Monitoring rollover : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

I will be monitoring rollover in far eastern time zones (hopefully including Fiji), and discussing the situation with people in those zones via amateur radio. If this board is up, I'll post progress reports here. Whether or not it is up, I'll mail reports to my Y2K net mailing list whenever I have any information. If you would like to be added to my mailing list, send me an email to that effect.

-- Steve Heller (, December 27, 1999


Steve--Your reports would reach a wider audience if you also posted them to the newsgroup (Usenet) Many of those posters will be on line with other posters located around the globe and reporting in no doubt. I plan to be on line with a programmer in NZ.

-- useusenet (, December 27, 1999.

Good idea about posting to c.s.y2k. I probably would have done that anyway, but now I'll be sure to.

-- Steve Heller (, December 27, 1999.

If anyone has information to post to csy2k, it can be sent by email to the following address: You should adjust the date before sending the email.

-- Dave (, December 27, 1999.

I think I'll wait until January 2nd to post a message saying I was wrong about what happens January 1st, if you don't mind. Or even if you do.

-- Steve Heller (, December 27, 1999.

I just noticed that the email address I gave for the mail to news gateway was an MIT address. If the MIT computers will be down, anything sent to that address will be delayed.

-- Dave (, December 27, 1999.


What makes you think anyone gives a damn what you think. Go away.


-- Dave (, December 27, 1999.

Dave, or Doug, or whatever you claim your name is:

If you could read, you would understand that I'm going to be reporting what is happening overseas. If you aren't interested, I suggest you crawl back into your hole. However, I have already received emails from about 20 people asking to be added to my email list, so obviously not everyone is as stupid as you.

-- Steve Heller (, December 27, 1999.

Face it, major mystery, Steve is just better than you. He's smarter, better looking, and.....and....his dog can beat up your dog. I am just glad Steve is there to monitor all of it and report it back to us peons. And thank God it's peacetime! If this was war, why, his own men might shoot him!

-- Grateful Company (, December 27, 1999.

If this was war, why, his own men might shoot him!

No, I think on this point you have me confused with Charles Reuben.

-- Steve Heller (, December 27, 1999.

I am just glad Steve is there to monitor all of it and report it back to us peons.

I'm sure you would be interested to know that you can avoid finding out what is happening on Friday and Saturday, as that is the main concern of all pollies. One key "preparation" to make is to avoid reading any of my posts about what's happening during that time.

-- Steve Heller (, December 27, 1999.

No, Steve, as usual, you conveniently skirt the issue. I can pick and choose which source I listen to or read. You certainly won't be the only 'source' to relate y2k info to the unwashed masses, and moreover, you certainly won't be the only 'source' with an agenda, either. If I adhered to your beliefs about the impending doom which is about to befall us, I'd certainly want your take on things, because it is human nature that perception basically is reality.And with some of the sweeping 'prognostications' you've made recently, I'd cast a wary eye at your analysis. Superior intellects aside, one must wonder WHO can give a true rendering of what transpires at rollover.I'll look for that 'impartial' source, nonetheless.

I'd submit that for an avowed doom and gloomer like yourself, that 'impartial observer' tag just doesn't fit.

It is truly funny that you would make the erroneous connotation that NOT listening to your play-by-play assessment is akin to not wishing to know what is truly transpiring. Apparently, Steve, your background would not cut it in pyschoanalysis.

Thanks all the same. Leave the reporting to reporters, eh?

-- Bad Company (, December 27, 1999.

Some links for the next few days.

 *****Rollover links*****

-- Brian (, December 27, 1999.

If I adhered to your beliefs about the impending doom which is about to befall us, I'd certainly want your take on things, because it is human nature that perception basically is reality.

Thank you for putting the primary Polly argument into such a brief statement. As anyone with the courage to face reality knows, perception is not reality: reality is reality. That is why no amount of screaming "I can't hear you, lalalalalalala" at the top of your lungs will keep the effects of Y2K from occurring, or from affecting you.

Of course, this is also why you and the others of your pathetic kind feel the frantic urge to silence those who keep pointing out that reality is reality: because you actually know it, deep down inside, where you hide all of the unpleasant truths that you hope will never affect you. For once, stop running: there is no place left for you to run to. See yourself as you really are: a naked, mewling infant crying for Mommy to make it better. Guess what? She isn't going to.

I'm sure I'll be flamed for pointing out the unspeakable truth about you and the others of your kind, but so what? If you haven't prepared, and I turn out to be right, you won't be around much longer to squeal about the unfairness of it all. And even if my predictions somehow prove to be incorrect, I'll still be right about you ... and you'll still know it.

-- Steve Heller (, December 27, 1999.

Steve, the glorious thing about your arrogance and your postings is that they collectively need no rebuttal flaming; they truly are abhorrent in themselves.

Perhaps it is all because you have spent so much time behind a keyboard that you have forgotten how to factor in a human element during the proceedings which necessarily encompass the story of y2k. Simply put, there IS no reality regarding y2k, until the actual date rolls over and we can all assess the damage, or lack thereof. May I take this opportunity to assert that even at that point, your mindset has become so entrenched in the camp mentality and the effort to prove your own validity that making an accurate assessment---that will jibe with both people firmly on the fence AND the 'pollys' you speak of, can never be achieved. More of the human element at work, for better or worse.

Knowing this, the question can only become, 'who are you trying to fool'?

Steve, YOUR perception is and always will be YOUR reality.

I find it unfathomable that you would employ classic doomer pretzel logic in this regard in a vain attempt to turn the tables on what has been taking place as of late. Myriad news stories have proclaimed readiness, confidence and optimism during the past couple of months and yet oddly enough, this site, among others, would much rather rely upon third-person renderings and personal 'feelings' as to how y2k will turn out.Moreover, scoffing at the reports or calling the stephen Hawkings and Peter deJagers of the world uninformed seems to be more preferrable. Listening to you, one would think there is some nobility in ignoring the news and rewriting the story.

