Do you have computer expertize involving y2k? Software, Hardware, Mainframers, PC's- all are welcome. Y2k has become far too polarized for my taste. The endless personal attacks on most y2k forums get very tiresome.

Y2K is a technical problem. Has it been solved? Is it being solved? Just how much remediation is ACTUALLY being done?

This is the place to discuss y2k on a tech level without "flames" (BB language for heated debate or name calling, if you are new to the internet) Whenever possible, it would be nice if lay people could ask questions of the pro's and get lay answers.

-- William Bookcliff (responsible_y2k@hotmail.com), September 14, 1999

Answers

It seems there is no stampede to flood this forum with posts!

I will continue to check in every few days, but if the forum doesn't fly, I will just let it die out.

Feel free to paste reports or technical data; and don't forget to recruit any y2k remediators you know.

-- William Bookcliff (responsible_y2k@hotmail.com), September 18, 1999.

Speaking of glitches! I don't know why my last submission was placed at the top of the answers list!

-- William Bookcliff (responsible_y2k@hotmail.com), September 20, 1999.

I am interested in y2k discussion without the flames, but I am not in IT. Can I place articles and posts written by others in the comp industry for discussion?

-- James Mcgallin (MCG267@aol(X).com), September 15, 1999.

Hi William

I am over from the noisy Time Bomb 2000 forum and there would be a few folks that would be interested in a tech forum. You should post something about your forum there. It would be a relief for some to have a IT forum.

It sounds like a much needed idea. I could help although not an IT person. Email me if you wish.

-- Brian (imager@home.com), September 16, 1999.

William,

I, too, am not an IT expert, but would enjoy reading posts from those who are. I agree that the Timebomb2000 forum has too much off topic stuff, but quite a bit of it is interesting. Hope this one flies.

Gerald

-- Gerald R. Cox (grcox@internetwork.net), September 19, 1999.

Hey I see a bunch of new threads...does this mean this forum still might survive?

-- I hope so (other@y2k.fora.are.too.radical), November 29, 1999.

"Y2K is a technical problem. Has it been solved? Is it being solved? Just how much remediation is ACTUALLY being done? " It this line of thinking, in part, that has gotten us into trouble in the first place. Y2K is more than just a technical problem; it's a management, logistics, human resource and time mangement problem and more. Because it was thought of as just a technical problem, many companies waited way too long to get involved with the solution. Upper management wouldn't commit the resources (human or financial), and the "techies" were seemingly unable to build the business case for action until too late. All the discussion over the past three years on y2k should have made that clear, but as Michael Hyatt said in his article today: The awarness battle was lost in a route (paraphrased).

-- Duke1983 (Duke 1983@aol.com), December 07, 1999.

As a starting point for a tech. discussion, why not everybody do some homework? Drive on over to the IEEE's site, http://www.ieee.org/organizations/tab/Y2Kfocus.html and download or read their "Year 2000 Technical Information Statement." Its definitely good food for thought and can not be accused of ulterior motives.

-- Gary S. (garys_2k@yahoo.com), December 08, 1999.

a better place for education on y2k...

Gary North is a Big Fat Idiot Homepage

THE YEAR 2000 AS RACKET AND RUSE - By Nicholas Zvegintzov

-- nobody (no-where@t.all), December 10, 1999.

"Is your millenium mental software compliant?" by aaron lynch

"E-mail thought contagions" - Aaron lynch

"Thought Contagion Theory and the Heaven's Gate Tragedy" - Aaron Lynch

-- nope (now@y.hosea), December 13, 1999.