Diane:

I don't really have a dog in this fight, but you should consider answering Flint's question as stated by him. He seems to be a reasonable person.

Z: Unlike many here, I haven't seen any attempt to "disrupt" this forum. I've seen both abusive and thoughtful people of all persuasions here. I just skip on by most of the abusive posts regardless of viewpoint (if I can even discern that viewpoint. Sometimes when one poster calls another an idiot, I need to do a bit of research to figure out which one proposes what viewpoint). But I'm drawing a very different distinction here from that being drawn by Diane. While I distinguish posts according to how much thought went into them regardless of viewpoint being presented, Diane distinguishes according to to conformance with the "correct" opinion that we are in Very Big Trouble. There is no forum anywhere that I know of devoted exclusively to the thoughtful or the abusive. The "they" Diane refers to are the ones with the "wrong" opinion, who should go away and leave "her" pessimistic (oops, "moderate") forum alone. The original suggestion by Whynot implies (or at least I infer) that we should have at least one moderator who expects y2k to be manageable, and says so clearly and politely. And we do not. Diane can claim to expect a '5' all she wants, but her complaints about misbehavior have WITHOUT EXCEPTION been directed at optimists. This despite the fact that some of the pessimistic people (like Andy) do little more than crosspost long, off-topic articles and call others foul names. The behavior Diane nominally complains of is *at least* as common among doomers as pollies. Her exclusive castigation of pollies for such behavior speaks volumes. I personally expect many noteworthy problems to befall us, but if Diane is a '5', I'm a -5.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), October 31, 1999.

Best wishes,,,,

Z

-------------------------------------------------

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999

Answers

Sorry Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com),

But I dont care to dog fight... with you or Flint.

Yes, there have been numerous attempts to disrupt this forum. (If you haven't "seen" that... well... that's your good fortune).

I would love it if everyone who agreed to disagree about Y2K would do so with civility. I would love it if the avowed trolls would go away.

When posts are profane, "way-over-the-top" or designed to seriously inflame (especially from a known troll) or if someone is just plain trolling for trolling's sake... it may... or may not get snipped. Depends on the Sysop who sees it first, or gets flagged on it, and they then make a judgement call.

Will the pure trolls, versus those posters of all flavors, who are engaged in debating Y2K+plus, depart? Doubt it. Welcome to life on the internet.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 31, 1999.

Diane J.:

You seem to have missed the point of the whole discussion [discussion, I'm sure is a word that you know; but it is part of Flint's criticism]. Now, I don't entirely disagree with your dire assessment of the problems of Y2K, but I think that you should allow other opinions. I think that you have [but I don't know what you have snipped]. Flint and I don't on all things, but we agree that the mod's should allow free discussion. Even Chris agrees. Let's do it.

Best Wishes,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Good grief!

This board allows about the freest Y2K discussion there is! What Flint is "trying" to imply is that it doesn't.

Sheesh!

Diane

(BTW, my "10" is Global Thermal Nuclear War, so quite possibly my "5" for rolling supply-chain effects, resulting in global depression somewhere near June next year, differs with Flint's "5.")

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 31, 1999.

Diane:

By-the-way:

I didn't propose a dog fight with you. You would fail that one. I said that I didn't have a dog in the "etc". You folks in San Hose [sic: intended] are so provincial. My post was intented to give you a chance to respond to a challenge. You did't do a great job. I hope that you do better in other areas. I am on the road and will not be able to irritate you for a while.

Best wishes,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Diane:

Please note that I will check in on my laptop. If this thread has been erased, I will know that Flint is right. Otherwise, not.

Best wishes,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Flint and Z, sittin in a tree. k-i-s-s-i-n-g. If I want happy face spin, I'll read my local paper, surf the debunky site, or turn on the TV. The hard hitting news is what has and continues to make this forum what it is. Diane has done nothing but make this forum more readable for all.

You and Flint's posts continue to have moderate entertainment value however.

-- a (a@a.a), October 31, 1999.

Z:

I didn't claim that such posts were deleted. In general, I applaud the open free-for-all that this forum is permitted to enjoy. I think that in her role as moderator, Diane is doing a good job. Yes, I'd prefer no moderation at all, but if the moderator doesnt *do* anything, that's a difference without a distinction. I do point out, however, that Diane has never identified a pessimistic troll, however vicious.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), October 31, 1999.

That's because the pessimistic "trolls" were likely zapped, Flint. Especially when profane.

Same-same.

Diane

The "other" thread...