I've said this many times before Steve, and will say it again...and it applies to yourself, the Yourdons and even the deJagers: one must wonder if anyone is fit to survey the ENTIRE y2k landscape and make a sweeping pronouncement as to the state of readiness. This was applicable 2+ years ago...and still is applicable at this late date. In this regard again, no amount of superior intellect can supplant the idea that one's own personal perceptions as to y2k (personal successes or failures on the job, stories by friends and family involved in the battle, et al) will shape his own feelings about the issue.In the end, you were like the rest of us 'dumb schmucks', reliant upon the fact that individuals world-wide would have to deal with this matter promptly and accurately. Where you would look at the glass as being half-empty, I'd prefer to call it half-full. Unfortunately, you'd like to attach some self-worth to how you look at the glass.

Steve, it had nothing to do with you.

No one doubts that y2k was a massive undertaking. What one must doubt is how much was or wasn't completed on a worldwide scale. Who is in a position to

This, of course, goes hand in hand with your ideas about silencing others. This is patently laughable, Steve, especially in light of the fact that pollys...or people like me who are called pollys by people like you...are in the supreme minority on this board. Who is silencing whom? By silencing, do you mean NOT adhering to what is put forth on this site by the posting public? Do you mean that taking 'rumor' as being akin to fact is preferrable to asking questions? Are you inferring that there are an equal number of 'doomers' being deleted here for their thoughts? And do you mean that someone's personal 'feeling' about the impact of matter who that person is...should suffice over verifiable news that eminates from legitimate news organizations? Or more pointedly, should we see who can arrange more 'experts' to validate each side's thinking?

In essence, your line is humorous. Can a crowd that is shouting down a few dissenters ever be called 'silenced'? In your way of thinking, apparently so.

I think you are once again being a little elitist Steve. I am not sure even the most ardent doomer would agree with this questionable line of logic.

I have read your words very carefully for some time now. I take your comments about major problems very seriously and am hopeful that they do not come to fruition.Yet recently, there has been an alarming amount of stress incorporated into your there has been with many other individuals of your belief. The quick-trigger-finger has tended to circumvent all that you'd said previously, and has tended to self-destruct ideas that seemed heretofore to be put forth after a great deal of thought. Now, one must wonder about the 'thoughts'. Addtionally, you should know your 'enemy' well enough before firing off pseudo-intellectual rants that talk about his/her demise and his/her lack of preps. Such commentaries bespeak an almost adolescent mindset. Truth is, I have had basic preps in place for 8 months now....nothing over the top, just the basics. And the point should be clear---that I take the possible severity of this moment in human history very seriously. Myriad voices have made an impact on my way of thinking. It seems unfortunate now that in the days leading up to y2k, the facade has been ripped somewhat and true identities are being revealed.

You are right in one thing here, Steve. There is no place to run and no place to hide. In 3 short days, we'll begin to see if the debate had merit on both sides, or not.

-- Bad Company (, December 27, 1999.

I have read your words very carefully for some time now. I take your comments about major problems very seriously and am hopeful that they do not come to fruition.

Since all you have done since coming to this board has been to attempt to distract people from the real problems, while belittling those who put forth a position you don't approve of, your claim to take my comments seriously is laughable. Nice try, but your hypocrisy is evident for all to see.

As for me, I call them as I see them. I'm not going to back down until and unless I see some evidence that I'm wrong. And since my predictions still have a few days before they can possibly be called "wrong", I'm afraid you'll have to put up with my consistent, logically analyzed, and carefully thought out position.

When and if I am proven wrong, I'll admit it. Until then, you're just blowing smoke, and no reasonable observer can doubt it.

-- Steve Heller (, December 28, 1999.

Oh, one more thing, "Bad Company": If I'm so biased and unreliable as a reporter, why is it that, as a result of this thread, 35 people have already asked to be added to my email list so they can find out what's happening overseas on Friday? I suggest that you post an offer to provide whatever information you may have or obtain about Y2K, and see how many people want to hear from you.

-- Steve Heller (, December 28, 1999.

After it's all said and done, sir, it is apparent that your arrogance knows no bounds. As usual, you miss the point. I read everyone's words and take all warnings about y2k problems seriously. No hypocrisy was intended. If you were a janitor, I'd take your words seriously, as well.

As is your wont, you read into the posting too deeply and made the connotation that some conciliatory patronage was aimed your way. How pathetic. I don't genuflect that easily, Steve.

And as usual, you skirt all of the points above. If I didn't know better, I would think you work for government. Calling me--or those like me--the 'silencing' types here is humorous, at best. Let me repeat, Steve, the naysayers who resist the doom cult logic are the supreme minorityon this site. Who are you trying to fool?????

Lastly, it seems everyone needs a hand to hold onto, even the 35 individuals who'll be relying upon you. Your commentary about me attempting to form my own list of people who want to hear 'my' impressions as the world rolls over is yet more political doublespeak.

In essence, your usual habit of straying from the original idea (perceptions...remember?) is illustrated once again.

These last few weeks have exposed your mindset quite nicely, Steve. Happily, your 15 minutes of fame have just about expired. I continue to enjoy your attempts to psychoanalyze the masses here and/ or engage in a veritable 'pissing' contest to proclaim you are superior.Logic? Intellectualism? Perhaps you need a dictionary.

Sadly, I won't be around to witness your apology but can safely say that when it comes to people skills, Steve, it is my opinion that you are better than no one.

Regards. And have a very pleasant millennium.

-- Bad Company (, December 28, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