Big Dog,

I find it very funny that you rant and rave about Hoffmeister and his phoney email address while continually calling for an apology.

When was freedom of speech in this county abolished? This is a public forum. I have seen people called assholes, morons and every other cussword in the book. Did you call for their apologies? If you did, I must have missed it.

Please publish your real email address so we can see what a Big Dog you really are?

-- (Phoney@ddress.com), October 16, 1999

Answers

Is this kinda like:

"sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me?"

It ain't recess is it?

Children, children.

-- no talking please (breadlines@soupkitchen.gov), October 16, 1999.

I've emailed BigDog at his posted address, he wrote back, apparently it is a real email. Just send him an email?

-- Helium (Heliumavid@yahoo.com), October 16, 1999.

And who are you?

The thread about Hoffmeister is quite specific. This fictitious person has made libelous charges against a REAL person. In my opinion, those charges are baseless.

Either Yourdon is a coward and snake or Hoffmeister is. There is no middle ground on this one. Let people who read make up their minds.

Calling someone an asshole is not the same as libeling them.

My email is real. Yours isn't. I have been in personal contact with dozens of regulars from this forum. Have you?

Right. Nor has Hoffmeister. BTW, perhaps you ARE Hoffmeister? Probably so.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), October 16, 1999.

Big Dog,

I think calling someone an asshole is libel only, if in fact, they are not an asshole. Which might be a tough case to prove in court. Besides who wants to sit there while all ones' co-workers and ex- partners tromp through with testimony about the verity of ones' assholeness.

-- R (riversoma@aol.com), October 16, 1999.

Big Dog:

You seem to be losing it a bit here.

[The thread about Hoffmeister is quite specific. This fictitious person has made libelous charges against a REAL person. In my opinion, those charges are baseless.]

Hoffmeister listed what Yourdon has unquestionably done. Not a baseless charge, a statement of verifiable fact. Hoffmeister then speculated that Yourdon's motivations for doing so were essentially similar to the motivation *anyone* would have for doing so -- to make money. Certainly you can speculate that Yourdon did these things out of sheer boredom or some other reason, but such speculation isn't libel.

[Either Yourdon is a coward and snake or Hoffmeister is. There is no middle ground on this one. Let people who read make up their minds.]

So a complex discussion is reduced to either/or extremes? Granted some of your intended audience is disposed to reduce any complex issue to pitch black or pure white, but you know better. For shame. Isn't it possible that Yourdon had multiple motivations, from earning a living to sounding a sincere warning? Isn't it possible that Yourdon's *effects* may not precisely match his original intentions? Declaring there's no middle ground doesn't remove such ground from reality, only from your assessment, largely invalidating that assessment. Think, man.

[Calling someone an asshole is not the same as libeling them.]

As a hair-splitter myself, I recognize legalistic weaseling when I see it. Calling someone an asshole simply reflects (perhaps willing) lack of thought. Speculating about the motivations of public persons is fair game. Otherwise, where were you when de Jager was being accused of "selling out"?

By all indications, what's bothering you is the sheer common sense and cogency of Hoffmeister's arguments. Focusing on Hoffmeisters anonymity rather than the arguments themselves is a transparent exercise in misdirection. Misinformation, anyone?

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), October 16, 1999.

There is no gray for Russ (aka Big Dog). Imagine the most dogmatic fundamentalist you've ever met... and just make the faith Y2K.

Heeeeeeere's, Big Dog.

Russ is incapable of apologizing for his attacks on Hoff and the other forum optimists. His faith will not allow it. For the same reason, Russ is incapable of seeing fault in Ed Yourdon. Yourdon has the Y2K version of papal infallability.

To Russ, the optimists are servants of Satan... any tactics are justified in battling these evil creatures. This is why he has been a eloquent, but nasty, debater during his time on the forum. Oh, in calm moments Russ can weave a beautiful story about Y2K. Get under his hackles, though, and he's a little Bantee rooster.

There are people one can take seriously on both sides of the Y2K debate. Hoff is one of them... and "Big Dog" has yet to effectively answer the "Hoff Challenge." There are reputable people who think Y2K will cause problems. Ed Yardeni is a good example. To the serious pessimists, however, Yardeni just isn't gloomy enough...

As an aside, I am seeing the birth of a new "Russ" argument. The "thousand cuts" argument just isn't enough, so we have the "only a few sacred IT types understand Y2K." OK. It's a recycled argument, but you'll see it again... and again.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), October 16, 1999.

