The Reuben Delusiongreenspun.com : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread |
I wrote this snippet on an earlier thread:"While DP has not expressed this idea explicitly, I think he suffers from what I'll call the "Reuben Delusion." In this fantasyland, the Y2K doomsayers were part of a grand conspiracy. North, Yourdon, Hyatt, Hamasaki, Gordon, etc. were in league to use Y2K for evil purposes like the overthrow of the free world or some other bad thing. This diabolic plot would have succeeded if not for the heroic Debunkers. Reuben, DP and a handful of others were not fooled by the evil doomsayers. Nay, they (and they alone) unraveled the sinister plan and then shifted the tide of FUD by running a web site and sending emails to reporters. Is the job done for these super heroes? Of course not, because North, Yourdon, etc. still roam freely. The Debunkers must remain ever viligant, if somewhat incoherent and profane."
In response, Charles Reuben wrote:
"This thinly disguised support for a spain and OPEN SUPPORT FOR YOURDON IS SILLY. Did Decker even understand what EY wrote? Did Decker understand that EY in over 2 years of marketing NEVER MADE AN EFFORT TO CORRECT THE OBVIOUS FLAWS IN THE BOOK OR THE POSTS ONLINE? NOW...........WHY WAS THAT IF Yourdon was merely "doing what he thought was best for his family?".
AS FOR NORTH.........GARY NORTH IS A SEDITIONIST WHO MOST LIKELY WOULD BE IN PRISON OR PAYING FINES FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN ***MOST CIVILIZED COUNTRIES***. Try his crap in Germany today and see how far it would go. IN ISLAMIC COUNTRIES, he might find his tounge cut off and his fingers "digitized" after a one hour trial for "crimes against the State". It is a tribute to the FIRST AMENDMENT he is allowed to try to eliminate it.
And that from someone on the Experts list that defended both North's right to write and speak and his right to be on the list. After all, who could be more of an expert on FUD than the FUD-Meister??
My behavior and that of DP or MARIA (remember the sneering "Troll Maria" she turned around on them?) is supposed to be "elevated" for PEOPLE WHO WALLOW IN........TOTAL AND COMPLETE BULL SHIT AND REJOICE IN DOING SO.
When I am in a social setting, business meeting or go to Church you may be certain I do not use "street language" but given the FACT that TB I and GN's list not to mention Hyatt's dictatorship forum were populated by Street People, I saw no reason to try to "elevate them" to my Private mode. Rather,,,,,,,,I adapted what I continue to believe is a method that they understand. It is clear that Decker does not. He would have one waste time as he did trying to "discuss" or "debate" with IRRATIONAL PEOPLE GRIPPED BY FEAR.
FACT............MY TARGETS WERE CORP DECISION MAKERS, I.T. AND MEDIA TYPES AND NOT THE FEW ZOMBIES YAPPING AT A DECKER OR FLINT. Those targets were addressed PRIVATELY with lists and private E- Mailings. And for proof of that I have dozens of emails from Media thanking me for giving them the stories of the Doom Zombies. I also NEGATED MIKE ADAMS LAST EFFORTS (remember the 7 days in December plan). I merely sent that to 100 members of the Press before he launched it and within hours of the start he was getting calls from Press telling him to turn off the SPAMMING from his list. The Washington Post wrote that up as did all the services they passed it to.
ADAMS' "program" endorsed and aided by Hyatt, North and Lord Dumbo was "still born" and ended before it was supposed to.
Meanwhile DECKER "debated".
WE the de-bunkers and the concerned people TOOK ACTION. STILL WE GET "DECKER's STRAW MEN".
ANOTHER DECKER "straw man" concoction from someone who now appears to have obtained his "news of Y2k" from online and the popular media. He will never understand that my "public" posts have nothing to do with the work that many of us did off line. The "reason" I used profanity and called the Doom Scenario BULL SHIT is simple.
IT WAS BULL SHIT. Calling it a "cow dropping" might make it a bit more palatable for the Church Lady but I know Pastors that called Gary North's rantings BULL SHIT. And some did it on public list serves that Gary read (see the CR lists for data).
While you were wasting bandwidth on TB I pontificating, the de- bunkers were sending the most ludicrous posts to people who could do something to counteract the garbage. HOW that was done is none of your business. Doc Paulie had nothing to do with such effort save for the fact that he got copies of a lot of the stuff we were forwarding. He did dig out North's partner (Meyers) and the little seminar GN and Meyers held for the Faithful "How to make money on the Net and the Y2k Crisis" (ticket: $500 for the day).
Now for DECKER: a. You "left" TB how many times now? b. Why have you returned to "help" spain the clueless with your rather week points above that Patricia easily dismissed. c. DO *YOU* have a second job that you would like to tell us about? SEE, the game can be played all ways."
I choose to emphasis parts of Reuben's response that support my theory of the "Reuben Delusion." In short, a real estate guy and his pals saved the world from an evil cabal of Y2K doomsayers. I find this about as believable as "Mr. CEO."
OK, there were some hucksters who took advantage of Y2K. A few, like Yourdon, were pretty slick. The people who bought Y2K supplies were consenting adults exercising their economic freedom. If any of these people were defrauded by North, Yourdon, etc., they have a legal right to redress. During the Y2K debate, the "Debunkers" exercised their freedom of expression... though I doubt many media outlets listened. The doomsayers exercised the same right. In my opinion, few people noticed. The public generally ignored the Y2K problem as documented by the declining concern throughout 1999. Sure, a few people stayed home for New Year's Eve, but not enought to ruin the party.
In a free society we tolerate the hucksters, the shills, the barkers and the snake oil salesman. We also accept the basic tenet that each citizen is responsible for his or her own actions. No matter how hard a society tries, we can save people from themselves... nor should we. For those who panicked listening the Y2K doomsayers, there are natural consequences. Perhaps they will learn. Perhaps not. But this process of making individual choices and mistakes is the cornerstone of a free society. For all I criticize the doomsayers and the sufferers of the Reuben Delusion, they are living proof we have not lost all our liberties. In fact, I think a large bronze statue of Reuben choking North could be added to the Capitol Mall.
-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), September 13, 2000
The Y2K debunkers includes more people than who you saw at Biffy and TB2000, people such as Mitch Ratcliffe, Steve Hewitt, and Steve Davis.I don't think Charles or any of the rest of us have an delusions that we saved the world from an evil cabal of Y2K doomsayers. However, I do think that many of us had quite a bit of influence with Y2K project managers and business decision makers. This was much more important than influencing the general public's perceptions.
