Posting guidelines -- have you read them? : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Below are the guidelines published in the forms page for adding a "question" starting a thread.
I think many skip past and have never read them. Also, they are not posted for "replies."
Here they are for your convenience:

TimeBomb 2000 Forum Posting Guidelines:

 Y2K--preparation and related issues--are recommended discussion topics
 We ask that vendors refrain from posting direct information about their products and services
 Challenge posts with facts or reasoned arguments--try to avoid flames
 If you have nothing of Y2K value to say--lurk dont post
 Post using your own name or handle--stealing may result in deletion
 Once 3-5 regular posters request DELETE--pointless threads may be removed
 Refrain from using profane/obscene language--or post will be deleted
 Dont feed the trolls--please
 Delete assessment of TBY2K SYSOP(s)--is final
 This is NOT a forum for continued religious rantings (occasional on-topic discussions are permitted).
Posters abusing this guideline will be asked to cease and desist, and/or their ISP provider will be contacted with a complaint notice.

Sysops here are some comments:

The first one about preparation is a bit out of date with the opening of the prep forum and should be revised.

The last one includes the phrase "occasional on-topic discussions are permitted".
Is this typo or a Freudian slip with all the posts about McCain, chemtrails, TWA800, etc being permitted? And the one "If you have nothing of Y2K value to say--lurk dont post"
Shouldn't Carl Jenkins be required to establish some kind of Y2k link for all the news articles he posts?

Then the one "Challenge posts with facts or reasoned arguments--try to avoid flames". I do try to follow this, although when someone flames me they're fair game.

A bit more about this one "Refrain from using profane/obscene language--or post will be deleted"

I have been involved in a discussion with a certain other poster. It has gotten a bit heated and some name calling has gone on. But the night before last he posted a message on this thread that is profane.
Then, last night he posted another message that is definitely obscene
If you don't consider the used of the f-word obscene, then nothing is.

Before a number of other posters who share the offender's side in this debate flame me (let me help you out "poor Mikey runs to the teacher when his feelings are hurt"), let me say this.
I don't care if the sysops leave these postings up and part of me hopes that they are left up. When someone of this mental caliber resorts to obscenities in an argument, it tells me that they are admitting that their position is indefensible with logic. I do think that it reflects poorly on this forum to those lurkers and thousands of news people monitoring this forum.

This other poster has suggested that I be banned for my vigorous arguments against him, but I am not returning the suggestion.

If there are going to be guidelines they should be followed and enforced. The sysops are tasked with a difficult job and I imagine that the profane language was left up not because they approved but because they didn't see it. Best thing is if everyone respects them.

Perhaps it is time to revamp the guidelines -- more than just a tweak such as the typo I pointed out and the bit about preparation. Perhaps collectively the forum should officially admit that Y2k is over and rename the forum to something else, prehaps not "Oilbomb 2000" or "Chemtrail 2000" as this forum's detractors have not without basis called it. Perhaps the sysops could open a topic to discuss a name change for the forum. If this forum is no longer about Y2k then it should be up-front about it.

-- Mikey2k (, February 13, 2000


Shouldn't Carl Jenkins be required to establish some kind of Y2k link for all the news articles he posts?

Please leave Carl Jenkins' posts out of this. There may or may not ultimately be Y2K issues responsible for the breakdowns he posts about, but without the stories here for us to see, we'd be limiting our discussions.

As for your problems with Hawk, I respectfully submit that both of you should CALM DOWN. You both sound like high school students who are badly in need of naps. After you wake up, apologize, and work on disagreeing with the *issues.* Avoid name-calling. You both have good points to make, but they're getting lost in the noise.


-- (, February 13, 2000.

I agree with Harrison. It takes two to tango. It seems that there is a personal issue between you two that had nothing to do with the subject. Very unfortunate, but also very common here.

-- haha (, February 13, 2000.

2000 will be with us for 1,000 years and the real millineum doesn't begin until 2001. Each day that goes by in this world is a timebomb ticking away. War, threat of war, financial collapse, scandals, chemical accidents, oil gluts or oil rationing,'s news. I see this forum as an information network, faster than clicking onto CNN to find out what is going on. It's a network made up of people who share information and comments. This forum was originally about the impending computer problem and in some ways there are still glitches and problems happening.

I do agree with you Mike that profanity and needless flaming isn't necessary. If people can't state their point in a rational factual way, then don't answer the thread. And I do agree with you that maybe the "guidelines," need to be revisited and changed to meet what's going on today on this forum. I don't know of any forum around that allows people to use profanity, threats, etc., and I have visited many forums that enforce the rules. I think the Sysops have done a good job in keeping disruptors out. The trolls were given many chances to clean up their act and they refused to act in a rational way. For some of the trolls, it was their goal to close down this forum and they failed. I've been here over 2 years and have experienced a lot of tolerance from the sysops on people who intentionally set out to disrupt. There's always room for improvement and I'm all for that.

-- bardou (, February 13, 2000.

Need a little EXTRA attention today Mikey2k ???

Remember Mikey Mouse, there are many other places for you to go, please don't IMPOSE your wishes on this forum. It's GREAT just the way it is.


