The one fact about Y2k non-events that should be remembered is that the Internet failed as a vehicle to clarify and informed but did succeed as a breeding ground for the propagation and distribution of errata disguised as fact. The failure of once skilled journalists like Miriam Michaels (FM/MM) to identify that in Y2k is a very clear warning that almost anything can slip under the radar warnings in the press (just as it does in the general public). And it is under that radar that some of the players continue to insult "collective intelligence". Said another way, TRUE "Peer Review" is needed and the "critical thinking" of the masses is NEVER possible without the screening that proper Peer Review provides. That should be evident in the cases of Paula Gordon whom I now suspect spends too much time in front of a mirror demanding to know, "Why am I so smart that I am the only one who .......really knows what happened in y2k?".

And in the post peer review process, it becomes somewhat necessary to ask, "who is this person and why is he /she saying such things?". IF YOU DON"T ask that, you fall victim to "the unexamined life is not worth living" as you fall into the box that the Poster to the thread below lives. And make no mistake about it, THAT IS ONE UNEXAMINED LIFE. He/she even revels in it by volleying back on the thread, "who are you to ask me for such information?". Well that cuts two ways and in this instance,,,,,its TIME TO CUT THIS CLOWN LOOSE AND "FUGGEDDABOD HIM/HER". Mud has some use in making bricks but unless you are a brick layer or 8 years old, little more.

In short, its time to eliminate the bar room idlers and the coffee shop bull shitters and tell them so. This poster is such a clown who while "having a right to say what he/she wants to say".....is WASTING OUR TIME with a regurgitation of the same matters that have been threshed down to the point where the chaff is powder.

In the "level playing field", not only were the average citizens given a voice but the average opinion about the average press article or PR piece was distorted for the construction of a set of believes that thankfully, few followed.

It becomes important to understand this because there will be MANY MORE "y2k Crisis" types of "scenarios". If one can learn ANYTHING from y2k, one must learn that EVERY "source" needs to be checked and confirmed and that uninformed opinion is just that. The appeals for "critical thinking" and "polite debate" mean little if you are arguing platforms built on quicksand (from failure to understand the credentials of the experts you quote) or worse, to argue a priori....some "house of cards" neatly constructed to protect your fragile ego or "belief system". MOST of Y2k rhetoric was just that on the Pessimist sides. The tip off was the **total rejection and denial of any optimistic findings. THAT PART WE KNOW. It can be proven and demostrated across the spectrum of so-called "ideas" that under pinned Y2k Fud /fear and caused the Mind Contagion.

Few will have the "timebomb" which for most propagandists is a plus. Without the "end date", the SCAMS can GO ON FOREVER (as we now see with the resurrection of all the old cliches from the "greenies" and the devotees of the Club of Rome/Malthus re: the "awl crisis" (NOW ENDING BTW whether you choose to believe it or not...((we are told that the problem is no longer "crude" but lack of capacity to refine crude and that nicely gives the doom zombies of awl another couple of months))).

This thread delivers a micro study of an individual who choose to isolate him/herself inside a shell that seems to serve as "protection" for a very fragile ego. I normally assign such psycho-babble to a discard pile but in this case, they behaviour of one of the "characters" from TB I leads me to one conclusion, that this person for what ever reasons known only to him/herself probably, is playing games with the rest of the world.

We know that minor criticisms of his/her style get returned with one of two results, if the critic is "liked" a 1/2 assed apology is given, if not, the result is vituperation. It is even weirder to watch him to back my views and then post on another thread that I am to be ignored, dismissed or worse.

JUDGE FOR YOURSELF with this as a template before reading the thread. For him/her, I have a message,.......You are Bull Shit to the Nth.

In addition, the complete dismissal of positions which are reasonable but disagree with this person's often result in post that have no evidence what so ever in the real world. There are many such examples but a classic is given elsewhere. The "pollies"(non-doomers) who did not "prepare" were foolish. Now that would have to include over 80% of the US population and since the Y2k personal "prep" was US Centric, one has to guess: 99.999% of the rest of the poplulation of the world who did not prep. Faced with those numbers, the complete denial of REAL WORLD actions coupled with actions deemed 'excessive' by others MUST be labeled: "IRRATIONAL". While "legal" in the sense, one "has a right to do it"...it is still "IRRATIONAL".

Of greater interest is the post here given that demonstrates the borderline(?) paranoia of the poster. It is interesting that the poster in clear rejection of the rest of the posts on the thread, would suggest that the person who started the thread had "dug a hole for himself". IN REALITY, a careful reading of the entire thread, shows that this poster is the one who has dug the hole and daily, we are exposed to demos of this hole which now resembles the "40 foot bunker" of another borderline(?) fruitloop. It hardly matters that they could be one and the same, Gary Duct Tape, Diane, BeanBoy Caton, or Dennis the Dense. THEY ARE ALL PLACE HOLDERS for what we now know were a minor sect of Y2k FUD and FEAR propagators and believers.

http://greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=003tf3

---

Patricia:

Thank you for your kind words. And from a de-bunkerette, yet! I am flattered.

Debbie:

Thanks for speaking up. I hope you understand that it does have a (too) long history behind it, and in any case was completely and totally in jest. Compared to what one might encounter elsewhere in Internet Land, it is pretty tame.

Bingo1 (Rich):

You will not be getting a private e-mail. What you will be getting is my attendance at Boks chat room at 11PM EST on Thursday, October 12, 2000, to determine:

1) The physical location and date/time of a meeting with you and anyone else interested in coming.