Big Dog:

I guess the question I'd like most answered is "Why are you even pursuing this?" In one thread you didn't notice that Hoff was the one being smeared, even though the title itself suggested it, just as the one you started later this week was designed with the same effect in mind; yet in another you felt that Hoff, et al were smearing Yourdon and took exception. If you're against smear campaigns, I would think you would be against ALL smear campaigns...not simply those of whom you agree. Personally, I'm against ALL of them, which is why I chose not to reply to yours against Hoff yesterday.

The anonymity question on this forum is a joke at best. I posted using my real E-mail address (and full name as part of same) for QUITE some time. Each morning I was met with spam from this action.......not from people on this forum, but from folks who scan forums looking for valid E-mail addresses. I HAVE received communication from Hoff, know who he is, etc.

Just for the record, I don't agree that Mr. Yourdon is responsible for folks deciding to over-prepare or "bug-out." I share that feeling for the others who have encouraged folks to over-prepare for an event that (IMO) has yet to prove to be devastating. In that same vein, however, I fail to see how discussions of successful remediation efforts or discussions of positive attempts at remediation somehow result in dissuading folks to prudently prepare.

In a nutshell, I've expressed my disappointment in you before, and I remain disappointed. Where others agree to disagree on the unfolding of Y2k, you take every opportunity to use language that you feel will "smear" the dissenter of YOUR unfolding and those with whom you share that philosophy.

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.com), October 16, 1999.

Flint..do you make your wife IRON THE SHEETS??????....WITH A CREASE IN THE MIDDLE????????? Have you thought of getting some psychiatric help for "middle of the road compulsiveness"? Do you divide the food on your plate into equal portions before eating?...start reading in the very middle of a book?.........rotate your tires every monday?....neatly refold your hankerchief...down the middle, of course, after using?...Step over or on every crack in the side walk? Do you ever listen or read yourself? You truly need some help, my friend. You have become obsessive to the point where you are destroying your value. Looking at both sides is an attribute,... but not when its compulsive behavior. Its like cleanliness...but when you have to wash your hands 200 times a day, the cleanliness is more dangerous than the dirt. In a nutshell (printed equally on each half) you are destroying any value to your message. It seems that the message is no longer important to you...just the division and remediation, or clarification, of the message. In otherwords, you have lost your originality/creativeness/free thinking to being JUST a technician.

Taz

-- Taz (Taz@aol.com), October 16, 1999.

Flint probably likes to drive in the middle of the road at 80 Mph with no headlights on. Got to respect a man like that. Yep we do.

-- The Cat's Butt (catsbutt@umailme.com), October 16, 1999.

Yeeee HHHHaaaaaawwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

Here we go again....

More time wasting clatter...

-- no talking please (breadlines@soupkitchen.gov), October 16, 1999.

Big Dog,

I bet you feel like a big man using a real e-mail address. We should rename this forum Big Dog 2000. We should hold a parade in Manhattan in you honor just for using a real e-mail address. Yep, the pope should cannonize you as a saint. We should bombard the news networks that they should break into the broadcasts with the important news that Big Dog uses a real e-mail address. Monday should be declared a National Holiday in your honor. Yep, you have replaced me as the cat's butt around here. Congratulate yourself, you've earned it.

You have motivated me to start using a real working e-mail address in my correspondence. I do hope to regain my title as the cat's butt around here, but I have to earn it, just as you have earned the right to the title.

:-)

-- The Cat's Butt (formerly) (catsbutt@umailme.com), October 16, 1999.

Taz:

I guess some of us are natural partisan fans, and some of us are natural umpires. When the fix is in, the game suffers. Sorry.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), October 16, 1999.

It's pretty simple, but apparently simplicity is a tough one for some people.

Hoffmeister has accused Yourdon of DELIBERATELY promoting FEAR in order to DELIBERATE promote his own profiteering from Y2K.

I see no evidence from the other thread that "Hoffmeister" denies this charge. Quite the opposite. He continues to defend it as stated. Flint and Decker also support it: they're just not as honest as Hoffmeister about it.

I am perfectly happy to leave the evaluation of the supposed merits of that charge and the people involved at this point in the hands of everyone who comes to this forum.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), October 16, 1999.

Subject Lipton has been very consistant through out the course of y2k religious evolution. He attacks and smears anyone who is a perceived threat to the cult mind set. Thank you Russ, for being so consistent. My studies of you will gain me much notariety, and hopefully fame as well. A few factual points if I may,

1. Mr. Yourdon has indeed been a top promoter of fear, uncertainty and doubt. To his credit he relies on a differing order of the ingredients namely, doubt, uncertainty and then lets the fear come as a natural by-product. You only have to read a sampling of his numerous essays to plainly see that. As you say, it is indeed simple but lost on some.