Also, Ken, you seem to think that this whole thing was a tempest in a teapot and restricted to a few internet meeting places. This is far from the truth. For example, Christian radio stations all over the country were broadcasting Y2K doom messages.
-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), September 13, 2000.
What makes you believe that it's over? Fools.
-- (deathbyonethous@and.cuts), September 13, 2000.
I DEFENDED SEDITIONIST GAREE DUCT TAPE"S RIGHT TO SPEAK EVEN THOUGH IN HIS DREAM SOCIETY,,,,,,,,,,HE WOULD TAKE AWAY MINE.
..........."CHUCKLE"........
WHY is TD BACK AGAIN? (LAUGHTER)........
Posting on his lunch hour again? (SNICKER)......
and now for more important news of the day. (CHUCKLE)
Alvin and the Chipmunks: Pissed! By Fiona Ng HOLLYWOOD, Sept. 12, 2000 -- Chipmunks have feelings, too. Especially when the issue involves money. Daily Variety reports today that Bagdasarian Productions -- rights holders to Alvin and the Chipmunks and the surviving family of the singing rodents creator, Ross Bagdasarian -- filed a $100 million lawsuit Monday in Los Angeles Superior Court against Universal Studios.
The B family is charging that the studio neglected to actively license Chipmunks products and its brand, resulting in a drop of annual revenue from about $4 million to the current $70,000.
The licensing deal between the Bagdasarian family and Universal began in 1996. In exchange for a 35 percent share of its business, Bagdasarian Productions received $12.5 million and an exclusive licensing agreement wherein the Chipmunks brand name was to become the center of the studios animated programming and family entertainment division.
The Chipmunks were created by the late Bagdasarian in 1958.
-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
YOU SEE, DECKER............. YOU AND YOUR **PRISSY** "RULES" ...........DON'T COUNT FOR SQUAT IN MY WORLD
(............LAUGHTER.............)
TTFN AND............ESAD.
-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
Ken,I hate to sound like Bill Clinton but it (sort of) depends on what you mean by conspiracy. One might argue that GM, Ford, Toyota, and VW are in a conspiracy to sell cars. They all have similar advertisements on TV and in the print media. They all lobby congress for legislation in their favor. Of course its not an actual conspiracy as defined by law as that would be illegal. Its a conspiracy of common interests. In a similar way most of the Y2K hucksters had a conspiracy of common interests to sell preps or books, or both. I think you can also argue that they also had a common egotistical interest in playing to the masses.
On the more fundamental question of was there an actual conspiracy? Well.maybe. CPR does seem to think there were actual links between many (but not all) of the Y2K sellers. Whether it was: You wash my back, I wash yours. or more of an actual conspiracy type of conspiracy I dont know. And I dont think you do either. I wouldnt rule it completely out like you seem to do but it doesnt keep me awake at night. If there are such links and CPR can prove them, more power to him.
As for whether or not the DeBunkers saved the world (or at least Western Civilization)? That sort of lives in the land of what if. It does appear to be a tempest in a teapot in the great and grand scheme of things but on the other hand DPs number of hits on the DB board do indicate a lot of traffic. And as Buddy says we did provide information to a lot of people if not in high places at least in elevated ones.
As Ive argued before it may have been that passerbys looked at all of the shouting and ran away. Or it might have been that the DeBunkers managed to prevent Yourdon & company from getting any traction with the major media and keeping them on the side lines. I think it will take someone more objective and with more information then the people on this board (or the others) to answer that question.
-- The Engineer (spcengineer@yahoo.com), September 13, 2000.
This thread is a continuation of another other recent thread:http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003moJ
-- (thread@2.thread), September 13, 2000.
Interesting that The Mr. Decker didn't see fit to put the link to his rather weird statements here. BUT then...........
-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
Moving right along, we see that all is certainly not Pollyanna in the world of Ms. Madonna Superstar. Could she be turning doomer?
Madonna Fed Up of Aggressive Fans, Interviews
September 13, 2000 1:53 pm EST
BERLIN (Reuters) - American pop star Madonna was quoted on Wednesday as saying she was fed up of the aggressive behavior of fans and bored with giving interviews.
The singer also told German monthly magazine Amica that she was having a hard time getting used to living in Britain because of the country's newspapers. She took issue with the photographs of topless models published by some tabloids.
"My God, you see nothing but naked women in the newspapers here. I just have not been able to get used to the naked girls on page three," she said, according to an advance transcript of the interview released by the Hamburg- based magazine.
Madonna, 42, is living with her boyfriend, British film director Guy Ritchie, with whom she had a son in August. She has a three-year-old daughter from an earlier relationship.
She said it was a "terrible burden" that her relationship was in the spotlight and complained bitterly about fans who trample on her privacy.
"The fans are getting increasingly aggressive," she said. "They don't leave me alone. They ring my doorbell, they order pizzas, they bother my daughter, they stand in front of my car so that we can't get out of our driveway. They make life impossible."
Madonna also took aim at interviews, telling Amica why she did not like talking to journalists.
"If it were up to me, I wouldn't give any interviews. I think they are A) boring explaining for the umpteenth time what I do and B) I'm not interested in telling the world about my private life."
-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
FROM THE "DECKER DROOL" thread: at the end. FREE OF DECKER "SNIPPING"
http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003moJ
This is the 100th post I think to this thread. Now its time to ask, "what is going on with td here?" and "why is spain back?" and WHO IS TRYING TO RE-WRITE HISTORY AGAIN?
I love it. Now *I* have to ask the Zombie question, "Why is TD back again and what is he "really up too?". This thinly disguised support for a spain and OPEN SUPPORT FOR YOURDON IS SILLY. Did Decker even understand what EY wrote? Did Decker understand that EY in over 2 years of marketing NEVER MADE AN EFFORT TO CORRECT THE OBVIOUS FLAWS IN THE BOOK OR THE POSTS ONLINE? NOW...........WHY WAS THAT IF Yourdon was merely "doing what he thought was best for his family?".
AS FOR NORTH.........GARY NORTH IS A SEDITIONIST WHO MOST LIKELY WOULD BE IN PRISON OR PAYING FINES FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN ***MOST CIVILIZED COUNTRIES***. Try his crap in Germany today and see how far it would go. IN ISLAMIC COUNTRIES, he might find his tounge cut off and his fingers "digitized" after a one hour trial for "crimes against the State". It is a tribute to the FIRST AMENDMENT he is allowed to try to eliminate it.
And that from someone on the Experts list that defended both North's right to write and speak and his right to be on the list. After all, who could be more of an expert on FUD than the FUD-Meister??
