United States has more than its share of Y2K paranoia, psychologist saysgreenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread |
United States has more than its share of Y2K paranoia, psychologist saysWednesday, October 27, 1999
By Patrick O'Neill of The Oregonian staff
When it comes to the terrors of Y2K, Americans are the nervous Nellies of the world.
Donald MacGregor, a Eugene psychologist who is studying people's reactions to the coming millennium, says high anxiety over the turning of the calendar is "purely an American phenomenon."
While Americans buy electric generators against the possibility of Y2K-related power failures, wring their hands over the specter of nonworking teller machines and ponder the virtues of hoarding Cheerios, people in other parts of the world remain blissfully oblivious to the supposed threats.
MacGregor, a researcher with Decision Science Research Institute of Eugene, a nonprofit research organization, suggests one hypothesis for the difference between us and everybody else.
"We are the one country in the highly industrialized world that has never come through a calamity," he says. "England had the Blitz. Japan had a nuclear attack. Germany, France, Italy were devastated by war."
We've escaped war at home
But since the Civil War, the United States has escaped the kind of widespread damage that war brings."We've never had a major destruction of our infrastructure and come through the other side with the knowledge that life continues," he said. "Through all the wars, we've been spared, whereas all the other countries have not."
Because Americans haven't had the experience of enduring a national disaster, he said, they don't know if they can survive one.
Armed with a National Science Foundation grant, MacGregor is studying how people perceive the risks associated with computer glitches related to the new millennium.
MacGregor's main message is that preparations for real or imagined threats can be hazardous. Hoarding large amounts of food can lead to spoilage and illness, for example.
Because we depend so heavily on technology, any rumor that technology is in trouble "leads us to believe that there's something fundamentally flawed with our civilization," he said.
"We are really dependent on technological institutions for our quality of life in a way humankind never was," MacGregor said.
"We literally do not know what makes our lives work," he said.
That dependence on technology gives rise to great feelings of vulnerability.
"How many people in suburban Portland could solve their own water problems if the water goes off? How many people know how to make their own soap? We're so highly specialized and divisionalized in our labors that we are enormously dependent on each other and on technology-driven institutions," he said.
But fears over technology aren't the only reasons why people worry. There's also a deep-running supernatural dread of the new millennium running through Western thought, he said. There has always been a connection between the millennium and the Apocalypse in Western thought.
"The Apocalypse is the big change, the end of it all when the Earth is cleansed and those who are the true believers will be redeemed and all the others will pass away," he said.
If you overlay worries about computer failures with fears of the Apocalypse, you have a very powerful psychological impact, he said.
"There are some people who are responding to Y2K with extreme decisions -- selling their homes and moving from the city to the country."
MacGregor said surveys show that as the new year approaches, anxiety is being replaced with action.
"You see an increasing level of self-protective behavior," he said.
"Fairly high percentages of people are saying that they'll hoard food, store water, buy generators and make photocopies of important documents," he said.
"People believe their own actions can help alleviate the problem," he said.
"By undertaking these actions, people believe they have some mastery over these events."
Preparations also bring risks
What people don't understand, he said, is that virtually every preparation carries its own risk."Come January, we're going to see a fair number of people who will have been injured by electric power generators -- burned in gasoline fires, poisoned by carbon monoxide or injured trying to get it off the pickup truck," he said.
And what about Y2K failures?
"I suspect that there will be very few disruptions in the U.S.," he said. "We're about as ready as you can get."
You can reach Patrick O'Neill at 503-221-8233 or by e-mail at poneill@news.oregonian.com
-- Incredulous (huh@what..), October 28, 1999
Tell them what you think of their fine journalistic skills: poneill@news.oregonian.com
Sincerely,
Stan FarynaGot 14 days of preps? If not, get started now. Click here.
Click here and check out the TB2000 preparation forum.
-- Stan Faryna (faryna@groupmail.com), October 28, 1999.
Hey, prepping is risky business.You can get paper cuts off of those cartons, you can strain your back lifting them. I got a tetanus booster so we could safely grow veggies on our porch, but we STILL wash our hands and the stuff we pick, so plagued are we by fear. And every time we buy extra food at the store, we can see those gas dollars just draining away, as the car chugs on home with the added burden. We got a fireplace insert and already I skinned a knuckle reaching into it. I could go on and on.
How could I have ever been so stupid?
