Dear Mr. Yourdon, I would like to start by thanking you, Mr. Greenspun, and the folks at MIT for providing the services that allow the general public to visit your forum, at no cost, to give and receive information and ideas on a wide variety of subjects. That being said I have some comments regarding the TB2000 forum that was started by you. In the fall of 1998 I discovered this forum and found it to be a most comprehensive source of information regarding the issues surrounding potential Y2K computer problems. For months, I lurked at the site and absorbed volumes of information. One got to know the forum regulars and came to respect the thoughtful and intelligent give and go that took place. Unfortunately, this forum has evolved into something else altogether and one has to question your continued support. There appears to be a climate of fear mongering growing there and many of the posts should be considered reckless and in some cases outright dangerous. I suggest that this forum is out of control and your sanction of this activity might be revisited. The regulars and sysops appear to be rational people but they seem to have lost control over this board and the content of the posts. It looks like anyone that questions some of the more delusional concepts brought forth are immediately labeled as Pollies and deleted on sight. Now, please understand that I am speaking for myself and these are my personal opinions. My position on Y2K has fluctuated somewhat over the past 8 months but preparedness has always been part of my lifestyle. As a 57-year-old professional engineer (ME) I have been around the block once or twice, so to speak. I suggest to you that this forum has moved way beyond its original intent and should be reviewed by MIT and yourself. The religious fanatics, conspiracy theorists, and mentally ill all deserve the right to be heard, but not on an internet site supported by a major educational icon. There are too many radical thought sites on the net for an institution like MIT to sanction and manage another.

-- Truth (at@the.ready), November 21, 1999

Answers

Ahh the open letter format.

No specifics.

"reckless" "dangerous" posts.

Maybe Truth (at@the.ready) is a regular, but this has all the attributes of a troll.

I suggest that we ignore this tread as a distraction from what this forum should be talking about.

-- LM (latemarch@usa.net), November 21, 1999.

Truth,

That is a joke. The sysops have done a superhuman job at trying to keep the discourse on this site CIVIL. The trolls have been bent on destroying this site, especially You Know Who, with his multiple spam messages. Also, calling Diane a "bitch" and other sundry cursing hasn't helped your camp either.

The point is that this site is for CIVIL discourse, no matter what your view. The trolls have not been civil at all.

Diane and other sysops have repeatedly mentioned that polite posts would be respected. I'm a doomer, and some of my posts were edited - in fact, it was my UDF post where you verbally attacked me. I don't mind that sacrifice, if it keeps the site on track, and polite.

Again, it's not your viewpoint that gets your post deleted, it's how you come across. Verbal attacks and disruptions to the board shouldn't be tolerated, and I hope that they never will.

Thanks again to all the sysops - thanks for all of your efforts!

-- Deb M. (vmcclell@columbus.rr.com), November 21, 1999.

Truth-why not your real name?- I would agree with you but if you want a dull serious forum go to Rick Cowles site. He will email you a password. Everything you said was wrong with this forum was correct and it is much worse at times. Yes it is disturbing but I find myself coming back again and again. Still the best on the net for Y2K. Just bring handfuls of gravol and a thick skin.

-- Jan czarnecki (janczar@air.on.ca), November 21, 1999.

Looks like this board has taken on a vigilante mentality the past few days. The Sheriff rides into town to chase away the bad guys and all of a sudden everybody in town is a new deputy. Invar, Deb M. and others have become self-appointed honorary deleters, fighting for the cause. Cries of We will this and We will that are popping-up on every thread. Opposing viewpoints must be coming from trollsget rid of them at once! I will agree with Truth that MIT should not be aligning with this type of activity. This should not be a closed thought forum, IMHO.

-- Not (telling@any.more), November 21, 1999.

Tatr: Your contributions here are minimal to worthless, at best. So why don't you jest hit the road. Go find someplace where your ilk are appreciated. Debunkhouse comes to min

-- Pinkrock (aphotonboy@aol.com), November 21, 1999.

sheesh! there are a lot of good posts here. widen your scope

-- bill (bill@yourdon.com), November 21, 1999.

Not,

Good morning.

"...Opposing viewpoints..." It's NOT the opposing viewpoints, it's the way the views are PRESENTED. Foul language and insults aren't necessary in civil discussion. If people can't follow the rules, then they pay the penalty.

As I said in my previous post (please read it again):

"Again, it's not your viewpoint that gets your post deleted, it's how you come across. Verbal attacks and disruptions to the board shouldn't be tolerated, and I hope that they never will."

I don't understand why you cannot see this - I'm assuming it's because you don't want to understand.

