Hi all!

Here's my take: The Pollies have substantially grown in numbers here and the criticism and bile they spew smacks of latent fear, anger and lack of perspective. Let me explain...

Nobody in '99 could predict the future--remember that every time you scan polly-spew saying how awful we GIs were to prepare and warn others about what COULD happen. Why blame the preparers? Why don't I hear them yelling at the UN, federal gov't, and so on down to the community level where folks spent HUGE sums of money to prevent an unprecedented disaster!

I've kept a diary of '99 as a record of what I learned, thought and did about a credible threat to ourselves and families. How could I, the gov'ts, corporations--even the UN (for you liberal types) have known very little would come from Y2K impacts?

Yet here the polly-buttheads (thanks Cory!) are, most of them folks I never met while learning, preparing and sharing throughout last year's monumental stress, ranting on about how THEY knew (like hell) and how EVIL we are (how stupid).

That--I THINK--is the result of massive fear given a sudden and unexpected release when nothing wrong occurs (ask any mother if they blow up when a missing child appears from "Freddy's" house...). Fear becomes anger, and uncontrolled anger short-circuits logic, leading to ridiculous postings we see on this forum.

GET PERSPECTIVE. You can't judge last year from this year's knowledge. Nobody knew. At least some folks had brains enough to see potential danger and act sanely.

I was wrong in what I expected to happen. THIS DELIGHTS ME! My family is safe, wiser, and better prepared for life's disruptions than 99.9% of the population. I refuse to apologize to maddened mobs of idiots who WERE NOT HERE and didn't speak out in '99.

I will stand in judgement before Almighty God for my actions. I am not accountable to idiots.

-- (Kurt.Borzel@gems8.gov.bc.ca), January 05, 2000

Answers

Just one question, Kurt.

Why do you keep calling the pollys "idiots" even though they were right and you were wrong?

-- (duh@duh.duh), January 05, 2000.

A simple question -- if you're angry about the bile, etc., why act bilious in return? I've read a number of similar accounts here from others who were similarly prepared, feel no regrets and are glad that nothing terrible happened, but many haven't reacted in kind, as it were, to what they saw as mockery and contempt.

-- Ned Raggett (ned@kuci.org), January 05, 2000.

This really is the manifestation of the rising conflict between two world views. In one view, the world marches through time in an orderly linear fashion with only the occassional 'correction' of what is otherwise progress. In the other view are those who see time cyclically affecting those in the world. In this camp the world travels through periods of calm and upheavel, war and peace, boom and bust.

While the latter can easily accomodate the former, the former cannot abide the existance of the latter. It is the issue of granularity. In order to see the cycles, you have to get your view above the day-to- day (week-to-week, commercial-to-commercial).

Or as Cicero so elequently observed, 'if you've got your head up your ass, the only view is a tunnel, and it has got to be better than where you are at.'

-- pliney the younger (pliney @pompei.presque.vu), January 05, 2000.

Duh:

They were right by default.

Blind luck on their part.

Read my post. Nobody knew for sure in '99. Yet now the pollies judge those who prepared as wrong-in-more-than-expectations. They were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! That's emotion, not reason.

They're acting like they have no brains--just overwhelming feelings of outrage at those who prepared. It's understandable, just not condonable.

-- (Kurt.Borzel@gems8.gov.bc.ca), January 05, 2000.

Kurt, the spewing is a blurt-spurt of venom, non-understanding noise. But the archives are testament to all the reports, articles, and scientific findings that prompted the concern about Y2K effects, and all the deep, amazing, collaborative thought about the world that has made this Forum so stimulating and addictively wonderful for 2+ years.

The screaming scornful pollies missed out on the growing, learning, sharing, and danger considerations and also the spiritual awareness and appreciation of the amazing grace and miracle of the Perfect Rollover on 2000.

Those who acted responsibly are blessed with the still-stunned awareness of a sweet, gentle, merciful Miracle.

And we Doomers remain confortably prepared for the disruptions Mother Nature increasingly dishes out, and that man is concocting, warlike, intentionally or not.

