Last weekend we had a yardsale to get rid of a lot of our y2k stuff. We sold boxes of canned food (six or eight cans per box) for $1, oil lamps and oil, candles, and assorted crap unrelated to y2k. Everything was priced to sell, and we made $213. Of course we had paid a lot more for the stuff, but I look at it as having given me some peace of mind in 1999.

-- Pearlie Sweetcake (teresa_london@yahoo.com), June 26, 2001

Answers

Could this possibly be the same "perlie" that derided "pollies" and told everyone to ignore "dan the powerman" but asked "what does NERC stand for?"

Be sure to read "Dan the Power man" and "NERC to cover up" threads below. And can someone please tell me what the initials NERC stand for?"The two posts I mentioned may be useful in helping DGIs understand why the happy-face test reports are not to be believed. And I know NERC has something to do with our energy, but I don't know what the letters stand for. Enlightenment, please.

-- Pearlie Sweetcake (storestuff@home.now), April 13, 1999 "

LOL!

Pissed off at those f%*^&rs who told you y2k was gonna be "real bad"?

Better yet, figured out that you got "took" yet?

-- Krackin Up (doomersm@de.melaugh.in.99), June 26, 2001.

I luv this stuff!

The truth about Paul Milne (clipped from "Mutha's" response to that thread.

Where the heck is Mutha these days? Anyone heard from her?

-- Krackin Up (doomersm@de.melaugh.in.99), June 26, 2001.

FWIW, I think that's a great idea. And if it gave you "some peace of mind", you really can't put a price tag on it (IMO). I know this is none of my business, but when OTFR started TB2K Uncensored Spinoff, one of the things we started to discuss was "why" some people leaned towards the "doom" side. There were many possible reasons, lots of great discussion. I'm not asking what yours were.

What I'm curious about is what you felt as you sold all this stuff. Did you feel anything like "letting go"? Or was it just a matter of, "get this stuff out of my house"?

Again, none of my business; just curious.

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), June 26, 2001.

Nice try pearlie. It can still be a little tough around here to relate even the simplest story.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), June 26, 2001.

It probrably felt like: "Boy, did I get hosed on this shit".

-- Telinet (like@it.is), June 26, 2001.

Thought I was being nice, Carlos. BTW, check your email please.

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), June 26, 2001.

If this poster is for real, and not some troll, why would she sell canned food? I don't understand the thought process behind that one.

-- J (Y2J@home.comm), June 26, 2001.

J:

"why would she sell canned food? I don't understand the thought process behind that one. "

Yes, I have that impression from your posts. If many of these people were truthful, they had rooms filled with canned goods. Maybe they want to get their houses back.

Oldtimer

-- Oldtimer (Oldtimer@tbk2000.csy2k), June 26, 2001.

We sold a lot of old junk that had no relevance to y2k. It was good to get our closets and cabinets cleaned out. The canned food was getting somewhat old, and we still kept a lot of it. It's good to be able to go to the basement instead of the store. My husband picked out stuff we weren't that crazy about, like cheap, store-brand soup. What did it feel like? Watching old cassette tapes, books, 45 rpm records, and surplus canned goods go was kind of like taking a very satisfying dump, except this time people were paying me to do it.

-- Pearlie Sweetcake (teresa_london@yahoo.com), June 26, 2001.

LOL! It's a beautiful thing. What a "load" off, eh?

Thanks.

(You sold your 45s? I have over a thousand of them, but I don't think I'd want to part with them. You're an inspiration.)

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), June 26, 2001.

First observation: Pearlie Sweetcake puts her head three inches over the parapet and gets a sniper bullet in the form of (who else?) Charlie Reuben, the Man With the Tin Brain, who immediately tries to make her the topic of conversation.

Good going, Charlie!

Just retribution would be to make YOU, YOUR FOIBLES, YOUR DELUSIONS, YOUR SELF-IMPORTANCE the topic of this conversation. I would WELCOME that turn of the screw.

Second observation, adults do what they think best. Pearlie did. First buying, then selling, each in turn. Ecclesiastes said, "To everything there is a season ... a time to cast away stones, a time to gather stones together."

