When will it be over?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Is this issue finite? When can we consider "Y2K" a non-issue? I am an I.T. (hate that cover-all acronym) professional who has been directly and indirectly involved in Y2K remediation for about 3 years. I've been what you consider a "polly" for the last 1.5 years, and I gained that perspective from direct, observable evidence.

When, specifically, is it a done deal for you?

I'm not trying to be a jerk or "troll", here.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), February 02, 2000

Answers

yOU aRE FreE To lEAve At aNY tiME, trOLL

-- debonker idiots (inquiringminds@want.toknow), February 02, 2000.

It's over when The Powers That Be no longer feel the need to put a spin on problems that might have been caused by faulty date formats in computer hardware or software. Give it another 6 months or so.

-- Charles Moorehead (cmooreh890@aol.com), February 02, 2000.

A quick read of a few topics on this forum suggests that Y2K impacts are increasing in quantity and severity.

The residual liquidity infusion of "Y2K cash" is still in the market and causing asset inflation which may be beyond control by the FED.

Our international security is strained on all fronts.

I don't think there is a reasonable answer as when it will be over. It could be over yesterday and its all spectatcular bubble.com growth from here or we could be at the top of a steep slope at the edge of the cliff. Watch and learn and stay flexible.

-- Bill P (porterwn@one.net), February 02, 2000.


Really, I am not trying to troll, and I have never posted at that debunker site - I have my own ideas about the situation, and am in no need of a support group or venting area that that site seemed to provide. I've read that site since 1/1/2000, and it seems like a place that was taken over by people needing to "win" something. I really only am looking for some answers here. From other postings in other threads, I know some very good insights exist...

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), February 02, 2000.

I am constantly amused and amazed at people who spend so much time and energy monitoring forums that they believe to have no intrinsic value. Evidently your life is so insignificant you have nothing better to do than hang around here where (according to you) there is nothing left to learn.

-- amused (and refuse@tobelieve.you), February 02, 2000.


Y2K, according to the Kook calendar, will be over at 12:01 AM, January 1, 2001.

The other significant risks we all face are just getting started.

Kook

-- Y2Kook (Y2Kook@usa.net), February 02, 2000.


Answer: Y3K

-- Gia (laureltree7@hotmail.com), February 02, 2000.

So you say you are a republican who hangs out on democrat forums just to harrass; you are a man who hangs out at women's just to harrass. You are a christian who hangs out at pagan forums just to harrass. You are a meat eater who hangs out at vegetarian forums just to harrass. Getting your own life and doing something significant with it might be in order.

-- Sheri (wncy2k@nccn.net), February 02, 2000.

Truth be told,I don,t come here because of y2k info anymore. I read this site because there is ALWAYS something of interest. It beats stupid CNN with their mindless drivel about the cuban boy and airplane crash minutae.

-- morgan (bitbybit@eoni.com), February 02, 2000.

If you do not wish to be viewed as a troll, may I suggest changing your handle? "Bemused and amazed at you people" does not connote an objective observer but rather someone who considers himself far more knowledgeable and superior.

You ask, "When can we consider 'Y2K' a non-issue?" If you like, *you* can consider it a non-issue immediately and go about your other business. If you are here to save people from themselves and the predatory vendors of survival supplies, I don't think you're going to get very far; such do-gooders have a long history of not being very well tolerated at this site.

-- Old Git (anon@spamproblems.com), February 02, 2000.



Hey Bemused, To answer you question, it basically is over. Whatever glitches may yet occur will be easily fixed, since there has been no significant disruptions in the basic infrastructure and very little in the supply chain. Most of the leading doomers (Gary North, Russ Kelly for example) have already admitted that they overestimated the problem and underestimated the government and industry's ability to fix them.

Like Morgan said, many of us continue to come here because it is interesting and interactive, not because we continue to be worried about y2k. There are other valid issues to be concerned about; the stock market, the tense political situation with Russia/China, and MY GOD! GLOBAL WARMING!

Sorry I got a little carried away there. We are also closely watching the international oil situation, although, as the days slip by and the price has only gone up moderately, I am less and less concerned about that.

