You have to read this to believe it. Actually, you probably won't believe it even after you read it.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 06, 1999

Answers

Steve, that's truly one of the sadest things I've ever read. Makes the pollies around here seem positive gloomers. I feel terribly sorry for that person and those who listen to him/her.

-Greybear

OTOH, if I were being a wag (which I *never* do), I would suggest that that person is a waste of otherwise good protoplasm.

-- Greybear (greybear@home.com), August 06, 1999.

Uh, this might explain it Steve...

"Andrew Purvis holds a Doctorate in Materials Science & Engineering from The University of Michigan. He is a former Assistant Professor of Manufacturing Engineering at Bradley University in Peoria, Illinois. He currently holds a senior engineering position at Howmet Corporation in Whitehall. Among his duties are extensive manufacturing process computer simulations using a variety of highly specialized programs and computer systems."

He's a BRAINIAC (God help us...)

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 06, 1999.

Steve, this is a sordid piece of propaganda.

Obviously, the Y2K propagandameisters haven't thoroughly indoctrinated their lesser lackies.

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), August 06, 1999.

Good propaganda is convincing.

Bad propaganda is laughably stupid.

-- Randolph (dinosaur@williams-net.com), August 06, 1999.

Here's the letter I wrote to the newspaper that this piece of garbage appeared in:

I've just finished reading a "guest column" in your newspaper entitled "Nothing Disasterous[sic]" by Andrew Purvis. Frankly, I'm astonished that any newspaper would publish something of such low quality. First of all, there are numerous typos, including the misspelled title. Secondly, the writing is of abysmal quality, containing numerous dangling modifiers, slang, run-on sentences, and general misuse of the English language that would earn a very low grade in any high school English composition class.

But that is by far the least of the defects in this article, which displays the most astonishing ignorance of basic issues in date manipulation by computer that I have ever seen published, especially written by someone who claims knowledge of the computer field. The statement that "computers simply do not care what day it is and will continue to function as normal whether the date reads the years 1900, 1776, or 2569" is bad enough, because of course the question is not whether computers care what day it is but whether they will properly calculate time intervals and whether one date comes before or after another. But what is even more absurd is his suggested means of "testing" the Y2K readiness of your computer: setting the date back a few years. As far as I know, no one has ever before suggested that the Y2K problem involves the inability to read files created later than the system clock date. Therefore, his "test" has absolutely no relation to the problem at hand. His explanation of the 9/9/99 problem is equally ludicrous: again, no one has ever previously suggested that the date "just may increment incorrectly on some systems" on or around that time, as he (mis-)states the problem.

I could go on for pages about the myriad errors and misstatements of fact in this article, but I think the above is sufficient to indicate the author's complete non-comprehension of the problem.

There actually is quite a bit of good information about the Y2K problem, and you would be doing the public a service by informing them of it. However, this article does quite the opposite: it misinforms them about a potentially disastrous situation.

-- Steve Heller (stheller@koyote.com), August 06, 1999.

Too pathetic for words...

-- Nabi Davidson (nabi7@yahoo.com), August 06, 1999.

Ah, but what you don't understand is that since this is a guest article, they din't have to pay him for it! That is what many small publications are about. I can see they don't pay the proofreader above minimum wage, either.

-- Mara Wayne (MaraWayne@aol.com), August 06, 1999.

Ugly stuff but a polite E to the editor can't hurt and might help.

Mine read: "You do your readership no service by printing opinions from authors as poorly informed as Andrew Purvis."

-- Carlos (riffraff1@cybertime.net), August 07, 1999.

I can't understand why the guy didn't get tenure at Univ. of Michigan?

-- Dave (aaa@aaa.com), August 07, 1999.

The saddest thing is the last sentence:

"He is married with two small children."

His PRIDE is what is so stupid. I have heard NO "doomer" make the depth of assumptions he is, and hes betting the lives (maybe) of his "two small children" that he knows it all.

And once you've went to college and actually talked to them, you never put more weight on what a "assistant proffessor" or PH.D says over anyone else anyway.

-- Jon Johnson (narnia4@usa.net), August 07, 1999.

species die back is natural

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), August 07, 1999.

If this guy was a manufacturing specialist, howcome he never seems to have heard of embedded chips?

-- Forrest Covington (theforrest@mindspring.com), August 07, 1999.

A college degree and big salary do not a wise man make. Either that or maybe the U of M is actually a diploma mill...

-- a (a@a.a), August 07, 1999.

Steve:

Point taken; but if this is "the stupidest article I've ever seen on any topic" you don't read enough....

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 07, 1999.

Gawd, I hope U of M hasn't turned into a diploma mill...I worked my butt off to get accepted and earn a bachelor's degree from there!

Of course, I didn't enroll in any of their grad school programs, which may explain why I don't agree with the article and don't share this dude's train of thought ;-)

-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), August 07, 1999.

I had the dubious honor of actually getting to read that tripe on real paper, as I live in the area and the rag in question is our local weekly "newspaper".