Would adding Ken Decker as a moderator be helpful to this discussion group?

http://www.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id= 001gFN

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 31, 1999.

Flint:

I am a defender of the job that Diane/Chuck etc have done. My comments were not to be taken in a literal fashion. I am also a defender of Flint [who I don't know or always agree with]. My point went beyond your comments. If the extremes, who attack the site, are correct in their assessment, then this thread will be erased. If not; not. This is an answer to their question. Of course it won't. Diane; good luck with the pies.

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Diane logs her snips... She tolerates things I personally would not tolerate. She seems fair minded enough to me and has my vote. I have been the subject of her snips and to be quite honest I feel that she was right to snip that (of mine) which she cut. I would say that if anything she is too tolerant... Not that my opinion counts that much with anyone here or Diane.

-- (...@.......), October 31, 1999.

Z,

You say you don't have a dog fight, but clearly you are trying to start one. Why is it so hard for you, Flint, Decker, and other antagonizers to respect the reason that this forum was established:

This forum is intended for people who are concerned about the impact of the Y2000 problem on their personal lives, and who want to discuss various fallback contingency plans with other like-minded people. It's not intended to provide advice/guidance for solving Y2000 problems within an IT organization.

Did you read that? Do you understand it??

Let me help...

It means that this is not a town hall meeting, this is a privately owned forum established for those who wish to discuss concerns expressed in the writings of Ed Yourdon. The forum moderators are under no obligation to allow criticisms that are contradictory to the primary goals of this forum. They have been extremely lenient in allowing a very wide range of opinions to be expressed, so you may whine if you wish, but they have every right to delete antagonizers.

We are willing to listen to antagonizers for the sake of argument, but you are beginning to push your luck. If you don't want to play by the rules, find somewhere else to play. I think instead of bashing Diane you should thank her for allowing you to participate.

(*V*)

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), October 31, 1999.

....What Hawk said....

-- jeanne (jeanne@hurry.now), October 31, 1999.

Hawk:

Didn't think that I was bashing Diane. I thought that I was defending her [not that she needs defending; she does o.k. on her own]. Otherwise, I have no idea what you are talking about.

Best wishes,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Z, The reason some people might find you and Flint disruptive is that what you are posting is not germane to what the majority here want to discuss and find information on. If you think we are too one-sided-- so what? Do you go onto bird-watching boards and complain that they are not discussing dogs?

-- Mara (MaraWayne@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Hawk and Jeanne:

Please read the first line of my post:

"I am a defender of the job that Diane/Chuck etc have done."

Then, please, come back an explain how this is an attack on Diane. I did question her pumpkin pie ability on one thread. But I don't think that is an attack.

Best wishes,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Let us add Mara to the previous post!

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Diane:

It is nice that you have so many defenders. But what I am trying to do is demonstrate your honesty. I wouldn't do this if I wasn't sure that it would work [or maybe I would]. Post a direct attack on you and see if it lives. It has. Those "others" have seen it. What can they say?

Best Wishes,,,,

Z

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Diane:

As a final note; Flint is also supporting you. Bet you would not have envisioned that.

Final Best Wishes,,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

"While I distinguish posts according to how much thought went into them regardless of viewpoint being presented, Diane distinguishes according to to conformance with the "correct" opinion that we are in Very Big Trouble." Z

Since you mentioned my name in your original post, I'll add my $.2 here.

I've never targetted Diane personally in my requests to sysops to use the delete key very sparingly. I've known Diane since she first came on the forum, and I've always found her to be very open minded and tolerant. As Diane says, there are other sysops involved and she has no perticular control over them. I HAVE seen of the disruptive troll posts Diane refers to, some very nasty Javascript posts messing with our computers, and some troll posts clearly malicious and having absolutely no discussion value, and THOSE posts I agree should be deleted. Diane herself IMO is doing a pretty good job from what I've seen.

-- Chris (#$%^&@pond.com), October 31, 1999.

Also, I should add that Ed Yourdon from the beginning used to delete such malicious posts. He's chosen Diane to delegate that responsibility and I believe she's holding true to what Ed would want.

-- Chris (#$%^&@pond.com), October 31, 1999.

Chris:

The point that I seem to be having trouble getting across is that I agree with you. Yet, a lot of people would not, without a demonstration. We have done that. This was a demonstration. Do your worst to Diane and she lets it stand. Now, and only now, people cannot say that good news is deleted because Diane says so. Get it. Of course, Diane did not know about the demonstration. I hope she was not offended.