I continue to be amazed, however, by the intense level of hostility that is always generated by a simple and reasonable post like yours. It seems that anyone who dares question the reality of impending y2k doom is destined to get "blasted" on this forum. That would seem to indicate a level of religious faith in y2k doomerism that cannot permit doubts.

I am slowly weaing myself away from the forum. I am now done to checking it once a day and reading about 1 out of 15 posts. After I get flamed for this post, I will probably be able to increase that interval to every other day and 1 out of ever 30 posts. Take care and thanks for visiting us!

-- JoseMiami (caris@prodigy.net), February 02, 2000.


Bemused:

Unless you have changed your name, you haven't been here long enough to ask that question.

The ol'Kook has lost his edge or he would have asked when will what be over. Y2k presented a serious problem; but it was handled in a variety of ways; we will be correcting those over this year [at least we will]. They didn't all happen at once; so far, no big deal. Looked that way to me in Nov., but I only had specific data for my on enviorns. When will it be over? Seems to me that the big problem from all of this is the inability of companies [primarily] and government [secondarily] to provide specific information to the general population. This has increased general distrust [or a feeling of distrust] in a larger segment of the population. Some feel that they weren't told to prepare [and are mad]; others feel that money was wasted. How do they get the trust back [such as it was]? That is when it will be over.

Best wi

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), February 02, 2000.


From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California

Well... isn't that special?

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), February 02, 2000.


From: Y2K, ` la Carte by Dancr (pic), near Monterey, California

Whoops... hit the return button too quickly, there. That last post was directed at Ccal. For Bemused, despite the unfriendly way in which the question was asked, I'll just mention that I've written several essays this year about denial, cognitive dissonance, being "wrong," and closure.

-- Dancr (addy.available@my.webpage), February 02, 2000.


I know at least a dozen folks that prepared 4-6 months or more. Almost all think the worst scenarios are not likely, but are planning to hold preps until March or summer and see what happens with gasoline. Everyone plans to try and permanently live with a couple months stockpile rotated....it's been a real eye opener for disasetr prep. If gas prices go down to traditional levels by summer and nothing big happens, I'll assume it's over. Until the next comet or mega earthquake or UFO invasion....

-- still (waiting@home.com), February 02, 2000.


Bemused, it will be over as soon as we are able to understand the etiology and the epidemiology of Y2K, just like in the original stages of AIDS. Not before. Till then, this one trillion dollar mystery is up for grabs, including yours.

Bemused, in practice, we are all doing reasonably O.Kay.

In theory, we are doing terrible guy. No one can reasonably explain why things are working out so 'right', even in China, Russia, Brazil, Ecuador, Italy, etc., despite the fact that the CIA, the FBI, the White House, the US Senate, etc., warned how far behind all these countries were.

JoseMiami, you sound like Josi Havanna, if you know what I mean...

God bless your ignorant souls.

Take care.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 02, 2000.


As far as I'm concerned, while the Y2K controversy may continue alive and well here and elsewhere, it's already meaningless. Software bugs, hardware malfunctions, industrial accidents, train wrecks, airplane crashes, pipeline breaks, marine oil spills, business failures, bank failures, and episodes of catastrophic inflation and depression all have occurred before, and there's no reason to think they won't continue.

Y2k-related problems may or may not contribute to these ongoing events. It's very unlikely that public acknowledgement will ever be made of Y2k involvement, if any, in any particular event. Since the only scorekeeping that can be done from now on will be no more than speculation, the question is moot. Why bother with it? What difference will it make to anyone adversely affected by some disaster to know that it was, or was not, induced by Y2k?

We have to live in the world, whatever its hazards.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), February 02, 2000.


Dear Bemused,

Go crawl back under your rock or bridge or whatever you live in and go back to sleep.

BTW, your lobotomy worked.

-- Not Bemused (just.amazed@your.pinheaded.approach), February 03, 2000.


Thanks for the responses... I'll try to respond below:

amused:

  I am constantly amused and amazed at people who spend so much time
  and energy monitoring forums that they believe to have no 
  intrinsic value. Evidently your life is so insignificant you 
  have nothing better to do than hang around here where (according 
  to you) there is nothing left to learn. 

I definately do think this forum has value. In just the past two days alone I've seen some very good debates here, and I don't have a low standard for debates.