2) The exact criteria that I need to satisfy your not loser criteria. For example, do I need to supply proof of employment? My college degree? Clean police record? Title to late model automobile? W-2 from last year? 401(k) amount? Property tax receipts? Federal/State income tax receipts? DD-214 for my Honorable Discharge from the military? Credit history? Pictures of the kids? Dental records? I mean, what exactly are you looking for that would meet your criteria? I barely know you, you barely know me, yet I am branded as a loser, and I would like to try to understand just what it is that I need to do to get this brand changed. And, for that matter, who exactly you are to pass such judgment.

Ken:

Look, let me be blunt, because I am really getting tired of your annoying yapping.

Firstly, you dug yourself into this sexist nonsense, and have nobody to blame but yourself. The political correctness game may be played constantly in your pseudo-government position, but gets stale fast IRL, especially on an Internet forum where people are just trying to have good natured humor, and certainly not to be taken personally. (Big clue: Everyone looks the same -- black text on white screen.)

Secondly, based on the reasonable assumption that where there is an overweight face there is an overweight body, it is my belief that you are fat, if not outright obese. Normally, I dont point these things out, but after all the stuff you stated last year at ye olde TB2K about your farming (or ranching, depending on the version) and military feats, it just seems a little odd to me. If you come to the gathering, I guess we can all see. But, if you decide to continue to decline, so be it. (Yeah, go ahead, stay home and gorge on doughnuts.)

All:

I apologize for taking up thread space with this crap. Normally, I dont get pissed. But I am really pissed. Ten months after the (non) event, we should be having the most thorough and insightful discussions about Y2K. Instead, we have this. As in, SUDDENLY, the mudwrestling stuff supposedly becomes our female forum members worst nightmare. I don't buy it.

As CPR would say, ***BS CUBED***.

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 06, 2000.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), October 07, 2000

Answers

I apologize for taking up thread space with this crap. Normally, I dont get pissed. But I am really pissed. Ten months after the (non) event, we should be having the most thorough and insightful discussions about Y2K. Instead, we have this.

Interesting position considering that the poster returned pretending he /she was interested in such a "discussion" but then cherry picks ONLY THAT WHICH IS AGREEABLE to him /her. Again, someone looking for facts is far different than someone looking to acquire yet ANOTHER SET OF DEFENSES FOR IRRATIONAL PRE-1/1/2000 behaviour.

If you think that your family and friends are going to forget about your "Y2k Crazy Uncle Lou/Aunt Milly" act before 1/1/2000, you may be assuming that genetics as equally disabled everyone in your "spere of influence" to be as bent mentally as you are.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), October 07, 2000.

CPR, your sanity has been in question for a long time by many.

-- Not A CPR Fan (cpr@is.a.loonie), October 07, 2000.

(CPR: Psssst. How much for your LISTS?? Can I buy one of your list of DOOMZIE names and addresses? Hee-Hee.)

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 07, 2000.

KOSpin sayeth above:

Look, let me be blunt, because I am really getting tired of your annoying yapping.

......to KOSpin&spit: DITTO.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), October 07, 2000.

Is sanity only the ability to "function"? Is this person beyond such a definition?

Yes CPR, you are. WAY beyond, as in "You put the FUN back in dysFUNctional."

You c*cksucker.

-- Yeah Right (Ahhh@haaa.haaa.haaa), October 07, 2000.

Don't figgure CEEP'll ever repost something of mine.

Sniff, whimper, sniff.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), October 08, 2000.

Carlos: I thought that the "Spin the Polly" game at Bok's chat room the other night was hilarious!!!

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 08, 2000.

LINK-FOR-THE_Slow-of-MIND

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), October 08, 2000.

Help! I'm stuck in an infinite CPR loop!

-- (nemesis@awol.com), October 08, 2000.

If you think that your family and friends are going to forget about your "Y2k Crazy Uncle Lou/Aunt Milly" act before 1/1/2000, you may be assuming that genetics as equally disabled everyone in your "spere of influence" to be as bent mentally as you are.

-- cpr (buytexas@swbell.net), October 07, 2000.

I wonder if cpr's family and friends are soon going to forget his own continuing act straddling both sides of 1/1/2000.

-- (anon2@anon2.anon2), October 08, 2000.

You are assuming that it HAS family OR friends.

Personally, I think not. Otherwise, it would have moved on after Y2K.

(Actually, I think the CPR-thing and the AndyRay-thing are butt- buddies. After all, who would have anything to do with either of them?) No sane person, that's for sure.

-- Yeah Right (Ahhh@haaa.haaa.haaa), October 08, 2000.

Of course, no one shows any signs of pointing out or even NOTICING that there was an actual POINT in there.

"Ten months after the (non) event, we should be having the most thorough and insightful discussions about Y2K. Instead, we have this."

No one has a problem with the KOS-unit making this kind of a statement I guess!?! Or you just see "cpr" and then read no further - yes this does tend to happen.

Anyone with a little time and inclination could go through recent threads about Y2k and pick out any number of examples of KoS stonewalling the very discussions he purports to want and seemingly purposely misconstruing things that have been said to him. He has only been back into the arena since about Sept. and now that it is well into October 2000, he is nearly guaranteed at this late date that few will care enough to call him on it. (most not for want of trying!).

-- Debbie (dbspence@usa.net), October 08, 2000.

Debbie: Could you be more vague? I'm having trouble following....

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 08, 2000.