2. Hoffmeister is hardly an anonymous individual.

And 3. (because you ARE so predictable!) No, I am not Hoffmiester.

-- Psych Major (psychob@b.le), October 16, 1999.

BigDog- You can pick up this self-improvement book at Amazon.com. Hope it helps...
Chapter 4: Three steps to breaking your constant "whining" problem
Chapter 7: Bulldog dreams - Chihuahua realities (How to recognize
your true role and actual position in the pack)
Chapter 9: Hoffmeister or HoffMASTER? (Learn why you need
to recognize and accept your master's voice)
(No. I'm not Hoffmeister either.)

-- CD (not@here.com), October 16, 1999.

Hmmm... I don't agree with Hoff completely. I think Yourdon's trying to sell books, videos, etc., AND maintain enough credibility to work after the rollover. He could have put the fear of God into the Senate sub-committee... but he just asked for better information. From the TB 2000, to TB 2000 Revised and Updated, it has been a virtuoso performance. The "retirement" from Y2K was a nice touch. Ed is not pushing hard core "fear." He's just jacking up the anxiety level a few notches... enough to make money, but far short of aligning himself with the Big Dog movement.

Sorry, folks, but you can't have it both ways. The pessimists ream private firms and public agencies for "self reporting." They cry out for "independent, third party verification." When Yourdon serves as Y2K vendor AND Y2K reporter, an amazing blindness comes over the pessimists. "What conflict of interest," they ask. (laughter)

Personally, I take my hat off to Yourdon. He's a sharp businessman and he'll be writing books well into the next century. He'll not only claim to be right on Y2K (even if we dodge the "Beruit" bullet). He will also take credit (a la de Jager) for sounding the alarm. Who knows, he may be right to take some credit.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), October 16, 1999.

Hmmmmm Ken - the last few posts I have read with your comments makes me think you have really loosened up your collar! :)

-- Kristi (securxsys@cs.com), October 16, 1999.

Hmmmmm Ken - the last few posts I have read with your comments makes me think you have really loosened up your collar! (and rolled up your sleeves?) :)

-- Kristi (securxsys@cs.com), October 16, 1999.

Oops... I'll shut up now...

-- Kristi (securxsys@cs.com), October 16, 1999.

Big Dog,

No, this is not Hoffmeister. I'm sorry but I didn't know that was a real address. I apologize. Have a nice day.

I still say calling someone an asshole or a moron calls for an apology.

-- (Phoney@ddress.com), October 16, 1999.

you asshole phoney address

-- Andy (No6InTheVillage@webtv.com), October 16, 1999.

Andy,

You just showed the mentality of some of the people here....or lack of it.

-- (Phoney@ddress.com), October 16, 1999.

Where I work being called an asshole is a compliment.

-- SgtSchultz (SgtHansSchultz@stalag13.com), October 16, 1999.

P.S. Nice phoney email Phoney. Isnt that like the pot calling the kettle black? DOH

-- SgtSchultz (SgtHansSchultz@stalag13.com), October 16, 1999.

Schulz,

Look who's talking.

-- (Phoney@address.com), October 16, 1999.

My email is real. You are a regular Barnaby Jones. DOH

-- SgtSchultz (SgtHansSchultz@stalag13.com), October 16, 1999.

Phoney,

I take it you did'nt win the spelling bee!!

-- SgtSchultz (SgtHansSchultz@stalag13.com), October 16, 1999.

Ooooohhh did Big Dog strike a raw nerve amongst the pollies yesterday!

And now today it looks like they've mounted a semi-organized counter- strike. Three big-name pollies (Flint, Decker & Anita) hitting this thread in straight succession doesn't seem like coincidence.

But which poster was Hoff; Phoney Address, Psych Major or both? And why haven't Doc Paulie and Poole weighed-in yet? Figures they'd want to get their lumps in, too.

Stay tuned to this thread, it might be an indicator of the tone of the forum these next few weeks.

WW

-- Wildweasel (vtmldm@epix.net), October 16, 1999.

Slow news day children?

-- lvz (lvzinser@hotmail.com), October 16, 1999.

I'm not even going to read it. Can we cut the crap here? This is a public forum. Doomers vs. Pollys. Do we really need a new thread for A ! B, who % C, and told D to + off???

Come on kids, don't we have enough going on without this?

Let's keep all fights in the thread where they started. Anybody interested will check in!

Tick... Tock... <:00=

PS: OK, maybe now I'll read it...

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), October 17, 1999.