My behavior and that of DP or MARIA (remember the sneering "Troll Maria" she turned around on them?) is supposed to be "elevated" for PEOPLE WHO WALLOW IN........TOTAL AND COMPLETE BULL SHIT AND REJOICE IN DOING SO.
When I am in a social setting, business meeting or go to Church you may be certain I do not use "street language" but given the FACT that TB I and GN's list not to mention Hyatt's dictatorship forum were populated by Street People, I saw no reason to try to "elevate them" to my Private mode. Rather,,,,,,,,I adapted what I continue to believe is a method that they understand. It is clear that Decker does not. He would have one waste time as he did trying to "discuss" or "debate" with IRRATIONAL PEOPLE GRIPPED BY FEAR. FACT............MY TARGETS WERE CORP DECISION MAKERS, I.T. AND MEDIA TYPES AND NOT THE FEW ZOMBIES YAPPING AT A DECKER OR FLINT. Those targets were addressed PRIVATELY with lists and private E- Mailings. And for proof of that I have dozens of emails from Media thanking me for giving them the stories of the Doom Zombies. I also NEGATED MIKE ADAMS LAST EFFORTS (remember the 7 days in December plan). I merely sent that to 100 members of the Press before he launched it and within hours of the start he was getting calls from Press telling him to turn off the SPAMMING from his list. The Washington Post wrote that up as did all the services they passed it to.
ADAMS' "program" endorsed and aided by Hyatt, North and Lord Dumbo was "still born" and ended before it was supposed to.
Meanwhile DECKER "debated".
WE the de-bunkers and the concerned people TOOK ACTION. STILL WE GET "DECKER's STRAW MEN".
ANOTHER DECKER "straw man" concoction from someone who now appears to have obtained his "news of Y2k" from online and the popular media. He will never understand that my "public" posts have nothing to do with the work that many of us did off line. The "reason" I used profanity and called the Doom Scenario BULL SHIT is simple.
IT WAS BULL SHIT. Calling it a "cow dropping" might make it a bit more palatable for the Church Lady but I know Pastors that called Gary North's rantings BULL SHIT. And some did it on public list serves that Gary read (see the CR lists for data). QUOTE: While DP has not expressed this idea explicitly, I think he suffers from what I'll call the "Reuben Delusion." In this fantasyland, the Y2K doomsayers were part of a grand conspiracy. North, Yourdon, Hyatt, Hamasaki, Gordon, etc. were in league to use Y2K for evil purposes like the overthrow of the free world or some other bad thing. This diabolic plot would have succeeded if not for the heroic Debunkers. Reuben, DP and a handful of others were not fooled by the evil doomsayers. Nay, they (and they alone) unraveled the sinister plan and then shifted the tide of FUD by running a web site and sending emails to reporters. Is the job done for these super heroes? Of course not, because North, Yourdon, etc. still roam freely. The Debunkers must remain ever viligant, if somewhat incoherent and profane.
While you were wasting bandwidth on TB I pontificating, the de- bunkers were sending the most ludicrous posts to people who could do something to counteract the garbage. HOW that was done is none of your business. Doc Paulie had nothing to do with such effort save for the fact that he got copies of a lot of the stuff we were forwarding. He did dig out North's partner (Meyers) and the little seminar GN and Meyers held for the Faithful "How to make money on the Net and the Y2k Crisis" (ticket: $500 for the day).
Now for DECKER: a. You "left" TB how many times now? b. Why have you returned to "help" spain the clueless with your rather week points above that Patricia easily dismissed. c. DO *YOU* have a second job that you would like to tell us about? SEE, the game can be played all ways.
-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
off
-- (hmm@hmm.hmm), September 13, 2000.
One last note about "street language". Using it and embedding it in the middle of posts has an interesting effect. My words couldn't be cut and pasted elsewhere or extracted/snipped. The former prevented people from using them out of the "thread context" and the latter would insure that poster would have to "put the link" to the source online.
BOTH had the effect I wanted. Getting people back to BIFFY (in particular) or any place else I might have posted. DE-bunker was MINOR vs. what BIFFY did with its lead position in Yahoo. For months if you searched on Gary North or Gary North and Y2k up would come: GARY NORTH IS A BIG FAT IDIOT (BIFFY). Gary wasn't the only one who knew how to play the Web game. The 22 yr. old at BIFFY could give him lessons. AND DID........LOLOLOLOL.
-- Doomzies-Be-Them (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
CPR: Please get a job.
-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), September 13, 2000.
This be de 100th post Ah dink t' dis thread. Sheeeiit. Now its time t' ax, "what be goin' on wid td here?" and "why be spain back?" and WHO IS TRYING TO RE-WRITE HISTORY AGAIN?Ah love it. Now *I* gots t' ax de Zombie quesshun, "Why be TD back again and whut be he "really up too?". Dis dinly disguised support fo' some spain and OPEN SUPPORT FOR YOURDON IS SILLY. Dun did Decka' even dig whut EY wrote? Dun did Decka' dig dat EY in ova' 2 years o' marketin' NEVER MADE AN EFFORT TO CORRECT THE OBVIOUS FLAWS IN THE BOOK OR THE POSTS ONLINE? NOW...........WHY WAS THAT IF Yourdon wuz merely "doin' whut he dought wuz best fo' his family?".
AS FOR NORTH.........GARY NORTH IS A SEDITIONIST WHO MOST LIKELY WOULD BE IN PRISON OR PAYING FINES FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN ***MOST CIVILIZED COUNTRIES***. Try his crap in Germany today and see how far it would go. IN ISLAMIC COUNTRIES, he might find his tounge cut off and his fingers "digitized" afta' some one hour trial fo' "crimes against de damn State". It be some tribute t' de FIRST AMENDMENT he be allowed t' try t' eliminate it.
And dat fum someone on de 'Sperts list dat defended both North's right t' scribble and speak and his right t' be on de list. Afta' all, who could be more o' an 'spert on FUD dan de FUD-Meista'??
Mah behavio' and dat o' DP o' MARIA (rememba' de sneerin' "Troll Maria" she turned around on dem?) be supposed t' be "elevated" fo' PEOPLE WHO WALLOW IN........TOTAL AND COMPLETE BULL SHIT AND REJOICE IN DOING SO.
