In the thread http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001gTW

jb smith wrote: "I beg to differ. I think the validity of the argument now is as important as ever. If one is going to go onto a national forum and state that the lights will be out at a certain time one should be open to defense of their statements. If they come true fine, if not, they should be willing to take the consequences. That is the way it is in a free society.

-- jb smith (Joebobsmith@yahoo.com), November 01, 1999.

My question is -- What are those consequences that he mentioned? What are the consequences of lights not going out during the rollover? And while you are answering the first two questions, answer one more for a full count -- What will be the consequences if lights will go out?

Good luck to all the playing.........

-- Brooklyn (MSIS@cyberdude.com), November 01, 1999

Answers

"What are the consequences of lights not going out during the rollover?"

Um, are you okay?

"What will be the consequences if lights will go out?"

Um, it'll be dark.

PS: Why would this be a question(s) for only Pollies?

-- (another@strikingly.insightful post), November 01, 1999.

The consequences he spoke of, I think, would be having a bunch of people say "I tolja so." There are no consequences, except for the resulting power bill, of the lights not going out - at least none that I know of.

If the lights go out, the consequences are the same as for any other power failure in that month in the affected area.

JZ

-- Jeff Zurschmeide (zursch@cyberhighway.net), November 01, 1999.

This is an attempt to clog the forum. They said they would do it, now it's happening. This troll's swinish, sarcastic challenge was answered on a post just below where another swinish, sarcastic troll asked the same question (The "lights out scenario" post; Lisa answered the question decisively). This is not "a national forum," or a playground for malicious disruptive trolls. It is a forum for those in this nation, and around the world, who are concerned about the effect of Y2k and are preparing to survive them. Posts questioning this, the forum's underlying purpose, should be deleted so that the forum can maintain the minimal boundaries necessary to be useful.

These punks are just hammering, and they are LAUGHING AT YOU for responding to their questions. They have no intention of arguing reasonably; they ignore those who are kind enough to provide them with answers they PRETEND to seek, then they high-five eachother and proclaim the supposed stubborn ignorance of those who are using the forum for it's intened purpose. They are merely disruptive and they contribute nothing. Delete them.

Liberty

-- Liberty (libery@theready.now), November 01, 1999.

Thank you again , Liberty, for a post full of mindless insults.

-- (mucho@gracias. thank you), November 01, 1999.

Liberty

I think you need a cold shower. Chill dude. Believe me that I am as conservative as you are, if not more. Isn't it easy to see the sillines of polly arguments in my question?

-- Brooklyn (MSIS@cyberdude.com), November 01, 1999.

"It is a forum for those in this nation, and around the world, who are concerned about the effect of Y2k and are preparing to survive them."

I don't think I've heard anything farther form the truth about this forum. And if you think that is my fault, you are wrong. I just respond to what is posted, I don't DO the posting. One out of every three threads are OT, and one out of every two remaining are opninionated and rely on "feelings" not facts, which usually have very little to do with Y2K.

I'm sorry your forum is dying, but it was inherently unhealthy anyway.

-- (I'm@just.a frozen embryo), November 01, 1999.

Me no like pollies. They stupid AND rude.

-- Mara (MaraWayne@aol.com), November 01, 1999.

Liberty, you don't know jack. You don't know me at all. How can you possibly say that I am a polly or a troll. I would love to debate you on a national stage with or without a moderator. It would be my pleasure to embarrass and humiliate you, as if you need any help. You had better go change your diaper now, oh, and by the way, why don't you change your handle while you're at it because liberty doesn't fit well.

-- jb smith (joebobsmith@yahoo.com), November 01, 1999.

But we're not on a national stage, are we, Joe Bob? We're on a forum for people who want to prepare for Y2k and discuss same. You have no right to "call people to account" for their opinions here. That's disruptive, and it makes you a troll.

Liberty

-- Liberty (liberty@theready.now), November 01, 1999.

>> My question is -- What are those consequences that he mentioned? <<

I rather imagine the consequences jb had in mind were looking stupid.

Most people feel uncomfortable looking stupid in front of a multitude of onlookers. In cyberspace, this is rarely a big problem, so the inhibition against acting like a damned fool or a rude jerk appears to diminish. Just look around you.

The same lack of inhibition was achieved in older days during festivals where the entire population wore masks. But they were smart enough to confine this license to one day a year. On the Internet, the masks are seldom taken off.