-- bw (home@puget.sound), October 28, 1999.
My note to the editors:<
Perhaps, however, you were writing this from the year 2001 when you knew that everything had turned out all right. Have you even investigated the possibility of a coming economic and humanitarian disaster, or are you just blowing smoke?
Thanks for the disinformation that might lead someone not to prepare for his/her safety.
Mara Wayne>>
-- Mara (MaraWayne@aol.com), October 28, 1999.
http://www.o regonlive.com/news/99/10/st102711.html
-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), October 28, 1999.
They forgot one huge difference: Americans surf the net, probably at a much higher rate than most other countries.It's almost impossible to take Y2k seriously w/o getting info from the net in some way. If all you know about y2k is what Dan Rather & the local newspaper tell you, obviously you won't worry or prepare. The net today serves the function of "samizdat" in the old iron-curtain countries -- underground information.
-- logged on (and@real.worried), October 28, 1999.
They forgot one huge difference: Americans surf the net, probably at a much higher rate than most other countries. --Logged OnGood point "Logged On". I doubt however, that a psychologist who has undertaken a study such as this would have overlooked the net as a source of incredible *mis-information*. It's my opinion that the net has contributed far more towards spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt than it has towards providing accurate information.
-- CD (not@here.com), October 28, 1999.
"England had the Blitz. Japan had a nuclear attack. Germany, France, Italy were devastated by war."These events occured more than 50 years ago. Most of the people who lived through them are dead now from natural causes.
None of the people in these countries "knows" what it takes to survive an infrastructure collapse.
Japanese-American U.S. Citizens were placed in internment camps then, too. No one suspended the constitution, they just rounded them up.
Couldn't happen again? Don't kid yourself.
There will be many people who will die the day before the electricity comes back on, or the water flows again. They'll die because they or someone that loves them didn't prepare adequately.
How many? No one knows.
-- nothere nothere (notherethere@hotmail.com), October 28, 1999.
... fear, uncertainty and doubt than it has towards providing accurate information.Why, exactly, are these mutually exclusive?
-- Lane Core Jr. (elcore@sgi.net), October 28, 1999.
Why, exactly, are these mutually exclusive? -- Lane CoreI don't claim they necessarily need to be mutually exclusive Lane. Rather, it's a question of degree.
-- CD (not@here.com), October 28, 1999.
>"England had the Blitz. Japan had a nuclear attack. >Germany, France, Italy were devastated by war." >These events occured more than 50 years ago. Most >of the people who lived through them are dead now >from natural causes.But the people there know that their parents and grandparents survived and rebuilt their nations. Not only intellectually, as we know it, but they have heard the stories, seen the pictures, and walked the streets.
>None of the people in these countries "knows" what >it takes to survive an infrastructure collapse.
Well, you do the best with what you've got. Isn't the cant in this forum always "we don't know what will happen!" It's the same thing. You don't know what will fail - whatever fails, people will put their minds and muscles to it as needed and fix it or work around it. We always have before - what's never been explained to me is why people believe that this time, it's different.
>Japanese-American U.S. Citizens were placed in >internment camps then, too. No one suspended >the constitution, they just rounded them up. >Couldn't happen again? Don't kid yourself.
It could happen again. What's your point? Ever heard of the Bonus Marchers? That could happen again, too, in a severe economic crash. The New Deal could also happen again, as could the draft, wheatless and meatless days, and gas rationing coupons. Hell, we could even see the return of "Whip Inflation Now" buttons.
>There will be many people who will die the >day before the electricity comes back on, >or the water flows again. They'll die because >they or someone that loves them didn't >prepare adequately.
Will they now? You're sure of this? There's an interesting schizophrenia in this group - people recite the "I don't know" cant in one breath, and then the "it can't be fixed, millions will die" cant in the next. As the time grows short and things show no sign of collapse, the "it can't be fixed" shouts grow more shrill - in fact I think the doomers protest too much - and the "we don't know" cant comes out less and less.
>How many? No one knows.
Indeed. I would guess no more than any other winter.
JZ
-- Jeff Zurschmeide (zursch@cyberhighway.net), October 28, 1999.
Whoops! Did someone say. . .Underground? I have been conjured. I will slink away quietly now. Sort of. [g]You know where this leads. . .
-- Marianne Michaels (scipublic@aol.com), October 28, 1999.