When Ah am in some social settin', business meetin' o' go t' Church ya' may be certain Ah do not use "street language" but given de FACT dat TB Ah and GN's list not t' menshun Hyatt's dictatorship forum wuz populated by Street Suckas, Ah saw no reason t' try t' "elevate dem" t' mah Private mode. Sheeeiit. Ratha',,,,,,,,Ah adapted whut Ah continue t' reckon be some method dat dey dig. It be clear dat Decka' duz not. He would gots one waste time as he dun did tryin' t' "discuss" o' "debate" wid IRRATIONAL PEOPLE GRIPPED BY FEAR. FACT............MY TARGETS WERE CORP DECISION MAKERS, Ah.T. AND MEDIA TYPES AND NOT THE FEW ZOMBIES YAPPING AT A DECKER OR FLINT. Dose targets wuz addressed PRIVATELY wid lists and private E- Mailings. And fo' proof o' dat Ah gots dozens o' emails fum Media dankin' me fo' givin' dem de stories o' de Doom Zombies. Ah also NEGATED MIKE ADAMS LAST EFFORTS (rememba' de 7 days in Decemba' plan). Ah merely sent dat t' 100 members o' de Press before he launched it and within hours o' de start he wuz gettin' calls fum Press tellin' him t' turn off de SPAMMING fum his list. De Washington Post wrote dat up as dun did all de services dey passed it t'.
ADAMS' "program" endorsed and aided by Hyatt, North and Lord Dumbo wuz "still born" and ended before it wuz supposed t'.
Meanwhile DECKER "debated".
WE de de-bunkers and de damn concerned suckas TOOK ACTION. STILL WE GET "DECKER's STRAW MEN".
ANOTHER DECKER "straw man" concocshun fum someone who now appears t' gots obtained his "news o' Y2k" fum online and de damn popular media. Sheeeiit. He gots'ta neva' dig dat mah "public" posts gots nothin' t' do wid de work dat many o' us dun did off line. Sheeeiit. De "reason" Ah used profanity and called de damn Doom Scenario BULL SHIT be simple. Sheeeiit.
IT WAS BULL SHIT. Callin' it some "cow dropping" might make it some bit more palatable fo' de Church Lady but Ah know Pastors dat called Gary North's rantings BULL SHIT. And some dun did it on public list serves dat Gary eyeball (see de damn CR lists fo' data). QUOTE: While DP gots'ta not 'spressed dis idea 'splicitly, Ah dink he suffers fum whut I'll call de "Reuben Delusion." In dis fantasyland, de Y2K doomsayers wuz part o' some grand conspiracy. Ya' know? North, Yourdon, Hyatt, Hamasaki, Gordon, etc. Sheeeiit. wuz in league t' use Y2K fo' evil purposes likes de overthrow o' de free world o' some otha' bad doodad. Dis diabolic plot would gots succeeded if not fo' de heroic Debunkers. Reuben, DP and some handful o' others wuz not fooled by de evil doomsayers. Nay, dey (and dey alone) unraveled de damn sinista' plan and den shifted de damn tide o' FUD by runnin' some web site and sendin' emails t' reporters. Be de job done fo' dese supa' heroes? O' course not, a'cuz North, Yourdon, etc. Sheeeiit. still roam freely. Ya' know? De Debunkers must remain eva' viligant, if somewhat incoherent and profane. Sheeeiit.
While ya' wuz wastin' bandwidth on TB Ah pontificatin', de de- bunkers wuz sendin' de most ludicrous posts t' suckas who could do sump'n t' counteract de damn garbage. Sheeeiit. HOW dat wuz done be none o' yo' business. Doc Paulie had nothin' t' do wid such effort save fo' de fact dat he gots copies o' some lot o' de stuff we wuz forwardin'. He dun did dig out North's partna' (Meyers) and de damn little seminar GN and Meyers held fo' de Faithful "How t' make bread on de Net and de damn Y2k Crisis" (ticket, dig dis: $500 fo' de day).
Now fo' DECKER: some. Ya' "left" TB how many times now? b. Sheeeiit. Why gots ya' returned t' "help" spain de clueless wid yo' ratha' week points above dat Patricia easily dismissed. Sheeeiit. c. Sheeeiit. DO *YOU* gots some second job dat ya' would likes t' tell us about? SEE, de game kin be played all ways.
-- crp (buytexas@swbell.not), September 13, 2000.
I could not have asked for a better example of the "Reuben Delusion." Reuben obviously feel he (and others) played a critical role in debunking the evil doomsayers and their minions. And his proof, ladies and gentleman, are emails from his grateful fans. What irony. This is the same type of "proof" used by doomsayers like Paula Gordon. (chuckle)
-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), September 13, 2000.
OK, Ken, don't believe it. But the fact is it's the truth. And there are no delusions of grandeur either.
-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), September 13, 2000.
"I don't give Yourdon credit for being a smart huckster?"Sure I have several times on this very thread. Yourdon cannot even figure out his website's Virginia traffic is not the "evil gumbit", but from AOL.
Ed Yourdon has been WIND-CHECKING and providing written commentary to a small portion of the IT community for decades. It is what he does. Unlike CPR, I believe Ed never corrected his What-ifs because he never UNDERSTOOD the issue technically. But even giving him this slack is weak when one understands the significance of the supposed trigger date issues and his "I am done folks" deal from the summer of 1999, and then his return.
Ed Yourdon is a very good CONman is what he is. Most of the voices from the Y2k Donner Party were. They didn't need to understand the issues since their followers didn't or cared to. Chances of them ever being found-out was low. Only threat to their schemes are folks like us Debunkers who stand up and speak out. Freaking entire IT industry should have stood up and told Ed Yourdon to GET LOST OLDMAN.
Arrogant ignorant assholes on this thread then act the part of all good Nazis and call me names. Even have a Nazi on this very thread explaining how we are but a couple of corrupt people away from sending fellows to the Gas Chambers. He has now rewritten Charlie's post using all the good stereotypical language all racists know so well. Course the monuments of liteary parse are too blinded by their own brilliance to see the OBVIOUS and will goose-step behind the wrestler. See they missed all the other clues from the Conmen so to expect them to see a Nazi in front of them is really nutso.
Poor Maria, looks the record in the face and has but the retort I am Superman, or is it Mental Dwarf? Unable to have had an original thought or insight herself, she attacks any who have, as being somehow at a level above human. Look Maria, I am NOBODY, basically a major point of my deal all along. I do not even use my own name ya MORON. Like I care if you love me? I am not even in IT in ANY capacity. I represent the average Joe who would be handed the Y2k papers and say...Geesh what NONSENSE. And guess what, they freaking DID while you and your waffling pals here played with outright CONMEN and HUCKSTERS. I am no Superman, but I am smart enough to know when somebody is "playing me" and you have been turned over and done real good.
