They just don't listen, that's why. I try to explain to Bad Company that his hosility towards the doomers is inconsistant with his so-called Polly views about Y2K. What I have observed from my Polly friends and relatives is that none of them have displayed any hositily when discussing Y2K with me, they are either bored or amused by doomer predictions. They truly believe it's all hype, a hoax, or has been fixed. Bad Company's anger is, I believe, a result of his fear that he is wrong about Y2K and will suffer the consequences. But when I try to point out to him that his hosility towards doomers, especially at this late date, doesn't make sense, all he does is rant and rave. Who is this guy anyway? His rage at doomers seems puzzling to me.

-- Ohio Bob (ohiobob@buckeyestate.com), December 10, 1999

Answers

Like many who choose to live in a box, they are afraid of anything other than the safe & comfy reality they have build for themselves.
This is why when the panic does begin, it will be an ugly thing. Avoid it.

-- Dan G (thepcguru@hotmail.com), December 10, 1999.

Denial and irresponsibility. And petty meanness.

-- no time (for@polly.trolls), December 10, 1999.

It's kinda similar to your kid whining at you to quit smoking or you're gonna DIE or possibly meathead refusing to have kids because of OVERPOPULATION or the tree-huggers telling us stripping out the ozone layer is gonna cause us to BROIL etc. etc.

These things are true, but we'd really just rather ignore them as we cannot individually solve them or don't want to make the change.

I think mostly the pollies want whatever's gonna happen to happen absent bank runs and stock market crashes, which we doomers on this board, single-handedly, are quite obviously precipitating.

What's ironic is they don't realize that very soon, the people won't need us doomers to prod them into action. Strange and mysterious failures will motivate them quite handily at that point.

I think also pollies need to place blame on us as they are basically spineless wimps who cower in fear at the idea of laying blame at the .gov or IT industry's feet.

Long-term, but not short-term, obviously, they're the real survivalists. But they're banking on the environment/fishtank they enjoy today to remain essentially unchanged (probably primarily due to a lack of imagination).......... where as we doomers don't.

I could go on for days as I made polly trolls my private thesis for my Y2K master's degree, but why, anymore........... the pollies are insignificant, as of about a month ago.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), December 10, 1999.

It's kinda similar to your kid whining at you to quit smoking or you're gonna DIE or possibly meathead refusing to have kids because of OVERPOPULATION or the tree-huggers telling us stripping out the ozone layer is gonna cause us to BROIL etc. etc.
oh geeez - these are ALL TRUE.

-- Dan G (earth_changes@hotmail.com), December 10, 1999.

I don't agree with any of you. I think you give people like "Bad Company" and the new one, "Wiffer", too much credit for having all of these feelings boiling up inside of them. The bottom line is that they are both ass holes and they need to just be deleted. I am tired of their rudeness, which has nothing to do with their ideas!

Taz

-- Taz (Tassi123@aol.com), December 10, 1999.

There are idiots at both extremes. I never get tired, however, of watching the pessimists preen in the mirror. They are so delighted with their intelligence, insight and general mental superiority to the "polly" dolts. (chuckle) Never mind most of the pessimists are rather average middle-class white Americans.

There are thoughtful people on both sides of the Y2K debate. Simply dismissing one side of the debate as "stupid" is beyond arrogant... whether done by optimists or pessimists. And if next year turns out to be less than the Apocalypse... the pessimists who spent 1999 calling everyone who disagreed with them an idiot or a liar will take a fair amount of flak.

-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@worldnet.att.net), December 10, 1999.

With my portfolio of posts, I'm building an insanity defense.

Kook

-- Y2Kook (Y2Kook@usa.net), December 10, 1999.

Ken

Sometimes you should put a sock in it.

Sometimes I wonder if the "pollies" like to remain ignorant of the risks just so the world could look like one great big capitalist dream (which it never has been).

In the thread below is a question from Bad Company about why water - waste water plants could be at risk. This is fair enough.

 Water supplies in question

Now there are lots of sources of info that there is a great risk to the water - waste water systems, from government sources no less. Yet even at this late date folks are just finally figuring out the risks. EGADS MAN!!!!

Your water -  waste water system maybe OK but you inhabit a small (very small) portion of the global whole. The only way you can understand your risks is by education and that means assessing the potential problems and asking "smart questions".

But the smart questions have rarely been asked by the "optimists" such as yourself, preffering as you do, looking at the political, ecomomic edification of the forum members without daring to look at the HARD QUESTIONS.

Water and waste water are hard questions. Life does not continue with no water and waste water hazards are life threatening.

This doesn't mean that there is going to be problems but the Senate 100 day report said the information on these systems are minimal.

Ignorance is not an option and IMHO the optimists such as Bad Company had better understand what the risks are before adding anymore comments about the tinfoil doomers.

Mind you on the other side of the coin doomers worrying about contrails, ancient predictions, UN takeover of the US and other such things is just useless retoric.

Shit I am 10 miles from the US border and not much farther to some of the naval, army facilities. They worry about the UN????

-- Brian (imager@home.com), December 10, 1999.

Doomer's are a product of logical, rational thinking and conclusions based on facts. Polly's are a product of what happens to a person when they watch to much Oprah.

