Can't tell the players w/o a scorecard...

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Electric Utilities and Y2K : One Thread
For anyone recently stumbling across this forum, I thought it might shorten the learning curve on the various personalities that inhabit this forum. Here's a list of the "regulars" (or at least long time participants) in the forum, and a one-liner on their background:

...and a supporting cast of thousands

If I missed any regular contributors, forgive me - it's getting late.

-- Anonymous, June 05, 1999

Answers

Well, since I'm having some fun with this anyway, let's do a little "Cheers" style personality analysis. :-D

Can't think of anyone for Rebecca...

No offense intended to anyone!

-- Anonymous, June 05, 1999

As long as we're looking at the players, maybe we should look at the game as well. Below is an OT excerpt from a recent table top policy planning meeting on Y2K. (sorry no link, I think they've since taken it down).

U.S. Naval War College Year 2000 International Security Dimension Project ----------------------------------------------------------------- GroupSystems Inputs for 4 March 1999 DoD Consequence Management/CINC Strategies Workshop -----------------------------------------------------------------

I. Y2K Mania/Countdown Phases: Feedback on Policy "Do's and Don'ts" ... "There is an interesting and very important sociological phenomenon occurring between some of the owls and roosters responsible for national-level political or financial policy. It has already begun and will begin to harden as we approach 1 January. The owls ridicule even the rational roosters as the owls' fears of what panic may mean becomes more palpable. The more reasonable roosters become even more concerned as they see the owls' continuing disinformation about what is ground truth concerning levels of remediation/confidence in our systems working properly. This in turn makes the roosters (that is, the reasonable ones, not the wackos) dig in their heels, because their perceptions are that those who should be responsible are not being so. This is all to say that there will be much greater distrust and lack of cooperation at the highest policy levels unless a bridge can soon be found. Dr. Landes' approach is, I believe, correct. The owls' approach will not work for this crisis. It is all pervasive. A proper approach should be to encourage populations and entities to have some preparation just as they would buy insurance against an unlikely event. That doesn't mean it will happen, but it would calm fears among a great number of people in the US. [The hardening of boundaries between roosters and owls is the single greatest risk to clear and successful planning.]" --------------------------------------------------------------- I believe the EUY2K forum is a way to openly address this hardening of boundries. I count it's members as a few owls and some very reasonable roosters. (& maybe just a coulple wacko roosters too ;)

-- Anonymous, June 05, 1999

Here's the link to the Navy War College document cited above.

http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Thinktank/6926/y2kproj.htm

It makes for a lot of interresting reading. Apparantly it was taken down from the War College site but had been copied over to this other site.

Note; It would be very easy to pull some very sensational quotes from this document. Very, very sensational. I won't even mention the ones I have in mind and I hope they don't get posted here or anywhere else without balancing quotes from the same document. BTW, there's enough material on electricity in the document to make it quite on topic.

Hope the link works.

Steve

-- Anonymous, June 05, 1999

Jim, thanks for posting the Consequence Management info. I have been puzzled for quite some time by the "hardening of boundaries" going on, as it seems to me to have less rationality involved than it does ego-based emotionalism, as in "you're wrong, I'm right" and there is no middle ground.

If we take banking out of the Y2K picture for a moment, what we basically have are people advocating risk management preparations (regardless of the extent talked about) and those advocating a business-as-usual or life-as-usual pattern. Ironically, in most all other aspects of modern American society, the prevalent attitude among people has been and is, a "live and let live" philosophy. I was recently struck by a couple of comments quoted in a Ft. Worth article about Y2K preparations and the standard Mormon be-prepared concept:

"It was a process whereby they learned it was wise, prudent and practical to be prepared," said church spokesman Dale Bills. The teachings on preparedness were reinforced during the Great Depression, Bills said.

"Y2K is overblown," Dick Silver said. "It's fluff. But if people are getting prepared for that reason, why get in their way?"

Regardless of one's personal opinions about the potential for Y2K failures and the impact they may have, it IS very confusing that the "why get in their way?" attitude is not the prevalent one! Certainly FEMA, the Red Cross, and financial planners have all been advocating for decades more preparedness among the population than has existed. On balance, you would expect the most likely government and societal reaction to any preparedness plans by individuals and communities to be one of, "Good! We'll be farther ahead in readiness for any kinds of emergencies, regardless of Y2K."

But that is not what has happened. Which begs the question of "Why?" It's not like there hasn't been extreme viewpoints opposing each other at the margins on ANY topic you can name for as long as there have been people! The only major difference I can perceive about Y2K occurs when we bring banking into the picture again. That seems to be the focus of the fears which are countering what otherwise would be a "who cares what preparations they make?" attitude (at a minimum) or a "preparedness can't hurt and may help sometime".