Maria you are pissed off because I bagged your boy Dubya. I reflected most Americans opinion on the Lewinski nonsense. Hey you got a grudge. Well BooHoo for you. This is cyberspace, America honey, WELCOME.
We are Americans exercising our Free Speech. We take no money for ANY of this. We do not have tapes-newsletters-beans or generators to hawk.
Are we a tad bit too committed? Well no kidding, like this is somehow being hid? Gary North is a Big Fat Idiot, does that sound like we care if the dumbf*cks on this webboard get it? I don't write for you. I write for an idea, called FREEDOM.
In fact, I know beyond any doubt, a KOS or a Ken Decker are INCAPABLE of ever getting it. One thinks a Nazi return as close as a few corrupt individuals, and the other thinks an indicator of a healthy economy is the presence of good amount of Conmen. Would take YEARS to open the eyes of these dimbulbs if one had that much time to waste.
Ken Decker posts from his governmental Job about the beauty of a Free Economic model. Recommends that everyone has to be the expert. If done wrong, you hire a lawyer. He gets paid to sit around and post here, just like Paul Milne does thru his tax-breaks. And they call me a mirror of Milne?
Course exercising one's rights is going to look very bizarre to the types round here. Freedom is BIZARRE, is RADICAL, is rare. More attractive the folks who play to your weaknesses. Who stroke your fat egos. Who pander to the worst in people.
First Amendment is the BALANCING factor against all manner of Baloney. It is the tiny alternative to a COURT TRIAL which in Ken Decker's DELUSION appears from the darkeness as his ONLY alternative if done wrong. Lack of awareness causing one to hold Deckerisms.
The price of Freedom and Liberty is constant spraying of the baloney which hitches a ride along with truth. All here have the dam right to spew any old thing they want, including those who stand up and confront it. This process is Freedom, legal remedies come into play when folks have sat and remained silent and offer little.
Leave you with a snip of the last paragraph-Newbie link, from Debunkers.."You have not even begun to "get it" if you think the information here looks "strange", I can assure you." verified by the fact Y2k was not something even close to being fixed, it never was the big monster sold.
-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), September 13, 2000.
Did it ever "occur" to you in January-Feburary-March 1999 that Y2k was a pile of baloney? Even now do you get that? Course not, so why should anyone trust your judgement?Quotably Quoted - What the 2/99 Senate Report Really Said...
http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003HW8
-- What we knew (in@February.1999), September 13, 2000.
Doc, I know the average Joe and you're no average Joe. You are sick and demented.
-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), September 13, 2000.
You do huh, well you gots a Nazi right under your nose and miss that, so thanks for your analysis. It means ZERO just like the outdated Senate turd meant ZERO for those of us IN reality.
-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), September 13, 2000.
Oh great. Somebody posts the Senate report, no not the Senate report, a link to an interpretation of the Senate report, an interpretation that was quite wrong by the way, for the umpteenth time. Big freakin' deal! When I first read their report I thought OK, they know what we know--that Y2K may cause some problems, but nothing we can't deal with. When the doomers read it, they found all kinds of problems that weren't even there! Major disconnect here, and it's still going on.And what the heck happened to you Maria???
Did it ever occur to any of you that some posters style might be the result of the fact that we're trying to say what we want to say in a short amount of time? I don't, and I'm sure Doc Paulie doesn't, have time to re-re-re- read what I write and clean it up. This isn't a novel or a news article, it's opinion. You may have all day to reflect on what you're writing, but all I have is a few moments to get a point across.
By the way, I still want to know if I'm right about the name "Doc Paulie"...does it mean something like "Doc Polly" ?
-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), September 13, 2000.
I thought about "standing up and saying so" to fight truth, justice and the American way and decided you weren't worth it. You're welcome to your ranting.FWIW Stephen, (I'm wasting my time with this bozo), for the record I wasn't played by "my pals". I am IT, worked Y2K remediation, knew from the start it wouldn't be the end, disagreed with everything Eddie had to say, and worked on New's Year to watch the fireworks that didn't occur. You're such a dip.
-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), September 13, 2000.
OK, gang, looks like the party has moved to yet another room. See you over at:"The Reuben Delusion" (Ken Decker, kcdecker@att.net, 2000-09-13) http://hv.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl? msg_id=003nk0
-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), September 13, 2000.
. . . .Y2k was not something even close to being fixed, it never was the big monster sold.I take it you're saying there never could have been significant problems even if there had been no attempt to fix it.
That's something easy to claim now after $300 billion or more was spent to fix Y2K. Most responsible and seemingly informed Y2K speakers were saying before the outcome that Y2K was something that had to be addressed. For example, Peter de Jager said this in 1998...
http://www.csis. org/html/y2ktran2.html#dejager
Let me reiterate something that Senator Bennett said. If today were December 31, 1999, and our systems were in the current state they are in today, tomorrow our economy worldwide would stop. It wouldn't grind to a halt. It would snap to a halt. You would not have dial tone tomorrow if tomorrow were January 1st, year 2000. You would not have air travel. You would not have Federal Express. You would not have the Postal Service. You would not have water. You would not have power. Because the systems are broken.
I know you don't like hearing it. I know it is classed as hype and exaggeration. The problem is: it happens to be a fact which you yourself can verify.
Very few problems occurred in January 2000. I don't know how much of that can be attributed to Y2k being fixed and how much can be attributed to Y2K not needing to be fixed. I don't think you do either, Doc. But the idea some things had to be fixed was the prevailing one in the late '90s, and it was never clear even later in 1999 that all of what needed to be fixed worldwide had been fixed.
-- Hindsight (is@20.20), September 13, 2000.
ANOTHER JUNIOR GRADE........."LINKMEISTER" POSTS A LINK TO THE ANTIQUE ***CSIS**?? CSIS?? CSIS........YOU DARE USE CSIS as an example when THEY WERE ONE OF THE FIRST GROUPS TO TURN OFF THE.........FIRE ALARMS?? AND THEN THEY GOT ***ALAN SIMPSON*** TO START HEAVY DUTY PR TO CALM NERVOUS NELLIES DOWN??? AND SHOW THEM HOW THE "SPIN CONTROLLERS OF Y2K " HAD GONE **WHACK-A- DO0****.
WHAT IS NEXT........."THE SENATE REPORT"
FOLLOWED BY WHAT? "THE FINAL SENATE REPORT"??
-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
Well, maybe the old thread is worth the longer load time. Reuben's presence on a thread is usually the triumph of quantity over quality. Now we have DP playing the "a" to Reuben's "Milne." This is almost Shakesperean.DP may be writing for freedom (all caps), and he demonstrates one of the great virtues of free speech. It makes it much easier to tell those who know what they are talking about from those who do not.