P.S. I wish I had keys to be a deleter - unfortunately, I do not. All I can do is offer my opinion.

-- Deb M. (vmcclell@columbus.rr.com), November 21, 1999.

***

Recent contemptible and crude behaviour by certain nameless posters should not be excused.

They have repeatedly posted malicious comments. And they have attempted to sew them together loosely into a relentlessly malevolent, verbal combat.

Poor behaviour of this type is publicly scorned.

Run the abusive perps out on a rail. Suits me just fine.

It seems only fitting, that any derogatory statements concerning the management of this forum, should be accompanied by a return e-mail address that works.

No one should be allowed to shout down the reasonable use of this forum by making so much unwanted, insulting and abusive noise.

The sysops are doing a thankless job made very difficult by recent annoyances. Annoyances not of their own making. The rude and obscene messages from these few perps have been outrageous and very offensive.

And now would someone want to defend these outrageous and indefensible posts? The very idea is preposterous !

A little courtesy to the sysops I believe is in order, NOT subterfuge, NOT extreme profanity, NOT crying about deletions, NOT bellyaching about how the forum is being managed and NOT by weaving a web of fabrications.

Posts in recent days have brought out the true nature of these perps.

This has gone on way too long.

Time for it to end.

***

-- snooze button (alarmclock_2000@yahoo.com), November 21, 1999.

Censorship in th eform of deleting or even editing someones thoughts and writing to suit the Sysops point of view is not a way to accomplish anything. If someone stumbles in here, and then picks yp on the fact that that is going on, why would they stay?

Censorship removes all credibility from a genuine discussion, IMO.

-- . (.@...), November 21, 1999.

(.@..)

Could not agree with you more. Censorship on this forum must stop if it is to be taken seriously. Blatant profanity and character assassination should not be tolerated but the entire spectrum of viewpoints must be allowed.

-- Not (telling@any.more), November 21, 1999.

Well Truth (Or not),

As I recall, youve done a fair about of disrupting here, and have used quite a few anon handles to do so.

Tired (of@you.freaks)... is a classic one of your many misnomers.

Tempted to research the archives, and started to, in order to post links to all the disruptive and supercilious comments youve made... BUT... Id rather walk in the sunshine and sip a latte.

Cheers!

Youre welcome to leave... any time.

Diane, NOT a "censor" just removin' the troll litter these days

BTW... were you really at Waco like you implied you were?

(OT) Waco, from one who was there.
http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001NFS

-- Truth (at@the.ready), September 08, 1999

And... methinks you doth protest too much...

If you had to guess one poster on this forum was a govt shill, which would it be?
http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001lQT

(Did you get "censored? No.)

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 21, 1999.

Truth:

Why don't you leave? Funny how you gloss over the disruptive postings that have been going on here. You don't think that is a problem? You don't think that intentionally spamming this forum is a problem? Then leave. Don't whine, leave. Nobody wants to listen to your whining.

-- haha (haha@haha.com), November 21, 1999.

This is just another troll post to distract people from the real issue. Truth should move on to debunkers or be deleted. It's that simple.

-- (brett@miklos.org), November 21, 1999.

Whats with all the critique and departure posts???

Things change-so what!! As Kos would say-------GAWD!!!!!

-- db (dciinc@aol.com), November 21, 1999.

Diane..

The crux of this discussion is censorship, plain and simple. Who are you to decide what a troll is? Have you ever heard me opposing the concept of preparing for emergencies? Have I ever derided anyone for their viewpoints regarding potential Y2K computer related problems? Isnt that what this forum is all about? Now, if you take a position of impending doom you should expect to be picked apart and chided. Extreme views will generate extreme responses, not always on a civil plane (from both ends). There is so much speculation and misinformation going on here what do you expect? That everyone will toe the party line on each issue?

In the end, who cares? As Ive stated before, if you want to run a highly censored doomsday forum do it with private money. That way folks will stay away that might bring some balance into the picture and nary a dissenting word will be spoken. I have the same privilege as others to express my views on this forum. If you need to run a closed shop, get your own server and stop embarrassing MIT.

-- Truth (at@the.ready), November 21, 1999.

Ashton & Leska,

I've got popcorn, but when I'm at the circus - I MUCH prefer cotton candy.

-- flora (***@__._), November 21, 1999.

Truth.

You ARE a hypocrite!

Isnt sprinkling about 30 threads with variations on this post asking for MIT to disassociate from this forum... CENSORSHIP in its highest form?

I will refrain from telling you what I think of your actions. But... you ARE are sleezy character! And... I suspect you are a shill.