We are too happy, dancing on the cherished air of normalcy, to care what anybody thinks, or read the rantings and ravings. A sunny working beautiful world is out there for the savoring!

HAPPY NEW YEAR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), January 05, 2000.

"Here's my take: The Pollies have substantially grown in numbers here and the criticism and bile they spew smacks of latent fear, anger and lack of perspective. Let me explain..."

Wrong. You are hearing it now because - at least in my case - I was busy working last year and gave up trying to explain it to the thick headed doomers who wouldn't listen anyway.

In the few newsgroups where I tried to explain how ridiculous some the claims were that people were making - it was obvious that the effort wasn't worth it.

I quietly went back to working on my "pee-cees" as some Einstein described earlier, and waited till 2000 to watch those same doomers sit in front of their "sure to fail" monitors with virtual egg on their face.

The anger you read in my posts comes from the religion aspect of the whole thing. Some people scammed more than a few Christians into believing a load of hogwash.

"ranting on about how THEY knew (like hell)"

How quickly we forget...

-- (dontscrewme_2000@yahoo.com), January 05, 2000.

Ashton and Leska:

Happy New Year to you too! I am thankful you are well and happy, and I, too, have a new humility that comes from accepting mercy.

For all:

there exists a very good essay to read--IS SURVIVAL WORTH SURVIVING? By Dr. James deBoer (October 16, 1999)--at:

http://www.millenngoup.com/repository/features/survival1.html

To be aware of threats and to take action is not the mark of an extremist. According to the Bible (Proverbs) A prudent man sees a storm coming and hides himself.

-- (Kurt.Borzel@gems8.gov.bc.ca), January 05, 2000.

Duh:

They were right by default.

Blind luck on their part.

Blind luck? So, do you feel that the results of Y2K were due to blind luck rather than remediation? Do you think any remediation was necessary?

Read my post. Nobody knew for sure in '99.

No, but many people had a good estimate of what they believed would happen.

Yet now the pollies judge those who prepared as wrong-in-more-than- expectations. They were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! That's emotion, not reason.

Some of it probably stems from the fact that doomers didn't simply imply that they were preparing just-in-case so that they might be safe, they implied that pollies were endangering the lives of themselves and their families by not preparing. That's also emotion, not reason.

In reality, both camps looked at the same information presented by the government, business, independent studies, and of course, the media. Both came away with different conclusions. The issue has ALWAYS been emotional with the constant flurry of messages about "convincing my DWGI spouse/family/friend, etc." Look at the responses to analyses by Flint, Hoff, or Decker, and you'll see PLENTY of emotional responses.

To expect that the issues would no longer be emotional on EITHER side is probably a bit naive at this point.

-- (duh@duh.duh), January 05, 2000.

Kurt,

I don't mind the pollies who were here (or somewhere) reading the news and following the mystery as it unfolded (or not.) It is the bastards who showed up here on New Year's Eve -- all full of themselves, proud of their expert analysis -- who fry my ass.

Someone in a thread below actually asked "Who is Cory Hamasaki?" And she was serious. These are the folks I wouldn't mind seeing having to live without indoor plumbing for a few months.

A & L:

Its about GD time you guys showed up. Gettin' worried here. See you at newt?

-- semper paratus (newbie@experts.abound), January 05, 2000.

Duh:

Just for the record, is this the same Duh that so emotionally jumped on my butt for posting information given to me about a certain pulp mill in Prince George, BC?

If so, your argument seemingly based on reason, just fell apart.

If not, I will answer your questions by private email. Advise me please.

-- (Kurt.Borzel@gems8.gov.bc.ca), January 05, 2000.

Kurt, You wrote

Duh:

They were right by default.

Blind luck on their part.

Read my post. Nobody knew for sure in '99. Yet now the pollies judge those who prepared as wrong-in-more-than-expectations. They were WRONG! WRONG! WRONG! That's emotion, not reason.

They're acting like they have no brains--just overwhelming feelings of outrage at those who prepared. It's understandable, just not condonable.