That is one reason I post under my real name and with a real email address. It tends to keep me from saying as many stupid things as I might if I used a handle, and encourages me to use the same rules of civil discourse I use in un-cyberspace. I feel uncomfortable when I'm not accountable. It feels wrong. And I see what it does to some people.

-- Brian McLaughlin (brianm@ims.com), November 01, 1999.

Brian:

Like you, I try to address the readers of this forum as though they are all intelligent and thoughtful adults. Unlike you, I don't always succeed. I think you're quite correct that cyberspace appears to permit childish people to get away with bad behavior, if that's an important enough facet of their personality that they can't help expressing it whenever they can.

Also, I think some of our contributors acutally *are* rotten children, taking out their frustrations. Certainly many of them have not yet learned to spell, much less to ponder.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), November 01, 1999.

I do not berate anyone. I try to be civil. It is difficult at times to do so but I try. I am trying to get to the truth. I have seen several threads where people have made extreme statements. I just want to see the supporting evidence. If you read through all of the threads, you will see that I agree with some and disagree with others. As far as the consequences go, some people read things and they go way overboard with it. I just think its a good idea for everyone to see that not everyone feels the same about an issue. I have preps for my own family. I believe that being prepared is the right thing to do. As far as the troll issue goes, I could care less what you call me, you'll probably call me a liberal next, which is total bs, I have voted straight republican for the last four elections.

-- jb smith (joebobsmith@yahoo.com), November 01, 1999.

jb: we're all looking for supporting evidence. It's hard *not* to know (and frankly, I'm sick of the "NOBODY KNOWS" statement).

Read the Senate 100 day report. The first 10 pages should sufficently worry you. Read the IEEE report where it says the fixes will introduce even more failures. Then read *all* of RC's oil/gas threads (he backs up everything he says).

Perhaps in the above, you will find the evidence you require.

-- mar (derigueur2@aol.com), November 02, 1999.

Brooklyn:

I'd really thought there would be something I could sink my teeth into on this thread, but it seems you're simply asking about the consequences of erroneous predictions.

I THINK the point jb was making was that if one has made predictions for a certain point in time, and the predictions didn't hold water, the consequence would be that someone might remember that prediction and indeed question the validity of other predictions by that person. The person who noticed the failed prediction(s) might even make others aware of the failed prediction(s).

Another instance in a similar vein might be Andy recently stating that he foresaw the stock market between 3000 and 6000 at the end of October, 1999.

Predictions are made on this forum all the time. If folks choose to honor those predictions and make decisions based on those predictions, they may make decisions in error. In the case of the lights going out in January, 2000, folks may have expectations that if the lights do NOT go out, Y2k is over. If the lights DO go out, folks may feel warranted in having honored the predictions. In the case of the stock market predictions, folks may have dumped their holdings prematurely if they believed the predictor and lost money in the recent market rise.

I read once the thread in which this topic began, but have no interest in reviewing it again. My suspicion is that jb was attempting to note that after one incorrect prediction, the future predictions of the same psychic perhaps shouldn't hold the same credibility it once did....if indeed it held any credibility at all.

This is simply my opinion on the consequences that jb had in mind.

-- Anita (notgiving@anymore.com), November 02, 1999.

Thanks Anita. Thats exactly what I had in mind.

-- jb smith (joebobsmith@yahoo.com), November 02, 1999.

Anita

The purpose of my "question" was to show the disparity of possible consequences from lights not going out, or going out for a day,week, month. So what if people who claimed that lights will go out are wrong? I made my preparations based solely on conclusions I derived from my research (and believe me -- after earning MS degree in Information Systems I can do research). I spent about a 100 greenbacks on Coleman lantern and two flashlights. Will I loose this money - no way. Now I will be able to do night fishing. I did not buy all those flashlights before, because it was difficult to justify the purchase only by desire to go fishing overnight. Now, imagine what if lights will go out, even for three days, in the city like NY. It actually happened this summer, but it was summer, not the beginning of January. What will be the consequences if something like this should happen? There is no comparison whatsoever. Threfore, it is laughable to talk about the consequences of lights not going out. THERE IS NONE.

Regards

-- Brooklyn (MSIS@cyberdude.com), November 02, 1999.

Good area of specialty Brooklyn. Thats mine too. Isn't research fun? Have a good one.

-- jb smith (joebobsmith@yahoo.com), November 02, 1999.