This is why pollys are pollys. Polly's are afraid of having their bubble burst, because they have an investment in living a life of illusion. For whatever reason, denial etc., any reference to things changing to the extent that their fantasy will no longer exist is a definite threat. That is why Pro's and Shmoe's keep boring us with their nonsense that 'Y2k ain't gonna happen!', without any factual evidence to back them up. We are a threat to their fantasy lives. Reality is simply too painful for people like Doomerssuck and Y2K Pro. They are more afraid than they will ever admit, because their whole internal world will come crashing down (forget about their external world) if they are deprived of their fantasy life.

DOWNtheROAD

-- DOWNtheROAD (foo@foo.com), August 12, 1999

Answers

Reality is a good friend of mine, obviously not of yours however. Keep on with your analysis though, if it makes you feel better.

The reason I haven't been trolling lately and just lurking is because your so entertaining. All this (OT) stuff is just getting ridiculous and, and like Billy Joel says, never argue with a crazy man. So while I heed that valuable advice you go ahead and keep making yourselves look foolish, it's a laugh riot, honestly. UNLESS, you all WANT me to start trolling again, which I'll gladly do. You know, just to give you Dooming idiots something solid to rebel against so you don't look totally ineffectual and useless, at least, to yourselves. Meanwhile a Billion Chinese don't care whether any of you live, die , or marry a mule.

Happy trails, Doom Zombies.

-- (Doomers@suck.com), August 12, 1999.

Denial, is not just a river in Egypt.....

-- It's (All@Conspiracy.com), August 12, 1999.

Actually, I partially agree with Doomer on one issue. The (OT) posts are sometimes interesting, but this is a Y2K forum - there are other boards for that stuff. It seems every 3rd post lately is OT, and any explosion/power outage is somehow Y2K related.

For the record, I think pollys are simply too unimaginative and technically/socially inept to be able to see/accept the risks inherent in Y2K - not just the Y2K with broken code and embedded systems, but also the Y2K that has radical religous zealots with bombs and agendas, and internal company politics and overworked coders/testers cutting corners to make key dates, and government reports that put a veneer sheen on everything, and people doing completely predictable things like checking dial tone at 12:01 and filling their tanks new years eve and doubling their shopping list on Dec 31st.

This Y2K issue has far transgressed the simple date field issues - which will likely be simply the catalyst that gets the rest going. The incredible unpredictability of the whole phenomenon is what has me spooked. I have a responsibility to provide for my family's needs and keep them safe, and ignoring such an obvious risk would be foolhardy.

Canuck

-- canuck (canuck@canada.com), August 12, 1999.

Hi Doomersuck, your piece was (once again) lacking a shred of reality and had nothing worthwhile to say. Why am I not suprised. So your presence is definitely not missed. Just want to keep pointing that out, maybe its working. Thanks for staying away. By the way, if you come across some facts, or evidence, we'd all be happy to hear from you. Otherwise, enjoy lurking, its obvious you're good at it.

DOWNtheROAD

-- DOWNtheROAD (foo@foo.com), August 12, 1999.

Why the interest in putting optimists on "the couch?"

Once again, we hear the chatter about how the "GIs" are the visionary geniuses of the modern world; superior in insight, intellect and knowledge to the "masses." These gifted futurists can understand complex systems far better than the people actually managing the systems... and are morally superior to the international cabal of conspirators insidiously trying to institute a "one world" government.

What I find truly amazing is how these mental titans have carefully hidden themselves in middle class America. One cannot help but think individuals so superior would rise to positions of great power. How is it the "GIs" have avoided becoming the leaders of the free world, the captains of industry, the movers and shakers of civilization?

Is is an inner discipline... or is there a more sinister plot afoot? Are these "GIs" really the alien invaders we have heard about from authorities like Art Bell? Perhaps this explains their other-wordly intelligence, their uncanny ability to read "between the lines" of government reports?

Probably not.

Regards,

-- Mr. Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), August 12, 1999.

DOWNthe ROAD

Exactly where did your 'piece' provide any factual information?

All I see is someone that appears to be very jealous of the lifestyles of the 'pollies' (whatever that is - hell, I don't even understand the dude's gripe!).

What fantasy do you speak of?? The life I'm living is real. It's a nice one too.

Fixin' to go home right now, drop a line off the end of the dock, open an ice-cold Michelob and enjoy the rest of this Thursday.