Sheri:

  So you say you are a republican who hangs out on democrat forums
  just to harrass; you are a man who hangs out at women's just to
  harrass. You are a christian who hangs out at pagan forums just 
  to harrass.  You are a meat eater who hangs out at vegetarian 
  forums just to harrass. Getting your own life and doing something
  significant with it might be in order. 

No, I'm not interested in harrassment, truly, I've seen enough lately to lose any taste I may have ever had for it. As far as "getting my own life and doing something signifigant with it," I have. For a recent example, I worked on fixing the very subject this forum is based on. To name one thing.

Old Git:

  If you do not wish to be viewed as a troll, may I suggest changing
  your handle? "Bemused and amazed at you people" does not connote 
  an objective observer but rather someone who considers himself 
  far more knowledgeable and superior. 

I've already considered changing it... I picked that handle to post during a debate on a thread when some trollish simpletons chose to gang up on someone who had posted a legit question. Since then I've kept it to remain consistant, so that others who question me can search the archives and see what else I've posted. I've also posted, to my recollection, under two other aliases a total of two other times: "jesus" martinez@mexico.gov, and "spock" boppin@the.class_m.ball. Take what you will from those handles.

JoseMiami: Class, combined with an IQ? What are you doing here? (KIDDING, folks.... :^)

Z1X4Y7:

  Bemused: 
  Unless you have changed your name, you haven't been here long 
  enough to ask that question.

I've seen the tag "Polly Come Lately" (PCL). I really do qualify for that title, since the first time I saw this forum was 1/1. I was working at 7:00am on 1/1 to monitor Unix-Client/server systems in my company that I already knew were fully remediated (by me and others) when I decided to do a search on the web for any Y2K related problems, & I stumbled on this site. I knew Ed Yourdon from his Datamation and other articles, and I quickly became interested in this site. That's my quick bio, that's why I presume to post here.

Dancr: I'll check out those articles, thanks.

George:

  In theory, we are doing terrible guy. No one can reasonably 
  explain why things are working out so 'right', even in China,
  Russia, Brazil, Ecuador, Italy, etc., despite the fact that the 
  CIA, the FBI, the White House, the US Senate, etc., warned how 
  far behind all these countries were. 

I've given my explanation for this in this forum, and I feel like I'm getting carpal-tunnel doing it, so I'll quickly summarize: Take every computer system in the world, and weight it for importance. You will see that in every industry, in every country, the most important systems were remediated. Now take the remaining percentage, the unremediated ones; of those, how many have date problems that will result in more than "cosmetic" difficulties? In countries that were light or late on remediation, the importance/weight factor was light to begin with, meaning ***they just didn't depend on computers as much!!*** These things were consistant, in macro, with what we saw in "micro" in the two fortune 500 US companies I worked at in the past 3 years. I also had contact with people in IS at other big companies who could see the same patterns there. The post-Y2K facts bear this out in spades.

To everyone else: Thanks for the responses, I hope to respond to each, and I definately will monitor this thread, so I hope I see more.



-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), February 03, 2000.


Amused, FWIW I didn't interpret your original question to be trollish and I think you handled the slings and arrows directed towards you in response with grace and non-enmity. Even though our views coming into Y2k differed (I prepped extensively), you're okay in my book and have my respect.

Now, in answer to your question: Who the hell knows? After being SO assured that the Rollover would create more problems than it did, I hesitate to make any further conjecture at this point and am in a "wait and watch" mode. I probably won't feel that we're totally out of the woods until June, when I'll finally feel comfortable enough with the status quo to breathe a sigh of relief.

Of course, just as I let my guard down we'll probably get zapped with a Mass Coronal Ejection (sneaky things that they are - lol) or The Big One in California, or a financial meltdown, or (insert disaster of choice here) and my preps will not have been for naught. I'm glad I have them and plan to keep them for *whatever* eventuality that may occur. As it's been said, Life, like sh*t, happens!

LunaC

-- LunaC (LunaC@LunaC.com), February 03, 2000.


You bet, Ccal, it'll be over! Heard of separation of church and state? Its there for a reason. Just look back at Britain when everyone left there to come here.

How would you like it if a moslem posted the same thing and pushed for the same agenda? How would you like it if a Nazi posted the same thing and pushed for the same agenda? On and on. You wouldn't. Believe what you will and leave the rest of us alone.