Harumph!

Diane

(Time for that latte!)

To quote YOU Truth...

I disagree with the disruptive multiple posts by YouKnowWho, but I concur with the anger over the mass deletions taking place on this forum. It is no longer relevant to be a prepper. If you disagree with the doomer mentality ya gotta go. I will campaign MIT until Im blue in the face to have them disassociate themselves from this forum. Some of the thoughts brought forth here are reckless and irresponsible and the folks at MIT should look closely at their involvement with some of the loonies posting here. Ya wanna have a doomsday site and foam at the mouth? Great, more power to ya. Build it and run it with your own money and keep normal folks out of the loop. MIT should cull this sick cow out of the herd.

-- Answered by Truth (at@the.ready), November 20, 1999.

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 21, 1999.

"New to the forum? Year 2000 resources, sites and links for research"

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001owa

-- Linkmeister (link@librarian.edu), November 21, 1999.

Truth,

"Have I ever derided anyone for their viewpoints regarding potential Y2K computer related problems?"

Yes, you did to me on my "UDF" thread. You attacked right off the bat without even asking questions, and you didn't even know what a UDF WAS. (You called me delusional and that it was better that I didn't come out of the house.)

After my pointing out your social inadequacies, you toned down, saying that you shouldn't have posted directly to me, but to posts in general.

You are ill-learned and ill-mannered. Hopefully, any newcomers will be able to discern the lack of quality in your (other trolls') posts.

-- Deb M. (vmcclell@columbus.rr.com), November 21, 1999.

Diane..

Thank you for your kind words. Also, I would like to thank you for demonstrating the type of misconceptions and distorted comprehension that permeates this forum. For example:

I post a cut and pasted article that featured comments and testimony from the director of the BATF, during the 1993 Waco incident. I titled that thread, From someone who was there. From that, these assumptions were made, some by you, some by others:

*That I was personally at Waco during the siege. *That I am the Ex-Director of the BATF. *That I am a shill, government or otherwise.

Ive vented my spleen and made my complaints and trust me Im over it. I would have expected more from you, but go figure.

-- Truth (at@the.ready), November 21, 1999.

Hey Deb, I still have never seen a UDF. And my retort to your UDF post had nothing to do with Y2K computer issues. You were so concerned that your UDF was selling firewood. After I stopped rolling around on the floor, I just could not help myself. A UDF was selling firewood, must be TEOTWAWKI. You should not expect to post this kind of observation without retort, OK.

-- Truth (at@the.ready), November 21, 1999.

Truth (or what ever your name is)

Rather than voicing your opinion (there are 6 billion of those) why not provide information supporting whatever position you take. Words are cheap and you have alot of them but relevent details are not. So rather than taking shots at the forum, you could contribute more to understanding Y2K rationally.

Also if you are so conserned Email Phil Greenspun and ask his views. But be prepared to read his book first :o)

-- Brian (imager@home.com), November 21, 1999.

Deb M:

[Again, it's not your viewpoint that gets your post deleted, it's how you come across. Verbal attacks and disruptions to the board shouldn't be tolerated, and I hope that they never will.]

I agree with this sentiment entirely. You have surely noticed, however, that Diane has invited me to leave, along with Decker, Hoffmeister, and Celia Thaxter. What are we to make of this (since all four of us remain as civil as anyone here)? I don't believe any of our posts has ever been deleted (except possibly contributions to an entire deleted thread). This is very encouraging.

However, it *does* put us on notice that the standards of civility optimists must maintain *far exceed* the standards permissable for pessimists. Never once has an abusive pessimist (there are many) been "invited" to leave, that I've seen. The implication is that the moderators are less interested in *civil* debate, than they are in *eliminating* debate.

Like you, I'd prefer not to see abusive posts. But when abuse and civil disagreement are so closely linked, it's disturbing.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), November 21, 1999.

"Hey Deb, I still have never seen a UDF. And my retort to your UDF post had nothing to do with Y2K computer issues. You were so concerned that your UDF was selling firewood."

Truth,

You didn't even KNOW what a UDF was, yet you still verbally attacked me! That's extremely immature and poor upbringing on your part.

Yes, I could have phrased my question a bit more succinctly - if you would have read my futher postings, the REASON WHY I asked about UDF is about corporate confidence in their Y2K remediations!

If more companies USE Y2K as a SELLING TOOL, then to me, if would be an indication that perhaps Y2K will be nothing, not even a bump. HOWEVER, I haven't seen many companies using Y2K as a tool, have YOU? Now, doesn't that sound like a logical question about Y2K?

