Alan Dechert is one of the leading pollys from c.s.y2k. He believes y2k will have absolutely no effect. Follow the link below only if you have way too much time on your hands.

http://www.go2zero.com/

-- a (a@a.a), October 26, 1999

Answers

Well, 'a', nothing like a good lie to get the afternoon cranking, eh?

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), October 26, 1999.

Damn. and I just sprayed the woodwork with half a can of Polly-off.

-- a (a@a.a), October 26, 1999.

Gee, 'a', I know it must be tough.

Go ahead with posting BS. Have a good time.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), October 26, 1999.

Hey Hoffmeyer,

the meter is running.

-- no talking please (breadlines@soupkitchen.gov), October 26, 1999.

OK, what's going on here? The link points to a "year 0" page, published in May 1996. While I do think it is BS, written by an idiot, what did I miss? What's with the lying stuff? <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), October 26, 1999.

Whatever the merits of "Year Zero", it has absolutely nothing to do with the Y2k problem.

Dechert makes that point on the website, as well as on c.s.y2k.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), October 26, 1999.

Thanks Hoff. I haven't been to cs in a while. Maybe I'll wonder over later. See ya! <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), October 26, 1999.

That's what I mean Sys. It's not intended as BS. Note also that Hoff doesn't deny Dechert thinks absolutely nothing will happen during y2k.

Hoff, he clearly says this will solve "Year 200" problems, just maybe not coding ones.

More calendars for the reality challenged

-- a (a@a.a), October 26, 1999.

Listen closely, "a": 1. Dechert _is_ an idiot; 2. Dechert _does_ think Y2K is a hoax; 3. Dechert did come up with the goofy "Y2K is a hoax" idea; but... 4. Dechert has not said the "zero" idea was meant as a Y2K fix. ...aeternum.......

-- aeternum (ae@ter.num), October 26, 1999.

I see, 'a'.

not intended as BS?

Then what is intended by "suggests a new calendar will remedy y2k's woes"?

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), October 26, 1999.

Oh, as long as it fixes everything else, except code, I guess we're saved! After all, the code isn't broken, is it?

OK, I'll shut-up 'til I catch-up. Later... <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), October 26, 1999.

Idiots one and all: I did not say y2k fix. Or code. Or remediation. Or software. I said WOES. The WOES he is wailing about in that stupid diatribe (humanity needs a fresh slate, etc). If I'm mistaken, you'll have to forgive me, I uh, didn't finish reading the whole site :)

Makes a good compliment to bks's post yesterday that Paul has convinced people not to prepare, though.

-- a (a@a.a), October 26, 1999.

Oh, apologies 'a'. See now you never intended to imply Dechert's "Year Zero" calendar was meant to fix Y2k problems (NOT)

BTW, bks has a valid point. These people issued all these dire predictions about Jan 1, April 1, July 1, etc., then lament why noone believes them.

-- Hoffmeister (hoff_meister@my-deja.com), October 26, 1999.

From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California

Year Zero Campaign <--- Bwahahahaa And we think we've got problems with apathy! Too funny.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), October 27, 1999.

A lot of people talk about using the present calendar, but setting the year back. How about everyone setting AHEAD to say, 2004, and see what happens? :-)

-- A (A@AisA.com), October 28, 1999.