Kinda sounds like fun don't it.........

Deano

-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), August 12, 1999.

That sounds like a grand idea Deano!

Only difference is I get to do it with real beer......heheheheheheheh....Canadian beer

-- Craig (craig@ccinet.ab.ca), August 12, 1999.

Why is it that when the words DOWNtheROAD and "analysis" are used in the same paragraph, laughter bursts forth from my lips? Perhaps because the witless illiterate DOWNtheROAD isn't exactly known as the sharpest tool in the shed. Its "analysis" is on par with its intellectual veracity, which is, shall we say, somewhat lacking

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), August 12, 1999.

This is why doomers are doomers. Doomer's are afraid of having their bubble burst, because they have an investment in Y2K. For whatever reason, denial etc., any reference to things changing to the extent that their fantasy will no longer exist is a definite threat. That is why Will's and KOS's keep boring us with their nonsense that 'Y2k IS gonna happen!', without any factual evidence to back them up. We are a threat to their fantasy lives. Reality is simply too painful for people like DOWNtheROAD and Diane. They are more afraid than they will ever admit, because their whole internal world will come crashing down if they are deprived of their fantasy life.

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), August 12, 1999.

Maria, do you like to mudwrestle?

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.com), August 12, 1999.

In any model with huge numbers of variables (aka "Unknowns"), different conclusions can be legitimately drawn.

Y2K is very nebulous thing. You take 10 variables and plot them out, and you can come to Infomagic, or Y2KPro from the same data set.

The weighting of the various variables comes into play here, and the world view of the participant is a major factor in these relatively arbitrary weighting factors.

World view is indeed critical. While "connecting the dots", there is a decision at every point with a minimum of two choices, but usually a range of choices. These choices go from Infomagic to Y2KPro, with an even spread in between.

The connection chosen says a lot about the connector. The connector draws upon his experience in life, his personality, his knowledge of the subject of the "dot", and so on.

As for Y2K, experience as a software engineer allows you to make different choices than a car salesman on certain dots. But if that engineer has never worked on a legacy system, nor for the government, his choices at those dots are no more relevant than the car salesman's. If the car salesman has worked in a government, his experience adds a different weighting viewpoint when connecting the "government" dots.

By the same token, someone who is computer illiterate, but has never seen the government fail to deliver SSI or an entitlement check to her door will connect the dots differently as well.

An "optimist" connects dots differently than a "pessimist". Some people are optimistic about capitalism solving all problems (can you say "Harry Browne"?); others are less optimistic about that, but more confident that DOD "wouldn't let x happen". So world view (optimism vs pessimism) connects dots in different ways.

Once the dots are all attached, the connector steps back and looks at the resulting picture. This picture is a guess, a theory, a supposition. Call it what you want.

I have seen someone I thought was a total optimist become a doomer, and a person I thought was a pessimist become a polly. There's just no telling.

Now, the last critical part is that the connector, if he is intellectually honest tries to verify the theory with all facts available.

This is the most difficult part. Especially with Y2K or any other model with so many variables, and information and mis-information.

If the connector is honest, modifications MUST be made to the initial model to satisfy the data that come in. By its very nature, this data will both prove and disprove separate parts of the theory. Dots need to be reconnected. The resulting picture needs to be reexamined, and a new hypothesis created if necessary.

The biggest error made here and in science is only adding viewpoints ("dots") that support the hypothesis. This results in an irrational zeal to protect the hypothesis. It HAS to be irrational, because it cannot be proven if all the data that come in is not utilized.

That is why many pollies and doomers freak out when their assessment is challenged. They have an irrational basis for their beliefs, since they discard data that contradicts their hypothesis. They then attack the messenger ad hominem.

The CONSTRUCTIVE debate on this forum is from the relatively few people who are intellectually honest enough to evaluate ALL the data points that come in.

On a personal note, my own mosaic is in constant flux, but tends toward the "doomer" side. Yes, I get uncomfortable when I get information that seems to say that I've spent thousands of dollars for nothing. But I put them in anyway, and see if the picture changes enough for me to modify my plans.

So far, I have decided to err on the side of caution. What could be wrong with that? Why do some of the pollies insist on calling a cautious person a moron? I can spend my money on any damn thing I wish. If I buy a ton of grain from a farmer in Kansas, he benefits from the sale immediately, and I benefit with reduced blood pressure.