Please dont tell me I was WRONG! WRONG! WRONG!. I am a Polly and I have always maintained that little, if anything would happen at the roll-over. If there are some people who have acted the way that you describe, then name them and save your ranting for those ones. There are many pollies here like Flint, Cherri and The Engineer, who have often commentd on some of the more extreme claims, and given reasons why it could not be as bad as claimed. Note that I say "reasons" not "Blind Luck".

It isn't the Pollies who "judge those who prepared as wrong-in-more-than-expectations", it is the debunkers. Just because some-one is a Polly doesn't automatically make them into one of the senseless few.

You are right when you say that "Nobody knew for sure in '99", but then Nobody knows for sure what will happen tomorrow, next month, next year or whenever. It is only a few of the more extreme Doomers (Gary North, Paul Milne etc) who tried to give the impression that they knew for sure. They are the ones who were wrong. The people who prepared to a level that they were comfortable with were not wrong, The people who tried to give valid technical reasons for might or might not happen were not wrong.

So Kurt, there may be some people on this forum who are acting childish. Up to now you have not been one of them, don't change into one now.

-- Malcolm Taylor (taylorm@es.co.nz), January 05, 2000.

Just for the record, is this the same Duh that so emotionally jumped on my butt for posting information given to me about a certain pulp mill in Prince George, BC?

You mean how I pointed out that a "power failure" and a "power failure drill" sounded like the same thing? Please explain how that is "emotionally jumping on your butt."

If so, your argument seemingly based on reason, just fell apart.

If you say so.

-- (duh@duh.duh), January 05, 2000.

Did they show their heads? Damn, I missed it.

-- semper paratus (screendoor@your.ass), January 05, 2000.

HERE, HERE!!

Court is in session!!

It is decreed by this court, in nowhere for everyone, hereby decrees to all, and we mean all, predictions, prophesies, and anything that can be construed as such, hereby, are finished!!!

It doesn't matter, as decreed by this highest, holiest, whatever of courts. Get over it, right/wrong, polly/doomer, lurkers/activists, whatever/wherever. Let's quit this freshman debate squad, OK. (Must admit though, both debate teams were post-grad in expressing themselfs).

None of us "know" our future yet, it's still on it's way. LIGHTEN UP ON EACH OTHER, OK! OK!

Court Dismissed!

Keep your eyes open.

-- Michael (michaelteever@buffalo.com), January 05, 2000.

Doug:

You illustrate my point about idiot pollies.

Malcolm:

I am NOT saying you are WRONG WRONG WRONG, I am stating that pollies are saying doomers are such. I am glad that your viewpoints have been exonerated, but I give credit for "rightness" to no one because the problem was too complex for any individual to completely understand.

Cherri (the brigadoom lady?) more than once bragged about her extensive knowledge--yet I cannot believe it so. Too many times she flew off the handle for me to accept that she is a rational person-- unless one takes into account the fear factor--which discredits her argument, while she remains greatly correct in what she predicted. See the confusion? I don't think she knew enough to state to confidently that little would happen. Thus she was exonerated by events beyond her control or influence--blind luck. Flint is another story. His input, which I often disagreed with, was at least rational. For this I respect him and congradulate him as well as you.

I am not acting childish--though my less-than-perfect grammer may lead you to that understanding. I think you misread me.

Nevertheless, I have enjoyed your posts over the time I've been on the forum, and I wish you Happy New Year and all the best to you and yours!

For all:

Douglass Carmichael wrote in one of his essays that (not verbatim) given a threat to one's personal future, most people will deny it rather than accept it. This man is a psychologist and well known to the Washington DCY2K group.

For this reason, and others, I THINK it is correct to state that truly no one did know what would happen, so claims of "I was right!" ring hollow.

-- (Kurt.Borzel@gems8.gov.bc.ca), January 05, 2000.

"Yet here the polly-buttheads (thanks Cory!) are, most of them folks I never met while learning, preparing and sharing throughout last year's monumental stress, ranting on about how THEY knew (like hell) and how EVIL we are (how stupid)."

Your post is predicated on the notion that all thinking people felt the risk was significant, and were only lucky.

