Just in from work. Checked the sibling board at GICC. Note pattern of incidents. Assume TBU checks all boards, but our conservative cousins seem to have a pattern estabished there, at least for today. Incremental failure or co-incidence?

-- mike in houston (mmorris67@hotmail.com), March 14, 2000

Answers

GICC LINK

-- (Dee360Degree@aol.com), March 14, 2000.

Huh?

-- semper paratus (here_with@my.pals), March 14, 2000.

Oh THAT gicc. Thanks for the link, Dee. I thought I missed a meeting.

-- semper paratus (here_with@my.pals), March 14, 2000.

Good work Dee!

Y2K is definitely happening, they've just done a pretty good job of hiding it so far.

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

Dee, thanks for the link!

Semper and Hawk, darn you guys know how to keep a poster on his toes! In all humility, don't you think there was an increase in "objective incidents?

OK, will shut up now (but they do have more than powdered asses over there, just not as much fun).

-- mike in houston (mmorris67@hotmail.com), March 14, 2000.

Mike in Houston, and Dee, I just visited the GICC site via your link, and apart from a wall clock on a post office in Washington showing the wrong date, I can't seem to see any other Y2K glitches. Could you please point them out to me.

Many Thanks.

-- Malcolm Taylor (taylorm@es.co.nz), March 14, 2000.

What does some of this stuff on the GICC board have to do with y2k? Water that smells like methane/Airplane problem with landing gear/viruses found in mosquitoes/hackers/grocery shopppers using self- scaners. Those are just a few of the topics posted on 3/14/99.

If you had looked at every random incident with the same diligence last year, I'm sure that you would find that the same types of incidents have occurred in the past. I'm not totally discounting that some of these may have been caused by Y2k issues. At the same time, it appears that many of the items posted here are clearly unrelated to Y2K.

If people are attempting to show a pattern of occurrences, the GICC board does zero to bolster their arguments.

-- CJS (cjs@noemail.com), March 14, 2000.

Malcolm, before I go back to lurking at the more coloful threads.... I noticed when I came here (a humble neophyte, still) that many of the reports involved pipelines, water supply and planes. Occam's razor: pipelines are on geo fault lines affected by drought (global warming), ditto water; planes, maybe satellite interferance (Navy is supposed to have grant to study). However, no-one's presented data yet pro or con for geo/satellite as opposed to Y2K theories. This leaves opening for chip controversy. I have a friend working in state government who constantly complains (and tries to document)mainframe instability since roll-over. Maybe these paradigms are within the norm of anamolous IT behavior, but the boards are fair indicators of reported as well as unreported events. When postings spike, it's a good time to be aware of event windows (or more accurately, sensitized to patterns).Check back on some of the old forum threads and see what you think. mike

-- mike in houston (mmorris67@hotmail.com), March 14, 2000.

I just read again the About section on GICC forum. It clearly states that "...will provide late-breaking news of Y2K-related events." Take the time to read the entire About. It's made to sound very unbias and proffessional in analyzing what's Y2K related and what's not. Personally, I check the GICC at least twice a week since its inception. I don't view the actual posts and archives as reflective of the About statements.

But I remembered reading a post a long while ago from Jen Bunker, one of the GICC forum staff, saying that all types of glitches, accidents/explosions/crashes etc. etc. were encouraged, as defining what was and what wasn't Y2K-related wasn't always clear-cut for anyone.

So I just went back to GICC's archives looking for his post (gave up trying), and then found this one in the admin/sysop category:

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002GDo

Now that we have so many messages, the use of the category feature is all the more important. Please take the time to select the most appropriate category and use the category links at the bottom of the main page to find reports by category.

We have previously asked that posts be limited to Y2K-related or possibly related issues. As we continue to get many reports that have no clear Y2K relatedness, and we don't want to lose this information, we have established a new category of "Non-Y2K Incidents". Please use it when there is no apparent realtionship to Y2K.

-- Steve Davis (Columbia, MD) (Steve@davislogic.com), January 07, 2000

P.S. IMO, they should clarify this in their "About" section.

-- Chris (!@#$@pond.com), March 15, 2000.

P.S.S: Their "Non-Y2K Incidents" category has exactly 1 post in it. Hmmm...

-- Chris (!@#$@pond.com), March 15, 2000.

Thank you Mike and Hawk.

Here is a thread that explains GICC's objective very clearly IMHO.

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl? msg_id=002lgl

Hope this helps,

Dee

-- (Dee360Degree@aol.com), March 17, 2000.