When pressed, DP resorts to the usual ad hominem attacks. I am bad because I have a position in local government and occasionally post during the during normal working hours. Of course, DP has no idea what schedule I work or where I am posting from. Why let facts interfere with a good smear?
The real irony here is that DP and Reuben engage in the same rhetorical nastiness that the Y2K doomsayers practiced last year. And they do so to hide the same lack of an underlying argument. DP or Reuben cannot prove they made a whit of difference in the Y2K debate. They are greatly offended by North or Yourdon, yet neither can demonstrate any harm done to them. This is just a long series of tantrums by a couple of guys who sound like Invar.
-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), September 13, 2000.
Dear Prissy,Does it hurt much?
Use the Prep-H.
-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
AND ...........SWAB IT ON USING THE STRAW FROM YOUR FANTASMAGORICAL "thoughts".
-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
Why is it that many disagreements on serious subjects on this board devolve into calling each other stupid or crazy or some variation?
-- helen (b@t.x), September 13, 2000.
I used to check the debunking fora every now and then, and I'd see threads with a couple of dozen posts, *every one* from cpr. I thought, Gee, it's an unusual person who writes to answer himself even once. But *two dozen* times? Doesn't it ever occur to him that nobody else is listening?Nope, never did. Still doesn't. Fantasyland indeed.
-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), September 13, 2000.
Flint, you might want to check out The Mr. Decker's Preps of Prep-H.It is purported to HELP FENCE SITTERS ALSO.
-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), September 13, 2000.
helen: That is because CPR is stupid or crazy or some variation... Not to mention unemployed due to his extremist overreaction to Y2K fear-uncertainty-doubt about people's reactions to the (non-)event.
-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), September 13, 2000.
Flint, you're right of course, but it could get even worse than that. There was a period very early this year on debunkers when cpr was the only poster (except for his cheerleader Louis). Then other posters began to appear agreeing with cpr, such as "Boris" and "Commander Hutt", who were of course different names for old guess who.
-- Peter Errington (petere@ricochet.net), September 14, 2000.
Decker,Do you ever wonder why everybody can't stand you? You fit no place. You were despised a year ago around these parts, and little has changed in over a year.
How can all these people be wrong Ken? Doomers or Pollies it makes no difference, you are a Class A jackass. How do you explain this?
-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), September 14, 2000.
KOS,How did you all of a sudden become a fan of Ken Decker? Don't you remember last year? you know the troll stuff? You drilled Kenny so many new ones his nickname now is Swiss Chez.
-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), September 14, 2000.
YOU DARE USE CSIS as an example when THEY WERE ONE OF THE FIRST GROUPS TO TURN OFF THE.........FIRE ALARMS??You've completely misunderstood what my point was, cpr. On purpose perhaps? That quote from Peter de Jager was not an attempt by me to imply he was still rather pessimistic about water and power at the end of 1999. It's well known Peter de Jager said in Jan. 1999 enough had been fixed that TEOTWAWKI (a collapse of society) had been averted.
I was speaking in response to Doc Paulie who believes Y2k was never a big deal. You should have picked up on what I meant when I said
Most responsible and seemingly informed Y2K speakers were saying before the outcome that Y2K was something that had to be addressed. For example, Peter de Jager said this in 1998...
http://www.csis.org/html/y2ktran2.html#dejager
and then after de Jager's quote when I said
Very few problems occurred in January 2000. I don't know how much of that can be attributed to Y2k being fixed and how much can be attributed to Y2K not needing to be fixed. I don't think you do either, Doc. But the idea some things had to be fixed was the prevailing one in the late '90s, and it was never clear even later in 1999 that all of what needed to be fixed worldwide had been fixed.
Cpr, you also said
WHAT IS NEXT........."THE SENATE REPORT"
FOLLOWED BY WHAT? "THE FINAL SENATE REPORT"??
Take a look at the 1999 Senate Y2k hearings.
http://www.senate.gov/~y2k/hearings/
The hearings show what we did and what we did not know about Y2k at different points during 1999. There was more uncertainty and doubt about Y2k last year than you're willing to admit, probably because you want newcomers to believe only people at 'doomer' internet sites were concerned about Y2k
There was a lot good news about U.S. banks and electric utilities by mid-1999. Short- or long-term supply chain disruptions and the stock market taking a big hit were still plausible scenarios, however, even in the second half of 1999.
There was the matter of international Y2k readiness. What was known about it in Oct. 1999 wasn't exactly optimistic.
http://www.senate.gov/~y2k/hearings/991013/
-- Hindsight (is@20.20), September 14, 2000.
DP,My allegiance is not to a social group, but to the clear, lucid analysis of ideas. I picked apart many "doomer" theories last year and pointed out some embarrassing errors in their thinking. The "doomers" who hated me were inevitably the extremists who did not want the participants in TB 2000 to think, but to follow. I wear the scorn of people like Russ Lipton and Diane Squire as a badge of honor.
I also criticized "pollies" like Reuben for silly activities like his "list making." This earned me the ire of the extremists on the "polly" crew. Boo hoo.
Flint said it best last year. My comments separate those who see TB 2000 (and its spinoff) as a school from those who see it as a church. Right now, Charles Rueben is the little tin god of the "pollies." You apparently cannot see it, but he is no different than Russ Lipton, Diane Squire or any of the doomer extremists. Reuben wants to bully people into thinking his way or shutting up. Wow... just like the "doomers" did on TB 2000 last year.
I'm not here to win a popularity contest or be a faithful member of one team or another. I'm here to think... and to express my opinion on bedtime stories like the "How the Debunkers saved the world." And you know what, DP, just like last year, I'm pretty sure I've won the debate when the participants have no better argument than to criticize me personally.
-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), September 14, 2000.
No, Decker, you are the one who is delusional.Shall we revisit the many threads from TB2k from participants from history past? Showing overwhelming consensus you were their gadfly? Shall I repost what KOS thought of you but a year ago?
I pick apart," yes you certainly do to the exclusion of anything else. You accuse others of being arrogant?
For a great while I envisioned you sitting in a smoking jacket and sipping brandy as you posted from your leather chair, your tone is that condescending. I will reply folks after I return from Holiday." Were you under the impression anyone cared about your picnics in the woods? Was the world going to stop if you were not present? Newsflash, you are not that dam important or interesting.
You are here to do onething. Prove to yourself you are not the boring paper pusher from bumf*ck Maryland.