Charlie Rueben of course, has no conception of such things, if they contradict HIS VIEW OF WHAT IS RIGHT. This is because, to your friend and mine - CPR - HIS VIEW OF WHAT IS RIGHT, is the gold standard, the sine qua non, the ne plus ultra of wisdom, never to be improved, never to be disbelieved, never to be questioned. The man is, let me be frank, amazing! For this reason alone, we should allow him to lead us where he will, like Moses. I swear I once saw CPR throw down his staff and it became a snake! Really. He's THAT good!

So, let all praise famous men. Our beloved CPR, as opposed to the snivelling, weak, deluded, impotent, stupid, little Pearlie, is a GREAT MAN! She is (how can we adequately portray her frailty?) a mere mortal. She has MADE A MISTAKE IN PUBLIC. God knows, CPR would never do any such thing. We should be glad he doesn't smite us. I mean really SMITE us! We could not live long under that shame, that cloud, that ALMIGHTY FROWN.

Spare us, CPR, we beseech thee! Turn aside your awful displeasure. Reconsider your mighty wrath. Spare poor Pearlie. She knows not who she displeases. She is mighty sorry. Withhold your fiery gaze and let us all live in peace.

This we pray. Amen.

-- Withholding (old_timer@someplace.comm), June 26, 2001.

FWIW, I don't think that was CPR. No "CAPS".

:-)

-- (PatriciaS@lasvegas.com), June 26, 2001.

PS:

If you are the original, it is good to hear from you. We didn't do anything for Y2k, didn't think it was required. But we are overstocked with canned and frozen food. The years have been bountiful. We gave-up raising meat, but raise everthing else.

We give alot away free to friends. We started to make wine from things. We are still overwhelmed. Our orchards are now into the tons of apples and pears. Right now it is blueberries and raspberries [red and black]. We are eating them on everything. We have given-up the thoughts that we have to use everything. The wild life love it.

Good to see that you are doing well. No judgement on your decision; it was yours to make, and as Patrica said, if you feel it was right for you, then, you did the right thing.

Best wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), June 26, 2001.

Good God man make some wine.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), June 27, 2001.

Z, just a thought, but if you truly have tons of fruit you don't intend to use, a local food bank or meals on wheels program might be glad to send out people to help you pick the excess. You could probably get a tax receipt for the donation too.

-- helen (tons@pears.here), June 27, 2001.

Funny how none of these barfbag modelers said ANYTHING to PEarlJammeduptheASS pre-y2k when she bashed anyone she thought was a "polly"---but mention how rude and condecending she was post-y2k and the doomerdumbshits all rush to her defense. I don't recall PS ever saying she was sorry for the way she treated those who were right. Will she ever apoligize? Doubtful. She will go cluelessly, merrily on her ignorant way, secure in the knowledge that she must have done what was best....didn't she?....

I luv this troll bit too; say anything about doomers and you hear CPR's name instantly.....

-- False Profits (for@false.prophets), June 27, 2001.

Funny how none of these barfbag modelers said ANYTHING to PEarlJammeduptheASS pre-y2k when she bashed anyone she thought was a "polly"---but mention how rude and condecending she was post-y2k and the doomerdumbshits all rush to her defense. I don't recall PS ever saying she was sorry for the way she treated those who were right. Will she ever apoligize? Doubtful. She will go cluelessly, merrily on her ignorant way, secure in the knowledge that she must have done what was best....didn't she?....

I luv this troll bit too; say anything about doomers and you hear CPR's name instantly.....

Well "perlie"---how bout it? Up for saying you are sorry for how you treated folk on Stinkbomb?

-- False Profits (for@false.prophets), June 27, 2001.

how about it everyone... let's take up a collection and get this troll laid. what say ye?

-- (me@home.now), June 27, 2001.

To hell with him. When you get the money together....call ME!

-- Telinet (like@it.is), June 27, 2001.

Z, just a thought, but if you truly have tons of fruit you don't intend to use, a local food bank or meals on wheels program might be glad to send out people to help you pick the excess. You could probably get a tax receipt for the donation too.

If z is talking about land here in washington state, the farmers do donate to the food banks to the point where there was excess at them also. I used to volunteer at food banks, about 15 years ago, farmers and fisher's were great contributors

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), June 27, 2001.