I've tried to envision what happens if banker's fears do become reality to the extent they mention. What happens if, at the end of this year, a number of people do decide they want to take some money out of the banks to have on hand? What if there are some bank runs and in consequence some banks have to close their doors? And then if Y2K problems do turn out to be manageable as all the banks are claiming? Is a pre-millennial panic going to be the end of the world? The answer I come up with is "No." Have we already lived through S&L's closing their doors and customers and investors losing money? Any panic situation will be bad, but have we had panic situations before and gotten through them? Are we to believe that closed banks can never reopen if it turns out there isn't any real problem? If there is truly no underlying frailty of the banking system other than Y2K panic, does the notion that banking problems are some unthinkably awful phenomenon exhibit as much of a "doomer" mentality as bankers accuse others of having? Is the idea promoted by financial institutions one in which we can handle anything, up to and including localized power outages but we *can't* handle some possible pre-2000 cash panics? This position seems illogical to me, and just as entrenched as the head-for-the-hills advocates. The only difference is that there are more people with this entrenched view in the banking industry than there are head-for-the-hills proponents.

And darn it, I just realized this post may be off-topic, unless comments about polarization may be helpful in any area of Y2K concerns. For myself, sometimes it does help to stand back and wonder about the reasons behind the developing acrimony. "The hardening of boundaries...is the single greatest risk to clear and successful planning," seems to sum things up nicely.

By the way, Rick -- "Cheers" for the lighthearted humor. If everybody was sitting at the bar, I'd happily buy a round, even if we do have different views!

-- Anonymous, June 05, 1999

Bonnie,

Concerns about banking instabilities are ultimately concerns about confidence. A definition of money that I once read was; "An idea backed by confidence". Fairly simple and very true.

In this forum we focus on electricity and our confidence in the continued flow of it because so much of our modern life depends on it. Learning about the electrical issues are largely a matter of learning technical matters and having confidence in those relaying the data. Confidence in the industry insiders is quite important and when they get snippish it sucks and makes it harder to get confident in what they say.

I like the phrase; "Question authority". I believe anyone posting here as an authority should be willing to be questioned. In fact, if they show a disdain for questioning they instantly fall from the position of authority. For me it's not an emotional issue, they just don't fit the role of authority or teacher anymore. Some of them become knowledgeable potty mouths that you have to take with a grain of salt. Sometimes a huge grain of salt.

Anyway, confidence is the name of the game here in the world of Y2K concerns. Confidence in our ability to predict, to manage, and in the end put it behind us and move on to other things in our lives.

This electric-centric forum has been a stabilizing influence for myself and lot of others. By weeding through the questions here we aren't facing the totally overwhelming amount of questions contained in the over-all Y2K scene, banking, telecoms, transportation, water, sewers, manufacturing, etc...

Those other areas didn't go away, but we've learned it ain't as bad as it could've been in the electric industry and we feel better about the bigger picture. But, (and here I'll use a quote from that Navy document), "It ain't over 'til the fat lady sings!"

This is a stabilizing forum because questions are asked and re-asked and clarified and put to rest over time. Shoot, I'd venture to guess most of us don't even know what questions to ask. I don't even remember which questions were asked and answered but I suppose I could look them up if necessary. But it's not necessary because the big question was and still is; "Will the electric utilities work when Y2K happens?" For me, my confidence in the industry has risen tremendously. But I'm not 100% certain this or any industry or group or individual will pass the portal unscathed.

I wish there were a biy2k, (banking industry) forum as good as this one. Same goes for all the other sectors of society.

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank you, and every other contributor to this forum, yes even the potty-mouths and snide jerks.

I hope the fat lady sings real sweet.

Steve

-- Anonymous, June 05, 1999

I presumed this thread is just for fun! :)

If we could see beyond the haze, foretell events of coming days, If we could read the minds of men, surmise their every thought.. well then Wed need not do the things we do, thered be no compelling reason to. But here we are to share a thought, for why else the battle fought? And to a fruitful and great degree and I think that we can all agree That Mister Rick has led us here, to this lofty plane, this higher tier, Where we may seek the final word, discount the tales that we have heard, To calm the raging fears we think will take us to that final brink, Where mankind ceases to endure as Mister North would say Im sure. So post your burning queries here and seek solutions from Engineer, FactFinder, CL, Jim Lynes and Dan, the indefatigable Power Man. And most of all lets not forget, that most prodigious poster yet, That gal of tact, our brightest lamp, lets not forget Ms. Bonnie Camp! Now, if Ive offended anyone, then I will take my leave and run, But I would only like to say, theres less now to fear from Y2k, Than there was a year ago because of lessons weve learned and know!

-- Anonymous, June 06, 1999

Moderation questions? read the FAQ