The Debunkers never saved the world. The world was never in a position needed that. Course you, as well as I know that but does that rest with you? No, you must belittle those who actually took a stand. Those who took money from their own pockets and presented best they could, a real stark contrast to the prevailing thinking. Which everyone in hindsight now knows was the actual rationality present.
I think it time the great debater found tougher competition. Maybe someday you will actually find something truly debatable and find out there is no such thing as winning in the real world. People agree to disagree. Truth is found everywhere. All have something to offer even you. If your goal is to share insight, you would be best served by dropping the arrogance and condescending tone of your parse. Unfortunately your goal is to irritate for the sake of being irritating.
Two things are not debatable. Y2k was overblown considerably. And Ken Decker felt this subject material debatable.
-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), September 14, 2000.
Quit all this pussyfooting around you guys.Ken hon,
Inquriring Doomers & Debunkers want to know - Are you the Antichrist?
-- flora (***@__._), September 14, 2000.
...When I am in a social setting, business meeting or go to Church you may be certain I do not use "street language"... -- CreePeRWow. (1) CreePeR has friends? (2) CreePeR has somebody who'll do business with him? (3) CreePeR goes to church?
Coulda fooled me.
-- (Dem Doomzies Are Coming@To.Get.Ya.Charlie), September 14, 2000.
Doc, even CPR said, "Doc Paulie had nothing to do with such effort [on debunkers] save for the fact that he got copies of a lot of the stuff we were forwarding." Yet you tout your selfless efforts to "stand up and say so".Is this the way you "debunk":
We already BEEN there and done it long time ago. Your arguments are JUVENILE, yes juvenile. They are so transparent and without meat someone has to stand up and at least say so. If you benefit from as much, some much the good. I am sad you apparently didn't and are sticking to the fundi-path you have chosen.
Grudge? Me, no, Doc, I don't. I just see you for who you are, another Hardliner who can't construct an agruement and reduces a discussion to flame throwing.
For Buddy if he's still here. I agree that we don't have time to post and sometimes misspell or use poor grammar but with Doc I needed to re-read his posts quite a few times to understand the point he was trying to make. Eventually I just ignored his posts until he "stood up and said so" to me. Now I need to "stand up and say so" whenever he states something stupid.
-- Maria (anon@ymous.com), September 14, 2000.
You just can't help yourself, can you, DP? You cannot "debunk" my basic argument so you heap on the personal attacks and hope no one notices the intellectual poverty of your position. Yourdon, North, Gordon and the rest of the doomsayers exercised their right to free speech. Consenting adults made decision based on the doomsayers flawed analysis. You were not injured by the doomsayers, just offended. Welcome to America. Reuben and the other Debunkers had an obscure web page that featured more bombast than intellectual discussion. Personally, I fail to see how anyone could take Reuben seriously as he ranted.Spain detested me last year... so what? He did leave TB 2000 with a surprising graciousness, admitting his error and taking his humble pie with good humor. I was impressed and wrote a post in admiration. Of course, the doomsayers hated me. They didn't want intellectual debate, they wanted conformity. School versus church.
Get a clue, DP. I don't care that the doomsayers didn't like me last year. I don't care that Spain "likes" me now or that you or Reuben dislike me. Your personal opinion of me has zero relevance to this argument. Frankly, I don't care what you do for a living any more than I care about "Will Continue" working as a hairdresser. Let's discuss the issue, not the personalities.
It is not my intent to "belittle" you or the other Debunkers. I simply do not think you made a whit of difference in Y2K. And thus far, you haven't shown me a thread of evidence to the contrary... the number of "hits" on your website notwithstanding. If you want to engage in this argument, show me press clippings from a major media where one of the Debunker's is quoted. Show me a single nationally- released story written by Reuben et al. Show me one speech where a natioanl figure thanked any Debunker. Show me any evidence your overheated rhetoric made a difference last year.
I have never claimed that I influenced the Y2K. I visited TB 2000 because it was the most interesting place I found for Y2K debate. Frankly, I found BFI and Debunking much slower and dominated by the ever angry Charles Reuben. Ask Reuben. He'll tell you he made a difference. That, DP, is arrogance.
-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), September 14, 2000.
Decker said: "You were not injured by the doomsayers, just offended."I beg to differ. We were all injured by the doomsayers. By blowing Y2K out of proportion the doomsayers affected many companies' reactions to the problem and hence their bottom line. Doomsayers' input to serious Y2K discussions--for example Yourdon, Leon Kappelmann, and some of Westergaard's cast of characters--seriously sidetracked many a Y2K project. Lots of money was spent to simply counteract the speculations of these self-proclaimed Y2K gurus. And how much of GWU's money, not to mention C-SPAN's, has been wasted by Paula Gordon? Then consider the impact of all that doomsaying on people's personal lives.
-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), September 14, 2000.
Flip You just can't help yourself, can you, DP? You cannot "debunk" my basic argument so you heap on the personal attacks and hope no one notices the intellectual poverty of your position.Flop It is not my intent to "belittle" you or the other Debunkers. I simply do not think you made a whit of difference in Y2K.
Clunk Show me a single nationally- released story written by Reuben et al. Show me one speech where a natioanl figure thanked any Debunker. Show me any evidence your overheated rhetoric made a difference last year.
circle-jerk
-- (fannybubbles@usa.net), September 14, 2000.
Link to the exchange Maria was so kind to cut and paste but seemingly overlooked referencing the source document. Sloppy for a programmer, shame.http://www.insideth eweb.com/messageboard/mbs.cgi? acct=mb1097119&MyNum=966969042&P=Yes&TL=966644981
Worth a visit. Especially for those simpletons who think us Debunkers some tight knit organized club, not. You want the heat? You can't handle the heat.
-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), September 14, 2000.
Come-on Buddy, grow-up.Them thingees you cited are indications of a healthy Free "Economically" run Country. According to Economist Decker, they are proof of just how well our Free markets work. The more Gordon's the better. If they get out of hand we just find Johnny Cochran and he sues them to the cornfield(to steal the title from a Twilight episode).
You are just jealous Buddy. Why don't you milk CSPAN yourself instead of pounding your chest like some moral know-it-all? It is the American Way! Do one to others before they do-on to you. Course don't tell the innocent children that, but you get the point.
Now you know me and I am a Centrist Extremist. I am also illiterate and a Mental Dwarf. Some have compared me to Superman and Dr. Demento in the same breath, so take a big helping of salt following anything I spew.
Anyhow gots to get back to Rush now, see-ya.
-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), September 14, 2000.
Buddy,Sorry, but I do not agree with your logic. Every individual, private firm and public agency made its own decisions about Y2K spending. If they believed faulty arguments from the doomsayers, they are responsible. The only case where they are not responsible is where provable fraud was committed.