Pre-Y2K I often wondered how people would feel and react when it turned out to be nothing.
I knew the sense of unreality I felt when I first read Gary's site and fell for it, the sense that what I knew existed around me held a falseness, was unreliable that somehow it could be gone in a way I was unable to comprehend. But I had questioned everything since I was little and I had to prove it to my self. That is when I looked around to find out how exactly the infrastructure was going to collapse.

Since I had gone to my parents and told them we had to get out of town and they gave each other "that" look, but said nothing, I knew I had to get proof for them. It was in that that I started seeing clues that maybe these people were wrong. On DeJaggers list some "supposed" experts started talking about aircraft crashing. This was an area I knew like the back of my hand, down to the wiring, hydraulics, pneumatics, digitally and analog. As a matter of fact I had been displeased at how Boeing had gone to "flat screen" instruments in the early 80's, had been pretty vocal about it at the time. It had taken a lot to convince me they were safe and the aircraft could function normally and safely without them. I knew how vulnerable digital equipment was. So when these so called experts started spouting off about functions of the aircraft they obviously didn't know a thing about, I realized it was possible that the same thing was being done in other areas.

I would never had said anything publicly if it had not been for CPR. In the midst of all of the negative FUD, he YELLED opposition to their views.

And yes, it was his use of caps that got my attention. I wrote him thanking him for waking me up and making me question the overwhelming negative hype. He is a gentle, kind, extremely intelligent, caring person. He encouraged me to speak out, but did not push me when I said I didn't think I could. And I didn't, until I read about airplanes falling out of the sky.

Then I got just plain mad. I wrote to DeJaggers list, telling them that no, aircraft would not fall from the sky. There were replies blasting me for my "view", I wrote back that I was STATING that no Boeing commercial aircraft would be effected by Y2K. Every potential problem they threw at me I was able to explain away in minor detail. You will notice that with few exceptions and older, unchanged postings, there weren't many who claimed aircraft would be effected at the rollover. Except, of course, on TB2K. *grin*.

It was having the fear and hopelessness of potential end of the world as I knew it removed that made me decide to come to TB2K and try to relieve the same fears in those there. That is why I persisted, even with all the bashing I got. I hoped that people without my background to understand the technology would get some kind of hope, some sort of relief from the constant negative re-inforcement they received every day.

If I saved just one person from the fear, or eased their fear, it was worth putting up with all of the abuse I received.

I do understand CPR's outrage at those who tried, and managed to make thousands afraid, got off scott free for their actions. Some did believe that it would be bad. But those who blocked out evidence to the contrary, those who tried to to profit from the fear even after they had knew there would not be the problems once feared, are criminal and should be held responsible for their actions. If the people on TB2K had been told the truth, if those who were in charge has allowed consenting information instead of driving off and flaming people with proof of better news, then so many who trusted them could have been spared most of the FEAR they were forced to live with, some for years. It isn't just the financial gains that are criminal, it is the propagation of fear they installed into so many that was the biggest crime, in my opinion. Ed Yourdon was aware, at least 6 months before the roll over that it was going to turn out a lot better than he had thought when he wrote his book. But he didn't have the guts to stand up in front of the people in his forum and tell them the truth.

I understand CPR's feeling about those who got off scott free for their actions. But I have had to walk away from many, many situations where people were not held accountable for their actions, where they got away with doing things that they should have been confronted with and punished for.

It's really too bad that Ed Yourdon was so gutless.... he could have spared so many of his followers a lot of grief. But he is a "user" and he used them as he always uses people. He sets up a forum and uses the input to write books. Like he is doing now with his currant book.He knew, and he knew "I" knew he knew that Y2K wasn't going to be any big deal. He had a lot of contempt for his groupies, that much was clear to me, too bad it wasn't clear to them.

CPR isn't the one people should be bashing, he not only was right, he did more than anyone in the world to bring the fact and truth to light. People should be angry at those who helped fool them instead.

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), June 27, 2001.

Cherri: "CPR isn't the one people should be bashing, he not only was right, he did more than anyone in the world to bring the fact and truth to light. People should be angry at those who helped fool them instead."

I disagree that Charlie has purchased himself immunity from criticism because of his actions before Y2K. His actions since Jan. 1, 2000 show a degree of boorishness that cannot be laid at anyone's feet but his own. According to his own actions, CPR has arrogated to himself the right to pester anyone who disagreed with his position on Y2K, no matter what they are doing.