Next year, if nothing happens, I'll eat a lot of bread, and give it to a foodbank. In the meantime, leave me alone. Let's agree that it is possible for a polly to exist that has a brain. And the possibility that a doomer has one as well.

Jolly

-- Jollyprez (jolly@prez.com), August 12, 1999.

Hey Jolly. Nicely put. I agree.

I pendulum between pessimistic polly and optimistic doomer as each new report is released and subsequent analyses of industry experts emerge.

The Y2K situation appears to get better each day as more is renovated and tested, but not fast enough. I think some days that it actually just might be just like a bump in the road - but most days I don't.

Regardless, I have the ability now to position myself to be cutoff from everything - so why not do it? Why would anyone really care that I choose to do this? Am I stupid? Perhaps in a few months I may eat my words, but at least I can eat my canning if my intuitions are right.

Canuck

-- Canuck (canuck@canada.com), August 12, 1999.

Ahem, the threads that have been posted more than prove my point. Anyone with more than an inkling of reality can see the obvious. Its simple, Polly's refuse to allow their bubble to be burst. Forget the fact that Y2K is a 'technical' problem, that requires billions of dollars to remediate, thousands of hours to recode, forget that society is completely wired together, that computers that can't recognize the date will either spew out garbage or shut down, forget about the fact that ITS ALREADY HAPPENING, in short forget reality man. Have a beer! Life is good!!! Be a polly!!!! Sorry, no can do. Reality has set it (long ago).

DOWNtheROAD

-- DOWNtheROAD (foo@foo.com), August 12, 1999.

When you first start working as an orderly (or whatever) at the asylum, one of the hardest things to understand is that the inmates *really do* hear the voices in the walls and light fixtures. The voices are not imaginary in the ordinary sense -- a willing suspension of disbelief. They are real, audible, and often clear and explicit (and LOUD). The fact that *you* can't hear them is not relevant to the inmate. *He* knows what's real, and it doesn't matter if his views are shared by only a small handful of loonies. Real is real.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), August 12, 1999.

BEANO!

You beer-retarded buffoon, cold Michelob is NOT beer, it is pisswater masquerading as beer...

GUINNESS!!! Becks, Grolsch, Stella Artois, london pride etc. etc.

ANYTHING but cold Michelob/Coors/Bud pisswater!!!

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), August 12, 1999.

Good job Flint, just accuse people of being schizophrenic. That is not constructive.

It IS possible to be a rational doomer.

Jolly

-- Jollyprez (jolly@prez.com), August 12, 1999.

" rational doomer" - Is that kinda like military intelligence?

People who want to survive Y2K should be prepared to kill.

-- (its@coming.soon), July 27, 1999.

-- Y2K Pro (y2kpro1@hotmail.com), August 12, 1999.

Jollyprez:

Basically, I said the same thing about schizophrenics that DOWNtheROAD said about pollies. NOBODY mentioned doomies at all! The difference is, what I said was factually accurate, while DtheR was wildly, (and very insultingly) imaginative.

And you take offense that doomies were criticized? I guess the shoe must have fit pretty well.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), August 12, 1999.

King of Spain asked Maria to mudwrestle? He must really be getting desperate.

-- (none@none.none), August 12, 1999.

Andy, I guess you should know. Did you discuss this with the cops that arrested you?

None, the royal pain asked me before and I agreed. I was pared with a in a pool of green jello (per a's request not mine).

-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), August 13, 1999.

Andy,

I know I should have consulted you first on my choice of brew. After all, you are the local drunk, right??

Didn't ye have a whole pint the night ye ended up in the slammer??

Youda man Andy!!

Deano

-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), August 13, 1999.

Some people eh . . .

One sniff of the barmaids apron . . .

Maybe Andy's rugby club had a whip round and paid for his emigration expenses and flights. (On the condition he didnt come back and embarrass them in pubs any more).

Hehehe . .

Getting arrested is pretty decend Kudos though . . but it does depend what it was for ? Not peeing in the street I hope . .

RB

-- RuggerBugger (strange@shaped.balls.com), August 13, 1999.

RB

It was either the street or the officers leg.

He's not the brightest bulb in the box but he's kinda cute so we keep him for a couple of yuks.

Deano

-- Deano (deano@luvthebeach.com), August 13, 1999.

