchen and virtual perpetual coffe pot as it were.

Chuck

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), July 27, 1999.

Bingo -- what a lot of us object to is, if you'll pardon the pun, wolves in sheep's clothing. Many of the trolls post to this forum with messages of reason and free-speech. But if you look at their postings on other forums -- before some of us pulled them and cross-posted them here to show them in their true light and they got more careful with their words -- you'd agree that their motives are very suspect. You've seen discussion about memes, this "mind virus" thing that the Bonkers/BFI folks insist we are infected with and are spreading to naive others? Wolfie is a meme-believer too. Not only that, he says "doomers" are driven by the same impulse as those who destroy telephones and break public restrooms, that we have the mentality of the average gas-station attendant -- Y2K is "a whacko news story," "entertainment." And this: "For all their bull and bluster, the 'doom and gloomer' personalities are now, and will always be, nothing more worrying or dangerous than a noisy dog chained to a post in someones yard along the street. The noise they make may cause other dogs in the neighbourhood to bark too, but so long as society keeps them on a leash, they can never be more than a nuisance."

Wolfie says above -- "...given some time, that I could probably draft their responses for them, and build the case for my personality assassination myself." You already did, Wolfie, you already did.

http://206.28.81.29/HyperNews/get/gn/900/2.html

Easy to explain Psychologically

Forum: Gary North is a Big Fat Idiot Forum Re: the battle of the NOISE (Doc Paulie)

Date: Mar 08, 07:17 From: W0lv3r1n3

This phenomena does not fly in the face of any accepted psychological principles regarding the flow of information around a predicted disaster. By which I mean . .

1) Those people who believe in a doom prediction will always seek to convert others to their way of thinking. This happens for many reasons, including the natural human desire to be part of a majority rather than a minority, the genuine desire to help others by disseminating information which one considers vital to survival, the perverse pleasure which many find in being the first person to "clue everyone in to the bad news" and of course good old-fashioned vandalism (the same impulse which drives some in society to random acts of malevolence such as willfully breaking public facilities like phone booths and toilets).

2) Anyone falling into any of the above categories would, for obvious reasons, place far higher importance to the issues in question than would someone outside the "circle of fear". Hence their willingness to spend time and money building websites and "spreading the word". This of course is not true of the non-believers. It stands to reason that someone who DID NOT believe that the earth was about to be devoured by a "Giant Sharp-toothed Space Wombat" would be unlikely to spend time and effort creating a "Giant Sharp-toothed Space Wombats do not exist" website.

3) The media, such as it is, has very little to gain from disseminating good news or debunking bad news predictions. Those who feed us our information must always pander to human psychological needs if they are to succeed. Stories such as Y2K, when dressed up effectively, sell copy, for a while. But when boiled down, its nothing more than titillation, and has to be accompanied by a cheer-up companion story in order to be palatable. Ever wonder why the typical 1 hour serious-TV-news program will generally save a token "Human interest, light hearted, good news" story for the very end? The reason is simple. Bad news sells better than good news, but its good practice in ANY media to leave the audience with a warm feeling inside (after youve scared them half to death). Those still in doubt as to this principle should refer to any distaster movie, horror flick (or novel) or fairground white-knuckle attraction for confirmation. The rule is "Slap 'em awake, then tell 'em it's all gonna be ok".

4) As has been amply illustrated in previous posts to this site, much of the "noise" on Y2K can be explained by entrepreneurial "cash in" projects, whereby products or services are offered, to "protect" the gullible from the perceived threat. Therefore, the force behind the resultant publicity would simply be financial profit. To continue my earlier metaphor, one would expect to see the above mentioned website IMMEDIATELY followed up by a string of "FOR SALE.... Giant-Sharp-toothed-Space-Wombat-proof body armour (only $399.99)" websites.

The truth about all this noise is quite encouraging. Given the understandable tendancy for the media to over-hype any available whacko story for maximum impact and duration (most of which, without the right "treatment" (AKA disinformation) would be unlikely to spook anyone with a higher mental capacity than the average gas-station attendant), very few ordinary people ever actually ACT on this kind of information. Its simply entertainment. Those who DO act, will (conversely) tend to be those already furthest removed from the fast, close-knit and technologically connected communities found in large towns and cities. Indeed, it can be said that in the target-areas for the media, the noise to action ratio for these kinds of issues remains at the very edge of the envelope.

For all their bull and bluster, the "doom and gloomer" personalities are now, and will always be, nothing more worrying or dangerous than a noisy dog chained to a post in someones yard along the street. The noise they make may cause other dogs in the neighbourhood to bark too, but so long as society keeps them on a leash, they can never be more than a nuisance.

Once the media (driven by their audience) grows tired of this issue, there will be another along shortly after. And without doubt certain individuals, some smart and canny, others weird and delusional, will step into the breach of the meme and start the fear machine up all over again. And all it means is that the wheel keeps turning.

"Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player That struts and frets his hour upon the stage And then is heard no more: it is a tale Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing."

William Shakespeare - Macbeth Act 5 Scene 5.

-------------------------

"The Shepherd drives the wolf from the sheep's throat, for which the sheep thanks the shepherd as his liberator, while the wolf denounces him for the same act.... Plainly, the sheep and the wolf are not agreed upon a definition of liberty." Abraham Lincoln, Baltimore, April 1864.

-- OutingsR (us@here.yar), July 27, 1999.