Okay Marianne, I succumb, I will go order your book.
-- Debi (LongTimeLurker@shy.com), October 28, 1999.
" But the people there know that their parents and grandparents survived and rebuilt their nations. Not only intellectually, as we know it, but they have heard the stories, seen the pictures, and walked the streets. "
And many of their parents and grandparents died as well. The nations were rebuilt without them, but it's still a loss. I would prefer that my parents not die as a result of infrastructure problems caused by Y2K when I could do something to help them not die.
" Well, you do the best with what you've got. Isn't the cant in this forum always "we don't know what will happen!" It's the same thing. You don't know what will fail - whatever fails, people will put their minds and muscles to it as needed and fix it or work around it. We always have before - what's never been explained to me is why people believe that this time, it's different. "
Yes, you do the best with what you've got, and some have more than others. Sometimes your best isn't good enough to ensure your survival.
" It could happen again. What's your point? Ever heard of the Bonus Marchers? That could happen again, too, in a severe economic crash. The New Deal could also happen again, as could the draft, wheatless and meatless days, and gas rationing coupons. Hell, we could even see the return of "Whip Inflation Now" buttons. "
I raised the issue of Japanese-American U.S. Citizens being denied their constitutional rights because most people believe that "unbelievable" events like this only occur in other countries. Many pollies think that Y2K disruptions can't happen here, only in less prepared foreign countries. Raising the issue of the Bonus Marchers and WIN has to do with economic dislocations and government finance. I'm not sure what they have to do with each other.
" Will they now? You're sure of this? There's an interesting schizophrenia in this group - people recite the "I don't know" cant in one breath, and then the "it can't be fixed, millions will die" cant in the next. As the time grows short and things show no sign of collapse, the "it can't be fixed" shouts grow more shrill - in fact I think the doomers protest too much - and the "we don't know" cant comes out less and less. Indeed. I would guess no more than any other winter. "
Your guess is as good as mine, JZ. Would you bet your family's life on it?
-- nothere nothere (notherethere@hotmail.com), October 28, 1999.
>And many of their parents and grandparents died as well.>The nations were rebuilt without them, but it's still a loss.
>I would prefer that my parents not die as a result of
>infrastructure problems caused by Y2K when I could do
>something to help them not die.
Of course. People always have wanted to save their nears and dears. So go stock up - but it's a balancing act between the perceived likelihood of disaster and the opportunity cost of using that money for preps or relocation. Don't be surprised when people opt to spend their money on today's problems rather than tomorrow's. Yeah yeah yeah, ant and grasshopper. People do prepare like ants, but ants don't store up more than they think they'll need. It's just that you think you need more because the situation will be more dire.
>Yes, you do the best with what you've got,
>and some have more than others.
>Sometimes your best isn't good enough
>to ensure your survival.
This is as true with risking my life going home from work tonight on the public roads as it is for any disaster.
Sometimes, it's that the building code wasn't up to the stress provided by a large earthquake. I saw that happen, but it happened in a matter of seconds. The thing that has never been adequately explained is why Y2K failures must necessarily result in famine and plagues - there has been an assumption of immediate breakdown of civilization into rioting and cannibalism by everyone who has tried to convince me of doom.
And yet that was not my experience during the aftermath of the '89 earthquake in CA. It's not happening now in North Carolina - Aha! say the doomers, but Y2K happens all at once everywhere, and there won't be any place left intact to provide succor to the afflicted. The assumption there is that it's all a house of cards and that it must all come down together. I doubt that sincerely. Even if Y2K causes some trouble (which I am coming to doubt), there will be plenty of infrastructure left to offer succor to the afflicted.
And if power was out everywhere tomorrow, would people immediately riot and burn down the cities? Maybe doomers would, as they seem to have a grudge against the world, but for the most part, people will be out trying to get stuff back online. The linemen won't be at home hunkering down with an AK-47 and a bag of beans, they'll be out replacing transformers with bad embedded chips.
>I raised the issue of Japanese-American U.S. Citizens
>being denied their constitutional rights because most
>people believe that "unbelievable" events like this
>only occur in other countries.
Well, they don't know their history, do they? This has also amused me about stuff like the Branch Davidians - people are shocked, as if this was the first time something like this has ever happened in the USA.
>Many pollies think that Y2K disruptions can't happen here,
I think they won't happen here - at least not to a level greater than local inconveniences.