-- Sheri (wncy2k@nccn.net), February 03, 2000.


I *am* actually in my home office working, so I don't want anyone to get big-headed and think I'm hanging on their responses or anything... But as long as I'm here:

LunaC:

I think you called me "Amused", when I'm actually "Bemused". "Amused" posted up there a ways, and they trashed me because they thought I was a troll. If you were talking to me, thanks for the kind words, but if there really is a Mass Coronal Ejection there's not a gol-durn thing we can prepare for except to meet our maker. Check out "Inconstant Moon", by Larry Niven. A truly scary short story about some night owls in LA who notice that the moon, all of a sudden one night, becomes very, very bright. Some of them "get" what's going to happen in 8 or so hours, when the earth's night side rotates, some don't... Creepy, well written story.

Tom Carey:

  As far as I'm concerned, while the Y2K controversy may continue
  alive and well here and elsewhere, it's already meaningless.
  Software bugs, hardware malfunctions, industrial accidents, 
  train wrecks, airplane crashes, pipeline breaks, marine oil 
  spills, business failures, bank failures, and episodes of 
  catastrophic inflation and depression all have occurred before, 
  and there's no reason to think they won't continue.

Yes, but we don't need to live our lives in fear. We are tougher and smarter than any species this planet has yet seen. Don't forget that, and take pride in that.

Still (waiting...):

  I know at least a dozen folks that prepared 4-6 months or more.
  Almost all think the worst scenarios are not likely, but are
  planning to hold preps until March or summer and see what 
  happens with gasoline.

Gasoline shortages and general petroleum shortages have happened before, and no-one needed food preps because of them. Since the worst of those shortages (1972-1975) we've (the U.S., I mean) become less dependant on foreign oil in general, and middle eastern oil in particular. Why do you think things are capable of getting worse than they were then?

morgan:

  Truth be told,I don,t come here because of y2k info anymore. I 
  read this site because there is ALWAYS something of interest. 
  It beats stupid CNN with their mindless drivel about the cuban 
  boy and airplane crash minutae. 

I do agree, there are some good news feeds here, it's just that I can't see a common theme in them as some can - they really are nothing new as far as I can see.

-- Bemused (and_amused@you.people), February 03, 2000.


Woops Bemused, i THINK you might want to re-check the numbers on foreign and Mid-East Oil importation vs use. i THINK we are importing a GREATER percentage than in 74. At least that is my memory of the data.

chuck

-- Chuck, a night driver (rienzoo@en.com), February 03, 2000.


Chuck, you're right about the overall percentage increase, but since 1977 we've had a Strategic Petroleum Reserve (something like 500 million barrels) which can be used to soften the blow. Plus, our production capacity (if not our output) has increased since then. We're a little less helpless because of these things.

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), February 03, 2000.

Tom Carey, your point of view is understandable and well taken ...

BUT... why bother with Y2K? (you ask)

Because until we understand the etiology and the epidemiology of Y2K the fat lady is still loose out there ready to sing long, ugly songs when we least expected, where we least expect it, and we are least prepared.

Although in practice we are doing reasonably OK, until the THEORY behind Y2K's benign impact is clarified, important chances do exist for widespread, large, unexpected accidents and failures far beyond the usual incidence.

Y2K or not Y2K we are still facing "Statistically High Incidence of Accidents And Failures Of Unknown Origin Some Months Before And After The Century Change Date". Hope we agree.

Take care

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 03, 2000.


Bemused, sorry, but your 'explanation' still doesn't cut it. Not even close.

Countries/companies that did little or no remediation STILL have their code broken. Maybe they are on 'manual workarounds', or have clocks back, or whatever, maybe...

According to the CIA, the FBI and the US Senate 100-day Report, countries such as Russia, Brazil, Italy, Paraguay, Indonesia, Venezuela, etc., etc., did little or no remediation and they DO have massive IT applications for government payrolls, customs, trade, banking, insurance, property registration, etc., etc. After all, 75% of code is outside the US.

And even SMBs in the grand ole USA, did NOT fix their code and IT applications in time, let alone embeddeds, whatever their impact may turn out to be.