-- Ray (, February 13, 2000.

In response to Ray's comment about "imposing my wishes on the whole forum", I say reread my question.

Harrison, you're probably right. I shouldn't have been drawn into the name calling when Hawk started. But I refuse to be drawn further and across the line that he has crossed.

I'll be generous and say that 5% of Carl Jenkins' posts could possibly be caused by a Y2k computer problem. Perhaps we should just call this "Glitch 2000" and encourage him to continue to post even more.

-- Mikey2k (, February 13, 2000.


I have read this thread and then took the time to go back and read each thread to which you gave a hot link. If all the posts are there, and I think they are, in each instance you started the name calling in reply to Hawk's posts by referring to him in a derogatory manner.

He then replied and in your next post you escalated the confrontation by more rude references. True you did not use profanity but you provoked him into using it. This appears to me to be deliberate on your part. Remember - "Attack the message, not the messenger".

-- Nadine Zint (, February 13, 2000.

Nadine commented:

"True you did not use profanity but you provoked him into using it."

Mikey2k, please read this 10 times.


-- Ray (, February 13, 2000.

How about "ThoughtBomb 2000" ??

That way it's still TB2000, yet that leaves room for interpretation, and a wide range of topics...

-- (, February 13, 2000.

Why don't you not print some of Hawk's little ranting's. If I may remind you in print that he has used Fuck, piss, Jack Off, turd and a few others so are you going to be selective about this or what.

-- Liberal Hater (, February 13, 2000.

"True you did not use profanity but you provoked him into using it."

Is this anything like luring burglars to rob you with a lovely window display, or how about... asking to be raped by wearing revealing clothing?? Absolutely ludicrous! Adults should take responsibility for their actions, and not blame the person whom they think "asked for it". Another sad example of why this world is so f@#%* up.

-- cin (, February 13, 2000.

Nadine, the discussion between Hawk and myself has encompassed a few more threads than the one I hotlinked, and has crossed back quite a few times. You can also see that he has abused others such as Gordon who has had more restraint than I and as far as I can see has not called Hawk names. Yet Hawk calls him a liar.

As far as provoking him to profanity, I guess you're right. All it took was asking him questions he couldn't answer. And no, I don't feel it necessary to repeat each and every potty-mouth word that he said. A hotlink to the thread where he said it is good enough.

-- Mikey2k (, February 13, 2000.

Thanks for posting the rules Mikey,

Y2k is not yet over. We still have no idea ho much is held together with coat hangers and duct tape. As INFOMAGIC said, its going to be a couple more months before the bullet hits the target. Its the nature of business and government to say whatever to keep the sheeple calm in their pens; every problem needs to be reported and examined in the search for truth.

Carl is doing us a great service with his postings. You may choose to ignore them, many of us are grateful.

-- John (LITTMANNJ@AOL.COM), February 13, 2000.

Nadine, thank you for taking the time to discern the truth in this matter. It seems that Mikey has a problem because he is a pathological liar, and I have had to prove time and time again that everything out of his mouth is untrue. No more. This is the last time, and from now on I will simply ignore him.

To all who seek the truth, please feel free to follow the conversation as it unfolds in any of the following threads, dating back to Feb. 8 and 9 when the problem started. If you don't have time, below are just a few samples of what Mikey results to when he is proven wrong. In each case you will find that these insults were totally unprovoked by me, and only after being insulted did I reflect his rudeness back in his face.

"No, Chicken-not-a-Hawk, I had the trim actuator figured out long ago. What I'm trying to figure out is the reason for your idiocy -- maybe your mother shoved you out the the roost when you were just a chick and you fell on your head."

"Hey birdbrain, you've been asked for specifics. Do you give them?"

"Tell us about YOUR aviation background. Hah! The only hawk about you is the phlehm you've spewed on this forum."

My name is Hawk, and I do not appreciate being referred to as "Chicken", "Chicken-not-a-Hawk", "Birdbrain", "Phlegm-hawker", "paranoid doomer idiot", "Hawker", and many other derogatory remarks.

I should be allowed to post my thoughts without being insulted, but the way that Mikey is aggresively trying to discredit my information by mocking me suggests that he is a paid government shill, who is trying to dispel the credibility of my ideas because they are very likely possible. From this point forward he will be ignored, but he will not stop me from practicing my right to freedom of speech. I think it is clear to everyone where he is coming from.

link 1

link 2

link 3

link 4

link 5

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 13, 2000.

Oh, there are lots more, but here's one from yesterday where I even asked him to stop this childish game, and he refused. Before I made a single negative comment toward him he insisted on continuing his game of insulting me.

link 6

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 13, 2000.


May I respectfully suggest that you haven't been here long enough to tell the rest of us what to do! These have always been guidelines. They have never been rules. And I might add, they have seldom been followed.

Establish some credibility first. This comes with time. After that, we can all discuss your desire to convert these to hard and fast rules.

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (, February 13, 2000.

Hawk, this sort of "fact gathering" (i.e., posting *six* links) simply adds more fuel to the fire. We intelligent readers can see that there is a problem. You need not tell us anything further, and the unintelligent readers lack the patience to follow your "evidence."