They gave it full court press, letting it take up about half the editorial page. Interestingly, that "newspaper" has a policy of refusing to print letters from people who refuse to supply their meatspace addresses.

Even more interesting is that they did *not* supply Purvis's address - - although a quick perusal of the *other* letters they have on their website (and, in their printed editions) *do* have addresses printed.

I've written quite a few letters to the editor for other newspapers, including one lengthy one to the Detroit News many years ago, which they printed as a "commentary" column (surprised the hell out of me too). I can't recall any that weren't printed -- although I do know that some of my satires commenting on the infamous "CMU riots" in the Morning Sun *did* result in a few thinly veiled death threats, phone in to my *father* because my phone number was unlisted, while his was not.

My point here is that in *no* other community have I *ever* been *required* to supply my street address, and in *no* other newspaper have I *ever* seen Letters To The Editor *accompanied* by the writers' street addresses.

BTW, this same publication printed a similar bit o' tripe by the president (or CEO?) of the Shelby State Bank a few months ago. Perhaps it's still on their website? It is about as solid a piece of writing as the current item under discussion. [g]

Perhaps it's time for me to clean out a corner of my barn and buy a printing press...

-- Ron Schwarz (rs@clubvb.com.delete.this), August 08, 1999.

Tim:

"Gawd, I hope U of M hasn't turned into a diploma mill...I worked my butt off to get accepted and earn a bachelor's degree from there!"

I wouldn't worry. The U of M remains one of the best Universities in the world.

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), August 08, 1999.

Interesting that most of you hide behind your email addresses. You also failed to mention that our newspaper printed all the responses to the guest column in question. Everyone on your comment area seems to agree. Must easier and less challenging that way. Plus, you don't have to worry about a polite method of discussing differing views. I think many of you may have valid information to share, please go back and review your responses though, you were too concerned with being cute and talking about how superior you are to actually share those ideas. FYI, before our newspaper website was launched in March we did print articles re: Y2K preparedness, particularly one from an ISP that took up as much or more room on a page then he one written by Mr. Purvis. That article was published in the news section of the paper. Please also recognize the views opposing Mr. Purvis that were published and offered information, not merely insults. I noticed one of your writers mentioned the proofreading of the Purvis article. I guess I have what might me a different theory on that (you are certainly welcome to disagree). My thought is, if someone writes a letter to the editor or guest opinion and I clean it all up, it changes the way the audience evaluates the writer, takes it out of context. If it were the work of one of our newspaper writers it would be edited and reviewed for the style and content consistent with our new writing. Also, regarding the writer that disagreed with our policy of requiring street addresses for letters to the editor  I will just offer this thought  many times in both large cities and small towns there are more than one or two people with the same name. When people are writing about an issue it helps readers identify where the concerns are coming from, and it protects the "innocent" the people with the same name that did not write the letter. Mr. Heller, I thank you for your polite correspondence regarding the column and your direct replies.

Kind regards to all. Mary Sanford Oceana's Herald-Journal Editor

-- Mary Sanford (ohj@voyager.net), September 03, 1999.

Ms. Sanford -

You commented that forum participants "also failed to mention that our newspaper printed all the responses to the guest column in question."

Did the responses appear in that same edition? If not, it would be unlikely that many of the forum participants could have read them, since the vast majority are unlikely to read the Oceana (MI) Herald-Journal daily, or even monthly.

That said, I for one would certainly like to read these responses to Mr. Purvis' guest column. Please provide a URL or date reference for the on-line edition of the Herald-Journal in which they appear. Thanks.

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), September 03, 1999.

Ms. Sanford, what I would like to know is if the Herald-Journal agrees with Mr. Purvis's views. And if not, why then publishing something so utterly misguiding for your reader's safety?

Surely you yourself know the government's official stance on Y2K, and FEMA and the Red Cross's preparation recommendations for the roll-over period.

Granted your readers might simply view this "guest columnist" article for what it is, an opinion, and hopefully they are more informed than he is, but I'm thinking of all the vulnerable people like my elderly in-laws who have absolutely no knowledge of computers and still use old technology acquired in their prime years. They look at Mr. Purvis's "credentials", read the lingo-jumbo, and are impressed. "This guy makes a lot of sense", they must think. And "he's right, television loves to hipe a lot of ridiculous things these days."

Even if Y2K turns out a "bump-in-the-road" lasting 1 week to a month as the Y2K Clinton appointee Koskinen tells us, your readers need to take some precautions and at least take Koskinen, Fema and the Redcross seriously, if not for their actual personal safety, at the very least for their well-being and comfort. Wouldn't you feel it very irresponsible to print a column making fun of and downplaying the dangers of an aproaching severe hurricane, and those who made preparations? Would you even consider publishing it as a "guest" columnist?

-- Chris (%$^&^@pond.com), September 03, 1999.

WHAT A MEATHEAD!!!!

Well, he is right about one thing ...

"airplanes will remain in the sky"

.. because the airports and the FAA will be too screwed up to help them land! Until they run out of fuel, and then they'll take their chances at getting onto the tarmac without having a midair collision.

-- @ (@@@.@), September 03, 1999.