As the problem never was D2K or M2K but rather Y2K, we still have to wait in order to find a logical explanation for whatever the impact turns out to be. After all, computers only mimic (weakly) our human logic, right?

Take care, but I'm still bemused.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 03, 2000.


How can something that never was an event be "over?"

This thread is really raveled.

-- val (valinn@aol.com), February 03, 2000.


Bemused-- "Yes, but we don't need to live our lives in fear."

Are you assuming that everyone here is living in fear? If so, think again.

It is not "fear" that prompts me to buy car insurance -- it's the certain knowledge that accidents are possible, and if I'm involved in one the costs can be extreme. Since I can't assume I'm immune to accidents on the road, I drive attentively -- not in fear.

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), February 03, 2000.


George -- "Because until we understand the etiology and the epidemiology of Y2K the fat lady is still loose out there ready to sing long, ugly songs when we least expected, where we least expect it, and we are least prepared."

Developing that understanding, and doing something constructive with it, would certainly be a welcome outcome. I just don't think it will ever happen.

You seem to be assuming that at some point the information needed to "understand the etiology and the epidemiology of Y2K" will be available. I can't think of any basis for this assumption, whereas there is every reason to think otherwise.

No business or industry anywhere in the world has anything to gain from public disclosure of its internal problems, whether they are Y2k- related or not. So a forensic analysis of this matter will never be possible. As I said earlier, the best we can do is speculate on the basis of very little real data. And so I repeat, why bother?

-- Tom Carey (tomcarey@mindspring.com), February 03, 2000.


Tom Carey,

I understand you better now Tom and, again, your point is well taken.

What I, and many others, are 'speculating' with is that as Y2K phenomena are so pervasive worldwide, sooner or later they will become visible and impossible to hide to a certain extent, thus exposing its nature, actions, reactions, etc., and revealing to everyone the extent of its possible impacts, despite the fact that TPTB are actively working against these ends.

Though you may end up being right Tom, it's sure worth it to try to keep alert until Y2K becomes clearer and certainly more understandable.

Take care, thanks for your input.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 03, 2000.


It reminds me of the Jehovah Witnesses. they predicted that Jesus would come in 1844, then in 1906. When he didn't come the 2nd time, they decided that he had come "invisibly." It seems y2k came and went invisibly. We are now living in the milennial kingdom!

Just ignore me. It is really late and I am not think very rationally.

-- JoseMiamiq (caris@prodigy.net), February 03, 2000.


It's seems to be pretty obvious to many Josi that the big difference between your example and Y2K is that abnormal failures and accidents of unusually high incidence are already taking place TODAY, such as planes having problems in the cockpits and even falling off the sky TODAY, trains are wrecking , derailing and crashing TODAY, oilpipes blow up TODAY, refineries melt down TODAY, avgas is failing miserably in Australia TODAY, nuclear power stations are scramming TODAY, spreadsheets are not working well TODAY, the IRS is having trouble issuing forms TODAY, water treatment plants spills take place TODAY, etc...

The big question is then:

Is this just an ice cube floating in the water or, in view of the enormous theoretical basis which supported widespread Y2K failures, instead of an ice cube it's the tip of a Y2K iceberg that will keep showing up as year 2000 advances until it shows its full ugly face.

Take care

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 04, 2000.


George,

  Bemused, sorry, but your 'explanation' still doesn't cut it. 
  Not even close. 
  Countries/companies that did little or no remediation STILL have 
  their code broken. Maybe they are on 'manual workarounds', or have 
  clocks back, or whatever, maybe... 

According to the CIA, the FBI and the US Senate 100-day Report, countries such as Russia, Brazil, Italy, Paraguay, Indonesia, Venezuela, etc., etc., did little or no remediation and they DO have massive IT applications for government payrolls, customs, trade, banking, insurance, property registration, etc., etc. After all, 75% of code is outside the US.

There is almost no country on the earth that did "no" remediation. Koskinen said that in 1998 they had a U.N. sponsered meeting on global Y2K preparedness, and 120 nations were represented. Many national delegates did not fully grasp what the issue was at that time, but they took the message back. By June 1999, when they had another gathering, 173 nations were represented, and everyone knew about and had progress reports on remediation. He said that it was the largest national representation in the history of the U.N. for one meeting.