Who by the way will probably write a diet book next year titled something like: "Lose 100+ pounds by not having a choice because you didn't prepare for Y2K"

-- ~***~ (~***~@earth.ebe), December 10, 1999.

Wow, my own thread. And long respected poster Ken Decker intimates that I am some sort of idiot. Thanks Ken! Any idea of what the term 'meely-mouthed' means?

The idiocy Bob has never addressed is his original posting about denial. There is no anger here, even in being psychoanalyzed from afar by some schmuck from Ohio. No, instead, the idea that has never been answered by Bob and his backwoods cronies/militia-types is this:

He tends to believe that denial can be equated to not sharing his doomlit mindset. He would like to have me read the senate report of last summer as some sort of rationale for his feelings. At the time of the publication, the report was already rife with statistics at least six months old. He would like to tell me that the American Red Cross, a bastion of helping people in dire straits and an organization whose very livelihood is to be proactive in dealing with tragedies, has authored a preparation manual and as such, validates his feelings that something must be on the horizon.

Bob, you don't know very much about the American Red Cross, it seems, and you tend to know less about this issue.

Since you go to great lengths to examine my feelings on the subject, let me issue some random thoughts for your discerning pallate.

-No, I don't think y2k will be anything approaching TEOTWAWKI. -Yes, I expect problems, and I also expect the world to muddle through it. -Oh, here's one, Bob---I have made my preparations. The 'pollys' I know abhor that idea. My 'preps' are nothing overboard. 3 months of food and water. A power saw since I live in the woods. Lots of flashlights. Lots of candles. No guns. No generators. Maybe I am not as polly as you thought, eh? Maybe I am not as emotional as those expecting armageddon, either.

And as far as the crowd here, I regard the TB forum to encompass two distinct groups of people. On one hand, you have a lot of good people, acting responsibly, prepping and going a little overboard in their rendering of what should pass for truth. On the other hand, you have a lot of survivalist/militia types who--I have no doubt--want a cataclysm.

Where do you fit in, Bob?

No, I'm not in IT and I don't play a computer pro on TV either. The only thing I have going for me is the ability to read and make my own decisions, apart from the pack. 2+ years of reading took me from the doom mentality I had in late '97 to where I am now...as someone who sees a 2-4 on your scale of seriousness.

Bob, you seem to embody the idea of mental problems associated with this topic quite nicely. To whit, the government is lying, the corporate leaders are engaging in spin and all positive news is flawed somehow. Sorry Bob, but where I come from, that's called close-mindedness. The 'hostility' you speak of only occurs when someone can't/won't cite sources during their argument and isntead would prefer to engage in rumor-mongering, innuendo, and the old 'I heard this from a friend of a friend'.

Sources, bonafide reports...that's all that can be asked for. And you can't provide either.

Like Ken said, there truly are idiots on both sides of the issue.

But thanks for the thread. Hugs, kisses to all.

-- Bad Company (johnny@shootingstar.com), December 10, 1999.

delete, please (troll baitee / troll baiter)

-- mike d. (bboys@yahoo.com), December 10, 1999.

Bad Company, I'm sorry but you are not a polly.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), December 10, 1999.

Thank you, lisa. Truly, I do not wish to be in either camp. And just as assuredly, I am hoping that the polly line about nothing happening does come to pass. (And I know most here feel the same way). Yet, it becomes akin to fingernails across a chalkboard when someone terms you as being in denial because you won't adhere to faulty logic. If I admit there will be some problems, am I not validating the many articles (like the one Brian posted on water today)? However, just as doomlits would state that the polly rhetoric of 'trust me, it'll all be ok' is flawed, I'd submit that the same can be said for individuals clinging to old stats or relying on hear-say. Clearly, there is a defining line between the two.

Regards.

-- Bad Company (johnny@shootingstar.com), December 10, 1999.

Bad Company, we just want people to prepare, swear to God, that's it, that's why we do this day in and day out.

-- lisa (lisa@work.now), December 10, 1999.

Perhaps this site should be subdivided into three: one for pollies, one for doomers and one for intellectuals. That way, each group could support and validate the other's feelings and beliefs. The threads would be much shorter, and not be filled with so much much drivel about who's got their head up their butt and who believes everything they read/hear. The pollies and doomers are very emotional, while the intellectuals are calm, rational and open minded. The three sites would eliminate the fireworks that occur when such divergent opinions and dispositions meet. As it is now, many of these threads resemble the dialog from a Jerry Spinger show.

21 Days

-- 21 days (lurking@cant.say), December 10, 1999.

There are no Y2K "intellectuals". Not enough data to predict what will happen. And not enough experience with Y2K problems to predict what will happen, although look-forward software has been having Y2K problems since about 1970. Both pollies and doomers are guessing. Doomers assuming $100bils. spent to prevent Y2K problems had little effect. Pollies assuming every press release they read is true. I guess the intellectual must conclude "I don't know". That's what I say. So I guess I must be an intellectual! Har har hardee har har

And here's my "Intellectuals Guide to Y2K Preps: Get really drunk at your New Year's Eve party, kiss your spouse/partner at midnight, and stay in a drunken stupor for the entire "three- day-snowstorm". Then pass out. Don't forget to wear a football helmet to protect yourself from planes falling from the sky ... and also when you fall over things or when you pass out. That's my plan anyway.

-- Richard Greene (Rgreene2@ford.com), December 10, 1999.