>only in less prepared foreign countries.
Actually, I think the Y2K issue may be the last brick in the platform that finally catapults the US into more or less complete global dominance. If it hits hard around the world, we, and our partners in the west, may be the only folks around with functioning militaries and economies.
>Raising the issue of the Bonus Marchers and WIN has
>to do with economic dislocations and government finance.
>I'm not sure what they have to do with each other.
With Y2K? What is Y2K but an economic dislocation? Disrupt the market by preventing goods and money to change hands (for whatever reason) and the rest is all economic. WIN was not so much about government finance, but an attempt to get the population behind a set of government actions designed to solve inflation problems. The equivalent of putting "Y2K OK" stickers on your toaster.
>Your guess is as good as mine, JZ. >Would you bet your family's life on it?
Don't have to - I live on a farm and use hydroelectric power. So far as I know, the Columbia River will continue to flow in the new year. I've had the generator and backup supplies for years, just as a matter of course because of where I live (which, incidentally, is within 5 miles of a 7/11, but I'm not sweating it).
In the event of a major problem, we could end up eating the horse, but starve? Not a chance.
I think the difference between a doomer and me is that I have a tremendous amount of faith in myself and the people around me - including those tasked with keeping the power on and working in the food distribution system. People are creative and adaptable. Sure, if the power goes off in Detroit or Minneapolis during a cold spell, people will die. That happens now. Which is why people who live in that area prepare for winter differently than folks in L.A.
I would actually welcome a month or so of down-time early next year. Give me some time to catch up on my reading.
JZ
-- Jeff Zurschmeide (zursch@cyberhighway.net), October 28, 1999.
JZ,I'm familar with you from participation in or.politics and I value your opinions based on that familiarity. However, I think you are not quite on the rails this time. This particular article was nothing more than a conduit for the rather lame views of one psychologist. Donald McGregor is quoted in almost every paragraph giving his opinions. No other views are given or considered.
For example:
"I suspect that there will be very few disruptions in the U.S.," he said. "We're about as ready as you can get."
Why would the suspicions of a psychologist from Eugene be a worth printing on a technical subject so far beyond his actual verfiable knowledge? This is about as relevant and informative as quoting Hollywood stars' opinions on politics.
The article, as is usual for the Oregonian, contains a large number of perjoratives: "nervous nellies", "wring their hands over the specter of nonworking teller machines" , "supernatural dread". This isn't reporting in any repsectable sense of the term.
Finally, I find the basic thrust of this article contains it's own disconnect. This guy actually maintains that firsthand experience of war, famine and other disasters somehow leads to a relaxed and complacent attitude toward disaster, while a lack of such experience leads not to complacency, but anxiety. Huh? Is it just me, or doesn't this seem bass-ackwards?
People who have a firsthand experience of seeing others dead, dying or injured, or who have lived with daily pain, hunger, or uncertainty over their own survival do NOT take the threat of a repeat performance casually. Their anxiety is, if anything, heightened by that memory. Any psychologist who says the exact opposite is, uh, hard to believe.
The entire article had no reason to exist, except to apply a measure of ridicule to people engaging in "self-protective behavior", in the belief that "their own actions can help alleviate the problem".
The key to the whole story is here:
"MacGregor's main message is that preparations for real or imagined threats can be hazardous."
And so, I can only conclude, the message of the article is: never be prepared for a disaster.
THIS IS A WORTHWHILE MESSAGE????!!?? Give me a break.
As for the mistakes and foibles of the participants of this forum, I fail to see how they excuse the Oregonian and Patrick O'Neill for perpetrating this piece of mind-numbing balderdash. It was an insult to even print it.
-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), October 28, 1999.
>I'm familar with you from participation in or.politics and I value your opinions based on that familiarity.Wow - you'd be in a small group, then. ;^)
>However, I think you are not quite on the rails this time. This particular article was nothing more than a conduit for the rather lame views of one psychologist. Why would the suspicions of a psychologist from Eugene be a worth printing on a technical subject so far beyond his actual verfiable knowledge? This is about as relevant and informative as quoting Hollywood stars' opinions on politics.
Indeed - I was really responding to the other poster - the only thing I thought was of value in the article is the notion that the rest of the world is ignoring the potential problems. Which is a valid point - mainly that power and water is pretty spotty elsewhere on the planet and shit breaks down a lot more than here.