It *would* be stupid if you didn't prepare because you couldn't figure out the world might end. But if you figured out the world was NOT in any danger, and didn't prepare, then you were SMART to not get excited for something you figured out wasn't gonna happen. Don't be so bitter.

Besides, everyone should be prepared for some degree of emergency situation--they just don't have to buy into the Y2K hype.

-- Jim Thompson (jimthompsonmd@attglobal.net), January 05, 2000.

While we're on the subject of the Almighty God, I think He said,

"Be anxious for nothing..."

Look it up, or email me for the reference.

-- Jim Thompson (jimthompsonmd@attglobal.net), January 05, 2000.

Kurt! Welcome back, and glad you and yours had pleasant holidays:)

BTW, tried the link you posted above to the essay, and it failed. ay have crashed, or maybe typo?

-- Hokie (Hokie_@hotmail.com), January 05, 2000.

Jim:

First, who are you? I don't remember hearing your wisdom before the rollover, when we really didn't know what we were facing.

Second, my post said nothing about being predicated on only thinking people feeling the risk was significant. This is your interpretation.

Third, I did not say the world might end. Too many gov'ts and corporations thought there was a *significant* danger and decided to take appropriate action for any individual to really think the world was not in any danger. "Do not believe what folks say, watch what they do"--to extremist? Try "actions speak louder than words"

Fourth, bitter? I said I was delighted to be wrong! You're not ready, merely scanning here...

Fifth, who said preparing was buying into the Y2K hype? Have you read any of my pre-rollover statements? No hype, sir, just logic.

Sixth, I am a Christian and know not to take scripture out of context.

It's probably pointless, but the INTENT of the original post was to balance the bull that's been overflowing this forum. There is humour, respect, logic, and a bit-of-a-partheon-shot at those who've tried so hard to sabotage a worthy discussion forum.

-- (Kurt.Borzel@gems8.gov.bc.ca), January 05, 2000.

Hokie:

Hello friend and Happy New Year to you! I am glad to see you are well. Apparently I still can't type respectably. millennGOUP? HAHAHAHAHAHA!

It should read: http://www.millenngroup.com/repository/features/survival1.html

SORRY!

Jim:

Misspell on my part.

"You're not reading, merely scanning here..."

-- (Kurt.Borzel@gems8.gov.bc.ca), January 05, 2000.

Might I suugest people go back and read the Naval War College excellent Report on y2k. They gave several possible scenario's on how this might play out. They also pointed out that the problems, ala Gartner Group, would not be a one day event. Look at the scenario graph's with a view of what we do know.

They also suggested that the most advanced countries would come through the easiest. This seems to indeed be true. As the next two month's pass we should get a better understanding of how the third world and our critical enterprise systems hold up.

To those who obsess over who is right, well, reality like science is shaped and controlled by how you view your subject.

Also, hey there Kurt, waving to good people everywhere, of all opinions.

-- Squid (ItsDark@down.here), January 05, 2000.

From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California

Pollies misunderstand one fundamental thing about what motivates those who have prepared and those who continue to prepare. We are not acting on predictions of doom. We are reacting to perceived danger.

When I do not allow my son to walk alone in our neighborhood at dusk or after sundown, it's not because I'm predicting that he will be eaten by a mountain lion. If he were to ignor my warnings and come home without an escort, and still make it safely home, this is not proof that I was wrong about the existance of lions. If the chances are even one in a million that a lion may strike, I'm going to chauffeur my son. A neighbor may stalk and kill a bunch of lions and announce with big fanfare that there are no more detectable lions. My son still gets an escort.

Back in October of 1998 I wrote an essay On Being Wrong, in which I predicted this kind of gloating on the part of those who refused to prepare in the face of danger.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), January 06, 2000.

"When I do not allow my son to walk alone in our neighborhood at dusk or after sundown, it's not because I'm predicting that he will be eaten by a mountain lion. If he were to ignor my warnings and come home without an escort, and still make it safely home, this is not proof that I was wrong about the existance of lions."

------------------

And if I force my son to wear tinfoil earmuffs to protect himself from telepathic transmissions on his way to school, and it works, does this prove I'm right?

-- (dontscrewme_2000@yahoo.com), January 06, 2000.