Best wishes,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Thanks Chris and company...

Couldn't do it without Chuck, the "Mad Deleter" and the anon Sysop #2 who only goes after the "real" nasties and the HTML snaffoos. (There have been more than we care to name).

And both are great in covering when I need a Y2K time-out.

Diane

(BTW, pies in the oven, they smell great, and trick 'or treaters ringing the bell. Cute. It's very lowering, but for the first time ever, while reading a holiday reciepe--I had to wear glasses to see the dang thing! *Major Groan*)

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 31, 1999.

Chris:

I agree, the moderators have been doing an excellent job. I'm much less concerned now than I was originally. I have no complaints. I was merely amused at Diane's "us against them" orientation, in her reaction to the suggestion that a true moderate join the effort.

Z:

It's not sufficient for you to say that you disagree with me. Unless you attack me personally, 'a' will start attacking *you*. I wouldn't want you to be guilty by association, you know.

-- Flint (flintc@mindspring.com), October 31, 1999.

Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com),

The "worst" about me, personally, are *still* in the archives. (And they were pretty nasty).

In the end, it's all about... Y2K.

That's what matters, and hopefully *some* people have prepared... who wouldn't have otherwise.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), October 31, 1999.

Flint:

I don't get this:

"It's not sufficient for you to say that you disagree with me. Unless you attack me personally, 'a' will start attacking *you*. I wouldn't want you to be guilty by association, you know."

I said that I sometimes disagree with you. What you are saying is that I must attack you personally or 'a' will begin attacking me. Makes no sense. If this occurs on this site, I will be ignorant; I will be gone for weeks.

Best wishes,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

Diane J:

Yea, you are right. But the integrety of the MODs on the site is important. Otherwise, everyone will consider it a group of wacos [don't really know how to spell that word]. (by the way, I have read the other worst stuff; doesn't sound that bad; you should meet my family).

Best wishes,,,,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), October 31, 1999.

I agree with the statement that there are all types of people posting at TB2000. I don't agree that there are not people deliberately coming in to post baits. I've read on other forums recalled exploits of such "baiting threads" being started. I agree with whoever said this is one of the freest forums around. There is certainly group pressure when something is posted that is without thought, or meant to inflame. I am not privy to the policy of the moderators...nor do I care. I disagree equally with extremists from the ridiculously polarized "sides" of the "discussions".

My question to everyone fixated on the policy of the moderators is: What is your resistance and reluctance about? The actuality of personal opinion is that the more firmly it is rooted in "true belief" the less likely it is you are going to change anyone's "mind". So is it just overweening ego, or ignorance that causes folks to continue to blast away at the perspective of others? I guess it is a little bit of both. Do some study in human psychology...goodness' sakes. Get some therapy. Learn about yourselves and attempt to live cooperatively. This has been my quarterly rant for the last 18 months...No one is that wise, smart or learned....and certainly humility is scare.

Sometimes the answer is: there is no answer. And sometimes people say, no, I don't wish to answer. Grow up. This is not at all about Y2K, even though so many bickerers think it is...it is about basic human maturity and immaturity. Pick your drug.

Caramba!

-- Donna (moment@pacbell.net), October 31, 1999.

I would like to know why this subject wasn't brought up when Ed left and Diane and Chuck took over as moderators? Why is it such a big deal now, 60 days away from the Year 2000? I am all for debate and differences of opinion, but I have to look at the person and ask if they are tolerant or are they here just to be rude and disruptive? I even wonder after January 1, 2000, how many of us will even venture here, and what roll will the forum play in the future if Y2K is a BITR?

-- bardou (bardou@baloney.com), October 31, 1999.

Donna: Do you like to mudwrestle?

-- King of Spain (madrid@aol.cum), October 31, 1999.

KOS, lovely one...as we have already discussed,...being from the Cadillac Desert, S. California, I am not one acquainted with much mud. A facial now and again in the privacy of my own home, but ,...well...don't let my sheets fool you...I'm shy. I appreciate your question, an invitation in the spirit you offer. Thanks! :-)

You must have great skin. LOL.

She in the Sheets, upon the hilltop,...

-- Donna (moment@pacbell.net), October 31, 1999.

Just popping in to raise my glass in support of Diane : )

You're the best!

Mike

=====================================================================

-- Michael Taylor (mtdesign3@aol.com), November 01, 1999.

Ditto Mike

-- Dana (A_Non_O_Moose@xxx.com), November 01, 1999.