Every day, people speculate. A financial analyst will say, "I think XYZ Company is going to take off." What happens if you buy this stock and it falls in value? Is it the analyst's fault? Perhaps, if you paid the analyst and he provided a guarantee the stock would rise in value?
To my knowledge, none of the doomsayers provided a warranty with their opinions.
As a general rule, I recommend against taking investment advice from a person or firm with an interest in selling a particular investment. There is an obvious conflict between giving you objective advice and selling a product. This was pointed out many times during Y2K.
The bottom line is simple. While the Debunkers are morally offended by the doomsayers, they cannot prove fraud or damages. By the way, if any of the corporations felt defrauded, I'm relatively sure at least some would have sued. They know what Reuben and DP fail to acknowledge. There is no legal remedy for listening to a bad soothsayer.
DP,
Read carefully. I have no idea what kind of person you are. Your arguments about Y2K are lacking. Reuben and others have asserted the Debunkers made a difference. Under the rules of logic, assertions require proof. No proof has been provided.
You and others argue that Gary North and the other doomsayers should be held "responsible" for their actions during Y2K. Under the rule of law, there are legal remedies if you have been damaged. To my knowledge, no one has sued any of the Y2K doomsayers because they were wrong about Y2K. Why? Because, in my opinion, this case would not last five minutes in any court.
Do I "approve" of the Y2K doomsayers and their tactics. Of course not, but my "approval" has nothing to do with the legality of their actions. I do not have to approve of what you say to defend your right to say it.
Now, please try to understand the difference between attacking an argument and attacking a person.
-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), September 14, 2000.
LOL Doc! I'm not sure everyone will get your sarcasm, but I did.BTW, thanks for the link to Poole's place. I didn't realize you guys have been posting over there all this time.
-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), September 14, 2000.
Ken,I'm not saying anyone has a case for fraud or damages in a court of law. I'm simply saying that there was injury caused. Whether that injury has a remedy is irrelevant. In this case you are right. I doubt anyone can sue for damages. Damage is done almost every day by the speculations of stock brokers. One does not have to prove fraud or take them to court to see the damage they do.
-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), September 14, 2000.
{I do hope that all self-respecting, card-carrying conspiracy theorists of any persuasion note that he didn't answer my question}.
-- flora (***@__._), September 14, 2000.
Buddy--I have often likened the FUDsters to stock pumpers (if they "knew" that their y2k predictions were bogus) and to bad stock pickers if they didn't know. In either case, I am responsible for my own purchases.
BTW, how can we call North a flim-flam man (ie, he knew that his predictions were wrong) and at the same time call him a technologically ignorant person?
-- Lars (lars@indy.net), September 14, 2000.
Ken Decker,For the last and final time(cheers from the crowd), doing what we are doing is ALL that is needed or required to beat down the cockroaches like North. Don't need law suits.
I know the concept of Free Speech is beyond you so I do not expect you to GI, but do try.
And one last one for Flint about an old crying session...To end all the useless dribble about being banned from Sleazyboard, simply log- in under some new Identity. If they ban by IPs, get another, or use an anonymizer service.
But of course like Decker this whole deal is about your fat egos and that would not work for you, would it? Yes, you 2 are THAT transparent.
-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), September 14, 2000.
"I have often likened the FUDsters to stock pumpers (if they "knew" that their y2k predictions were bogus) and to bad stock pickers if they didn't know. In either case, I am responsible for my own purchases."Sure, you are responsible, but you were still injured by the actions of others.
-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), September 14, 2000.
"To end all the useless dribble about being banned from Sleazyboard, simply log- in under some new Identity. If they ban by IPs, get another, or use an anonymizer service."Doc,
You don't 'Get It'.
-- flora (***@__._), September 14, 2000.
DP,Far more people are reading North's "Remnant Review" than are reading your posts here. I fail to see where you have beaten down anyone with your online writings. I have no problem with you exercising free speech; I just don't see see many people is listening. How are you "stopping" Gary North or Ed Yourdon by scribbling on an obscure Internet forum?
As for your suggestion, you must be joking. For nearly two years, I have posted on fora under my real name. I've made no attempt to hide where I live or what I do. This is a matter of integrity, at least to me. I didn't apply to EZB out of principle. The "organizers" were the sysops from the old forum where the "delete on sight" policy ruled during the last days of 1999. As if this were not enough, I learned EZB had banned Flint before he had a chance to break the secret, unwritten rules. Not my cup of tea.
It isn't about "ego," DP, it's about principle. I'm here because the discussion is open and unfettered.
-- Ken Decker (kcdecker@att.net), September 14, 2000.
AS FOR NORTH.........GARY NORTH IS A SEDITIONIST WHO MOST LIKELY WOULD BE IN PRISON OR PAYING FINES FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN ***MOST CIVILIZED COUNTRIES***. Try his crap in Germany today and see how far it would go. IN ISLAMIC COUNTRIES, he might find his tounge cut off and his fingers "digitized" after a one hour trial for "crimes against the State".Don't hold back, cpr. Tell how you really feel!
-- (don't@hold.back), September 18, 2000.
"The only thing I gain is the knowledge that I helps [Sic] prevent some people who aimed at tearing at the Fabric of American Society. For that......I was willing to give up a great deal of income lost by spending most of my time DE-BUNKING the MYTHs and the MYTH MAKERS OF Y2k."
November, 1999 link
cpr
-- (crp@swbell.not), September 18, 2000.
Do you think the Fabric of American Society is still at risk, or can we quit worrying now?
-- (Is@it.over?), September 18, 2000.
That is worth another look...AS FOR NORTH.........GARY NORTH IS A SEDITIONIST WHO MOST LIKELY WOULD BE IN PRISON OR PAYING FINES FOR THE REST OF HIS LIFE IN ***MOST CIVILIZED COUNTRIES***. Try his crap in Germany today and see how far it would go. IN ISLAMIC COUNTRIES, he might find his tounge cut off and his fingers "digitized" after a one hour trial for "crimes against the State".
So I should be upset that America does not have a ***CIVILIZED*** legal justice system, like say...oh....IRAQ? Should we try to change our system? I can see the rally cry now...
"C'mon team USA, let's be more like France!"
-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), September 18, 2000.
"C'mon team USA, let's be more like France!"From one wino to another, you go boy!
-- Doc Paulie (fannybubbles@usa.net), September 18, 2000.
:-P
-- Uncle Deedah (unkeed@yahoo.com), September 18, 2000.