Going back to my original explanation up there; The most important systems in almost every country are almost assuredly remediated. In the U.S. and probably Britain, the weighted importance of systems goes deeper into the commercial and governmental infrastructure than in all other countries, and that's why we needed to remediate more than them. You will see minor Y2K maladies in this in other countries in 2000 - no-one said we wouldn't. But we're out of the water now, we're so far out that we can barely see the beach. And again, as I said before, the post-rollover facts are bearing this out.

Tom Carey,

  It is not "fear" that prompts me to buy car insurance -- it's the 
  certain knowledge that accidents are possible, and if I'm involved
  in one the costs can be extreme. Since I can't assume I'm immune 
  to accidents on the road, I drive attentively -- not in fear. 

Granted, but I've always thought the insurance analogy was a weak one when it came to individuals. We buy property, auto, and health insurance because fires, car accidents, and sickness happen all the time to people. It would be silly to take a chance with problems that are so common. How often do we have societal and economic breakdowns that our local and federal governments are powerless to prevent? And the argument that the U.S. spent $50 million on a Y2K command center so that justifies spending $5000 of our family budget on preps is also a little weak - figure out what percentage $50 million is of the national budget vs. the percentage that Ed Yourdon wanted people to spend out of their own family budgets. $50 million is nothing to the U.S. Government, it would have been criminal not to prepare to at least that percentage.

I don't want to knock people who were just trying to take care of their families by preparing, that's excusable, my real gripe is with people like E.Y. who should have known better than to spread this kind of FUD for their own benefit.

George,

  It's seems to be pretty obvious to many Josi that the big  
  difference between your example and Y2K is that abnormal failures 
  and accidents of unusually high incidence are already taking place 
  TODAY, such as planes having problems in the cockpits and even 
  falling off the sky TODAY, trains are wrecking , derailing and 
  crashing TODAY, oilpipes blow up TODAY, refineries melt down TODAY, 
  ... (etc) ...

I feel that this currently the biggest misrepresentation in this forum today. Did anyone here bother to take a sample of calamities like this *before* Y2K? Do we have a valid control sample to compare this to? If you started a forum in 1999 and cross posted all the glitches and crashes you found you'd probably see the exact same daily rate then. The best people who are posting these seem to be able to come up with is "well, it just seems like we're seeing more problems post-rollover!" Of course it does, becuase people are posting all of them here, and they weren't before!!!

-- Bemused (and_amazed@you.people), February 04, 2000.


Bemused, thanks for your reply. Your points are also well taken.

(1) I don't see how "the most important systems in almost every country" even had time, let alone the money, managerial and IT resources to fix Y2K, as you say. Brazil and the rest of Latin America for sure didn't. I can prove my case very easily , believe me. Now think Russia, China, etc. Koskinen's statements and time frames actually are proof of this, not the other way around.

(2) Can I prove that in 1999 things were just as bad? No, I can't. Probably neither can you or anyone else prove it the other way around. But some/many common sense things are getting out of whack, aren't they Bemused?

(3) Y2K can turn out being like AIDS. First (1978) it was nothing much, just a couple of nice-looking pink spots on the skin. But things didn't turn out to be so nice-looking later...

So... we have a one trillion dollar mystery to resolve here ($1,000,000,000,000). That's why I insist in being patient until we all truly understand the etiology and the epidemiology of Y2K in view of the overwhelming theoretical underpinnings supporting the incidence of massive failures if remediation was not done, or not done PROPERLY, particularly under the unfavorable conditions under which it was done, if it was done. In many important systems of many countries, I doubt it. We differ here Bemused.

If it's an ice-cube and not the tip of the ice-berg, better. I'll be a happy man and then, and only THEN, will it be over. But not quite yet.

Take care

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com,.ar), February 04, 2000.


P.S.:

Bemused, Tom Carey, Josi Miami, whatever our ideas and agreements or disagreements on points of view I still enjoy and appreciate the civilized discussion we are having here.

Let's pray that the "Marmas" and "Liberal Haters" and "Y2K Pros" of this world keep staying out. If they do show up, I'll let you guys enjoy their company by yourselves.

Take care.

-- George (jvilches@sminter.com.ar), February 04, 2000.


Moderation questions? read the FAQ