Suppose I were Ed Yourdon and CPR discovered I was engaging in an conversation with my grocer about the advisability of stocking mangoes. CPR would feel perfectly justified to crash into that conversation and point out, in extenso, that Mr. Yourdon was wrong about Y2K, that his actions were, in Charlie's view catastrophic to the well-being of thousands of people - without, I might add, any evidence of thousands of people being catastrophically affected.

Charlie, based on what he has done since Y2K, would then assert, loudly and repeatedly, that I (Ed) could not be trusted in any judgment on any subject for any reason ever again, leading to the inevitable conclusion that if I said mangoes were a bad idea becasue hardly anyone would buy them, then by god, they were probably a grand idea and moreover, the grocer should probably stock 50 cartons of mangoes, because I was nothing but a "doomer" and my pessimism about selling that many mangoes was laughable. Just look at how wrong I was about Y2K.

CPR is no more immune from being judged by his actions now than Ed Yourdon is immune from being judged by his actions then. CPR may have been spot on about Y2K, but he acted like a comprehensive ass both then and now. If he had been capable of exercising self-control and perspective, I might have been more inclined to listen to what he was saying. But braying was more his style.

-- I disagree (disagree@opposition.org), June 27, 2001.

I disagree,

Ken, where the hell have you been? The level of conversation has dropped since you left! Please join us rugrats more often.

-- (me@home.now), June 27, 2001.

CPR is no more immune from being judged by his actions now than If he had been capable of exercising self-control and perspective, I might have been more inclined to listen to what he was saying.

Plenty of people were exercising self-control and putting things into perspective. All they got in return was venumous abuse, which cause the majority of them to give up in discust. believe me, I hand literally hundreds of people write and tell me that.

CPR was very effective in getting the attention of many people my his methods. If you were not involved with him at the time you wouldn't have a clue as to how much was going on in the background. You do not have enough information to make informed judgments about him.

Oh, and he is not in the least bothered by those who bash him either.

-- Cherri (jessam6@home.com), June 28, 2001.

I'll take CPR's abrasiveness over Ed Yourdon's mealy-mouthed "civilized" discussion any day.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), June 28, 2001.

"...you wouldn't have a clue as to how much was going on in the background."

Cherri, you have missed my point. I will restate it. Charlie (as you call him) was right about Y2K. I am not judging him on what happened before rollover. He may have had good reasons to be abrasive then.

Since Y2K he has remained abrasive. It would be difficult to justify this on the basis that Charlie is only doing so to prevent thousands of people from irrational fear about Y2K, because Y2K is over. What you portray as a reasonable tactic then is no longer a reasonable tactic now. Yet, do you detect any change in abrasiveness? I certanly do not.

Charlie's course of action since rollover has been one of relentless vindictiveness. That is not a trait to admire or condone. The uneventful rollover would have been "vindication" enough for any reasonable person, followed perhaps by a short period of gloating. You'll notice that nearly all other pollies followed this course, including you.

It speaks well for your loyalty to Charlie that you overlook this ugly flaw in him. But it is one thing to overlook it and another to excuse it. You are excusing Charlie for conduct in the present that is no longer excusable by reference to the past. Take a fresh look. He needs to change. You aren't doing him any favors.

-- I disagree (disagree@opposition.org), June 28, 2001.

I'll take CPR's abrasiveness over Ed Yourdon's mealy- mouthed "civilized" discussion any day.

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), June 28, 2001.

BAAAWAAAHHAAAA, yeh until you become CPR's target for abrasiveness!

-- agree2disagree (agree@2disagree.org), June 28, 2001.

I've been the target of folks who act much worse than CPR ever has.

Need I say INVAR?

-- Buddy (buddydc@go.com), June 29, 2001.

"I've been the target of folks who act much worse than CPR ever has. Need I say INVAR?"

Yes. Invar's behavior is and has always been abominable. But it is silly to think that worse behavior excuses bad behavior.

It is typical of children, when you point out how poorly they behaved themselves, to say, "But so-and-so acted even worse!" As if that was a defense. When kids do it, we see through it instantly.

Charlie is still caught in a web of childish behavior over Y2K. Invar, OTOH, is beyond saving.

-- I disagree (disagree@opposition.org), June 29, 2001.