Jolly:

Thanks for the well balanced answer. Although my current "model" is quite pessimistic, I still cringe whenever I hear *anyone* say that such and such (electrical outages, Infomagic, Bump in the Road) WILL happen.

Of course, after "dabbling" in semantics on my own, any kind of all inclusive statement makes me nervous.........

If someone feels that the evidence that they have examined is adequate to support their position, it is none of my business.

NONE OF MY BUSINESS. I really don't care what position they have taken.

Folks, let us assume for the moment that we are all adults. No lurking teenagers here to stir up trouble. If you have never seen the ability of different people to arrive at diametrically opposite opinions from the same evidence, I strongly suspect that you have lived a sheltered life.

As to needing to be prepared to kill in order to survive Y2K, I have not raised my hand in anger to another person in many years. However, even in everyday life, should I feel that my life or most especially the life of one of my family were threatened, I would do whatever it would take to protect them or myself.

The tone of the forum has improved greatly in recent weeks. Whether it is due to Chuck's moderating, or self moderation, it has been a welcome change.

Finally, yes, topics do wander greatly on this forum. I personally am not basing any prep activities on Chinese, Hopi, Mayan, Aztec, astrological, Nostrodamos, or Bible code predictions or prophesies. Should someone else choose to do so, well, I prefer Killian's Red..

Just my feelings on the subject

-- Jon Williamson (jwilliamson003@sprintmail.com), August 13, 1999.

I suspect this thread is just more troll bait. Expect this activity to increase.

-- not surprised (by@these.tactics), August 13, 1999.

Jolly -

I like your optomist/pessimist comparison. they do see things differently - I am an optomist and my husband tends to be - well - the other. However, on Y2K we tend to be in agreement that not all is going to come off with out a hitch.

I do think you left off one segment of population in both the tech oriented and the non-tech. These are the people who are programmers and have a slight defect in personality I call tunnel vision. I know 4 programmers. There are 2 in each camp. Two say that there is just too much to remediate and test and we are going to have problems no matter what. The other two are of the opinion that nothing serious can go wrong because THEIR company is ready and tested and therefore the rest of the country must be too and the rest of the world doesn't matter because -- well - just because we can do anything we need here.. they just don't see the interconnectiveness of the whole problem. Prime example is one friend who works for a large distribution company on the west coast. He just finished installing a new payroll system (someone else used to do their payroll so now they do their own). He is worried about having enough gas to get to work. Their distribution is done almost 100% by truck once their warehouses get the product. He doesn't get that if he doesn't have gas to get to work, there ain't going to be any work because the trucks run on gas (OK - deisel). ("Oh - the company will manage..) I think that trying to get through to people like him is a greater frustration by far than anything else I have tried to do with respect to Y2K.

-- Valkyrie (anon@please.net), August 13, 1999.

Bummer...I had a long essay all ready, and then Jolly beat me to the punch. Ditto, on the dot connections analogy. As someone once said ( I don't remember who, but it's an old quote), "Reasonable men can and do disagree".

To DOWNtheRoad: And doomers are doomers because they are consumed by a desire to see the world made new in their image, whether that image is of a theocracy, a return to the values of an earlier age, or a Mad Max world where they can play the super-hero, they are all united by the desire to see the slate washed clean.
Everybody's got an agenda; ain't no new news here. You could pick apart the agendas of Democrats and Republicans, Christians and Aethiests, Moslems and Jews (etc, etc, etc, etc, etc!), in just the same way.
Whats the point, except to highlight that we are an imperfect species and we all have our issues.
I regard everybody's "evidence" as suspect, but that doesn't mean I ignore it. I personally think GN is a Fundy Neo-Fascist scumbag, who wants to see the world remolded into what is at the top of my pantheon of patently bad governmental forms - a theocracy. But that doesn't mean he doesn't have a lot of good advice and resources. I'm just careful to watch for his own brand of spin.
Everybody needs to keep both ears and both eyes open wide. For me, the really maddening thing about Y2K is that it forces me into a kind of split personality - one is a doomer, preparing for an apolcalypse and the other, a pollie who is planning and doing projects, as if it were any other year coming up.
If I can indulge in a little armchair pschoanalysis of my own, perhaps it's an attempt to avoid such madness, that is leading so many of us to be so polarized in our opinions.

Come to think of it, this wasn't all that short...I guess Jolly did me a favor by stealing half my point(G).

-- Bokonon (bok0non@my-Deja.com), August 13, 1999.