You will get across your excellent points much better if you will stick to the issue and not revert to name calling.


-- (, February 13, 2000.

remember this one?

<< -- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 09, 2000.>>>

-- cin (, February 13, 2000.

Uh oh, here comes that brainless vegetarian California bimbo bitch again, the wannabe psychologist. I bet you spend a lot of time masturbating... with your vegetarian friend, Mr. Cucumber! ROTFLMAO!!!

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 09, 2000.

-- cin (, February 13, 2000.

Harrison, as I said, that is exactly what I intend to do, ignore Mikey. But this response was just to clarify the issue since he said I started it, and that simply is not true. See for yourself. Thanks. :-)

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 13, 2000.

cinlooo, yes I do remember that one. It was in response to this one by you...

"Poor couldn't find anyone to attack, so you pick a fight with YOURSELF? And then fight back? HAHAHAHA! How's that for mental masturbation."

You're not fooling anyone, you got exactly what you were asking for.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 13, 2000.

well shucks, Hawk. I cant pull them there wool over yerr eyes, nah can ah?

Actually, my post contained no obscene language or vulgarity. Sad that you have to resort to such trash to get your point across.

-- cin (, February 13, 2000.

Z-, perhaps you could show me exactly where I told the forum what to do other than suggest a review of the guidelines. And exactly how long is long enough?

Hawk, you have basically been ignoring my questions, so what's new? As far as the names I've called you I'm going to stop it not because of anything you deserve but out of respect for the other members of this forum. Then the attention can be turned to your language, including when you called others liars including Gordon and Cherri. Not the worst language you've used, either.

And more importantly, the attention can turn to issues that you'd rather ignore when errors appear in your logic.

-- Mikey2k (, February 13, 2000.

Cinlooo, Telling someone that they are mentally masturbating with theirself, and then HAAHAHAHAHA! in caps is not offensive? I think you could use some sensitivity training! Clearly you were trying to provoke me, so you got what you asked for.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 13, 2000.

Observe... Mikey is being ignored. Since he gets off on provoking people into a response, this is going to drive him nuts. :-)

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again!), February 13, 2000.

Will someone please send these guys to bed? I don't believe either of them have gotten enough sleep lately. Diane? Are you around? Where's your sleep stick?


-- (, February 13, 2000.

So that's ignoring me. Uh huh. Your ignoring me sure lasted a long time. Thanks for the laugh, Hawk.

-- Mikey2k (, February 13, 2000.

I rest my case. :-)

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 13, 2000.

Stop it Hawk. My sides are hurting from laughing so loud. Yep, you ignored me real good. Matches the quality of the logic in your other postings.

-- Mikey2k (, February 13, 2000.

I posted three -- that's 3 -- messages on the "death & dying" thread. All 3 of them were deleted. Not one contained a single nasty word.

What gives? Is censoring threads now standard procedure?

Hello? Is anyone there?

-- could someone please explain (what's@going.on), February 13, 2000.

If you're messages were deleted, they were probably trollish in nature. Take the hint.

-- (, February 13, 2000.


My posts, if deleted, don't get that way because they're trollish, it's because BIG BROTHER is trying to SUPPRESS the VITAL INFORMATION that only I POSESS. You see, when THEY are OUT TO GET YOU, you start getting PARANOID, etc. etc.

And Hawk, BTW thanks for the posts.

ADMITTING that I'm typing for the sound of hearing my keys click,


-- Someone (, February 13, 2000.

All who won't tow the party thought line around here are censored. The bigotry against a persons ISP is apawling.

All who disagree are "outed" by having private information displayed publicly. *Some* of us would like to retain our privacy, but the thought police won't have that.

-- Incredible (, February 13, 2000.

If it bothers you so much, then go make your own forum.

-- (, February 13, 2000.

Hal, I think you might be missing something here. There are few posts on this forum that will go unchallenged or escape disagreement to some extent. That is the core vitality that gives this forum its spirit. Would you continue to participate if every post was taken for face value with no replies or debates? And when did this become your forum, or anyone elses for that matter? This is a public site, open to anyone that follows the published guidelines. Should that disturb your sensitivities, I suggest that it is YOU that might wish to form your own forum for like-minded zombies.

-- Ra (tion@l.1), February 13, 2000.

Yes Hawk, we are ALL provoking you. It's us, not you. YOU are the victim. We bad, you good. (Now repeat this several times until it becomes true).

And by the way...I MAY be a b*tch, but I was pick of the litter. WOOF!

-- cin (, February 14, 2000.

Very funny cinlooo. I think anyone who reads what you posted to me on the other thread can see that it had absolutely nothing to do with the subject of the post, but was merely intended to offend me. You've just been added to my list of people I will no longer acknowledge by even replying to your attacks, profanity or not. WOOOF! :-)

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), February 14, 2000.

Cin, you said,

"And by the way...I MAY be a b*tch, but I was pick of the litter. WOOF!"

That's one H*ll of a line! Got *my* attention.



-- Someone (, February 14, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