Don't shoot off your mouth before you know all of the facts, as you did back during the UDF thread. As a 50-year old, you should have learned this a very long time ago. If you don't agree with me, fine, perhaps we can both learn something, just don't be nasty about the disagreement.

Deb M. --------------------------------------------

Deb M: [Again, it's not your viewpoint that gets your post deleted, it's how you come across. Verbal attacks and disruptions to the board shouldn't be tolerated, and I hope that they never will.]

"I agree with this sentiment entirely. You have surely noticed, however, that Diane has invited me to leave, along with Decker, Hoffmeister, and Celia Thaxter. What are we to make of this (since all four of us remain as civil as anyone here)? I don't believe any of our posts has ever been deleted (except possibly contributions to an entire deleted thread). This is very encouraging."

"However, it *does* put us on notice that the standards of civility optimists must maintain *far exceed* the standards permissable for pessimists. Never once has an abusive pessimist (there are many) been "invited" to leave, that I've seen. The implication is that the moderators are less interested in *civil* debate, than they are in *eliminating* debate."

"Like you, I'd prefer not to see abusive posts. But when abuse and civil disagreement are so closely linked, it's disturbing."

Flint,

Hello and thank you. I haven't done much research as to why you, Decker, Cecila, etc... have been asked to leave. If you've been civil, and haven't posted under different malicious aliases (such as Pro, Sucks, You Know Who, etc...) then you should be able to stay - as long as you're CIVIL - this should apply to all posters, no matter what their view on Y2K.

"...Moderators *eliminating* debate..." To me, I don't see that yet. What I see are very frustrated sysops who are trying to deal with a number or irrational, emotionally damaged individuals who are spamming this board. The frustration level is such that it becomes confusing as to what should be deleted or paraphrased. I don't believe that INTENTIONAL malicious paraphrasing has occured. I'll keep an eye out for it in the future.

Perhaps we should all electronically sign an agreement to stick to the boards standards, or else be permanently banned from the board? Perhaps this will help keep things in perspective.

Deb M.

-- Deb M. (vmcclell@columbus.rr.com), November 21, 1999.

As you are painfully aware Flint, you & I will probably never read a rebuttal by a sysop to the statements you've succintly made. Oh, I almost forgot about the tried & true "About Statement", which is trotted out at the drop of a hat. A poor attempt at misdirection.

I have posted similar comments as yours & have yet to receive any reply which even acknowledges, much less justifies, the lopsided application of "the law of the land".

This is the main reason I stopped participating back in June/July. Disingenousness right from the very tippy-top of the TB2000 food chain drove me away. One of my (many) weaknesses is an inability to tolerate hypocrisy.

I check back every so often because this is, after all, a pretty fun place - warts & all.

-- Bingo1 (howe9@pop.shentel.net), November 21, 1999.

Brian, Thanks for your input. I will, I did, he did, not yet. Best Regards

-- Truth (at@the.ready), November 21, 1999.

...sigh... I suppose there has to be someone willing to ask the stupid questions, and it looks like it's my turn:

What's a "UDF"?

-- I'm Here, I'm There (I'm Everywhere@so.beware), November 21, 1999.

1) UDF = United Dairy farmer's convenience store.

2) I have a nice case of very fine dark lager here for someone who can find ONE thread or post that I have deleted because it espoused a position I disagreed with,

chuck

(Hint: i have often let STAND posts which i disagreed with and SHOULD have deleted on other grounds)

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), November 21, 1999.

Dear Truth. Send your open letter direct and see what happens. I understand you can find Ed at :

(HumptyDumptyY2K@yourdon.com).

Night train

oh yeah, you MAY need to use a real e-mail so I don't expect you to try

-- jes an ol footballer who always liked to be addressed to my face (nighttr@in.lane), November 21, 1999.

Hey Night Train

I saw just about every home game that Dick Lane played for the Silver & Blue. You could hear his hits for blocks from the old park on Michigan and Trumbell. You be him? Sixties something. BTW, thanks for your suggestion but you were a few hours latebeen there, done that. Enjoy your Thanksgiving. Remember the good old days when you had to rumble with the pack every last Thursday in November? Those were surely good times. The Lions were not so lucky today.

-- Truth (at@the.ready), November 21, 1999.

One again, Flint, you prove yourself to be an ignoramus. You say you and Decker have to fight to stay on the forum, yet you admit you've never been deleted. I, on the other hand, representing the 'doomer' mentality, have been deleted many times.

Do you see me crying about it Flint?

-- a (a@a.a), November 21, 1999.