I wouldn't base my opinions on this guy's analysis.
>Finally, I find the basic thrust of this article contains it's own disconnect. This guy actually maintains that firsthand experience of war, famine and other disasters somehow leads to a relaxed and complacent attitude toward disaster, while a lack of such experience leads not to complacency, but anxiety. Huh? Is it just me, or doesn't this seem bass-ackwards?
Kind of - I lived through the Loma Prieta quake in '89. Lived in the Santa Cruz mountains a couple miles from the epicenter, as the crow flies, and was working in Santa Cruz just a few blocks from where the 8 people who died in Santa Cruz were killed and dozens more were injured. 6 people died in a business (the coffee roasting company) that I frequented on at least a weekly basis.
My own house was severely damaged. We had to camp out in the yard for a week. Electricity and water were back on about 24 hours later, but many wells uphill from us went dry. I helped tear down damaged chimneys in my neighborhood, my own included. It was impossible to find a contractor to fix anything for several months. The problems lingered (and I'm sure still do). I ended up having to replace my septic tank, among other unexpected things.
The point is, I've done the disaster thing. Got the T-shirt and everything. I can tell you, for myself, how I feel about future disasters. They're a HUGE PAIN IN THE ASS. They're traumatizing and they just suck all the way around. I kept an earthquake kit in the house before the quake, and I keep an "oh shit" kit around now.
But I also know that unless it just isn't your day, they are survivable, for the most part. 68 people were killed when a freeway collapsed on them in Oakland that day. Nothing they could have done to prevent it, except not be there. They could have, I suppose, moved to Arkansas like Gary North, but that's not a reasonable response if your whole life is centered around someplace else. (Although centering your life around the East Bay strikes me as insanity of a whole different sort.)
>People who have a firsthand experience of seeing others dead, dying or injured, or who have lived with daily pain, hunger, or uncertainty over their own survival do NOT take the threat of a repeat performance casually. Their anxiety is, if anything, heightened by that memory. Any psychologist who says the exact opposite is, uh, hard to believe.
I don't take disaster casually, but I will face it with confidence in myself - forged in actual disaster where I had to work with the other men in my neighborhood to secure our homes - no one wanted a natural gas or electrical fire in the woods that day, believe me.
It doesn't keep me awake nights, come what may on 01-01-00.
>"MacGregor's main message is that preparations for real or imagined threats can be hazardous." >And so, I can only conclude, the message of the article is: never be prepared for a disaster.
No, I think he was talking about the folks who are cashing in their IRAs and moving house - if Y2K fizzles, they've screwed themselves economically - they can't afford to be wrong. And he's got a point - all these folks playing with generators et al will generate a few deaths. It happens every winter, when Ma and Pa Dumbass seal up the kids bedroom and turn on a propane or kerosene heater and wake up to find Junior dead of monoxide poisoning.
>As for the mistakes and foibles of the participants of this forum, I fail to see how they excuse the Oregonian and Patrick O'Neill for perpetrating this piece of mind-numbing balderdash.
They don't. I never said they did. Their foibles stand on their own demerits. About the first thing I said in my first post was "go ahead and stock up" - it's really no sweat for me. I read this forum primarily for entertainment value, but also because an intelligent skeptical response is usually missing from the "polly's suck" "no, doomers suck" diatribes.
>It was an insult to even print it.
Yeah, it was played for yucks. Don't lose sleep over it.
-- Jeff Zurschmeide (zursch@cyberhighway.net), October 28, 1999.
Granted, a psychologist doesn't have the credentials to give a complete analysis of the worldwide implications of Y2k.But somehow you Doomer folks seem to think that a historian who specialized in the Puritan era (Gary North) knows all about computers.
You seem to think that a man who knows how to program computers and write books about it (Ed Yourdon) knows all about disaster preparedness and social responses in times of difficulty.
If you're going to talk about people who extend their opinions outside their areas of expertise, well, let's be even-handed about it.
I can tell you from very recent personal experience that making it through a disaster tends to make one feel a lot more confident in one's ability to weather difficulties. It gives a person renewed faith in the ability of the 'powers that be' to keep on keeping on. It is encouraging to see people pull together to help one another, as has happened here in eastern North Carolina.
What has happened here is much worse than anything Y2k could possibly do. If you don't believe that, then you just don't know very much about what has happened here.
Local folks who are Y2k-aware are now much less worried about the Rollover than they were before we went through this Floyd thing. At least, that was the consensus among those who attended the Eastern North Carolina Y2k Community Conversation meeting in Greenville last night. And also among everyone with whom I've spoken personally about Y2k lately; which is a pretty large number of people.
I know I'm less worried now. Before Floyd I was a 2= or 3 as regards Y2k; now I'm down to a 1 or a 1=.
Disaster? Been there, done that now. Those who haven't, maybe ought to listen to those who have. And I don't just mean this thing in eastern NC. People have been through other disasters; the midwest floods; the California earthquake. Hardly anyone I've seen on this board who has been through such things is a Y2k Doomer. And for good reason: the practical evidence of historical fact carries a lot more weight than the fancies of armchair Doomer theory.
-- Chicken Little (Panic@forthebirds.net), October 28, 1999.
CLI agree with most of what you said, with one exception. yes, we are good at dealing with disasters when they are localized. But what if they are widespread througout the nation/world? Help may be a long time coming. And while a lot of flood victims from Foyd are today living in government trailers, what would they be living in if they were dealing with a 150 front war? For me at least, it gives one something to think about...
-- Bob (bob@bob.bob), October 28, 1999.
>yes, we are good at dealing with disasters when they are localized. >But what if they are widespread througout the nation/world? >Help may be a long time coming.Indeed - but it will come - at least in the US and western democracies. There will be enough left running here to get us all through. Elsewhere - like Russia, probably not.
>And while a lot of flood victims from Foyd are today living in >government trailers, what would they be living in if they were >dealing with a 150 front war? >For me at least, it gives one something to think about...
Do you expect a 150 front war anytime soon? Or even a 1 front war? In the United States?
JZ
-- Jeff Zurschmeide (zursch@cyberhighway.net), October 28, 1999.
Some important variables that determine how quickly a disaster can be repaired are:- The ratio of work needed to workers available.
- The ratio of materials needed to materials available.
- The ratio of skills required to skills available.
The more widespread and severe a disaster is the more unfavorable these ratios become. My experience is that willingness to deal with a disaster is rarely a problem, at least in the short haul before fatigue sets in. People usually apply their best abilities. But even the best people, when put in the worst situation, are limited in what they can accomplish. Sometimes a group of neighbors can accomplish prodigies of effort. Sometimes all one can do is to comfort the dying.
I have no information that leads me to conclude that we'll be in the worst of situations after rollover. But whatever happens, I do expect people will do whatever is in their power to make things better. I've seen it to often not to believe in human goodness.
-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), October 28, 1999.
Do you expect a 150 front war anytime soon? Or even a 1 front war? In the United States?JZ
Sheesh - don't be so literal. I meant a y2k problem that was simultaniously being fought in multiple ( yes, maybe 150 locations ) in the U.S.
-- Bob (bob@bob.bob), October 28, 1999.
So what you're telling us is if the lights go out, or the phone goes dead, or police or fire service are suspended, we should contact a psychologist to help us sort through our feelings about it.Okay, got it.
-- Not Whistlin' Dixie (not_whistlin_dixie@yahoo.com), October 28, 1999.
To the mentaly unstable, rational thought is aggrivating. Look at the tinfoil response to this article; fairly telling, huh? {big huge grin!}
-- Incredulous and then sum (huh@what.the.heck?), October 28, 1999.
Brian:Points taken. But the 'powers that be', and the people at large around here, have come through in a bigger way than anyone dreamed in their wildest imaginations. This disaster has been far worse than anyone ever dreamed could ever happen here. "Not in my lifetime. No way." But it has happened. But Eastern North Carolinians rose to the challenge.
The best nutshell analogy I can come up with is a story we all heard when we were 5 years old: "The Little Engine That Could". (I think I can, I think I can...I knew I could, I knew I could)
Color me 5 years old.
Bob:
You still make a lot of assumptions I'm not willing to make. And I sure assume a Heck of a lot less than I used to, having gone through this mess. Assuming stuff isn't very wise, I've found out; the hard way.
Whistlin':
Sorry Santa didn't bring you any Common Sense, or visible Discernment, last Christmas. Be good, maybe he will this time.
=====
-- Chicken Little (panic@forthebirds.net), October 30, 1999.