A friendly reminder - PLEASE! follow the GICC Posting Guidelines - we have gotten several request to keep it on topic and we will be working harder to enforce the guidelines. No one here likes to delete the hard work of others but we want to keep it to Y2K-related or possible related issues so we will be deleting off topic posts.

Please understand that while practically anything could be considered to be possibly Y2K related the guidelines are meant to require that there is some clear or likely relationship to Y2K. This means that we do not want to report every problem that happens in the world - only Y2K problems. BTW, there seem to be plently of Y2K-related incidents to report.

Thank you everyone for your hard work, understanding, and assistance!

GICC Posting Guidelines

Volunteers are asked to report any Y2K-related or possibly Y2K-related issues or incidents that are of interest, including human behavior and community impact. Please do not post stories with no likely Y2K connection. If you suspect a Y2K connection but are not sure, please take extra care to give investigation leads for follow-up by GICC analysts.

Only verifiable information should be posted. Anonymous reports by whistleblowers with first-hand information are permissible. In all cases contact information must be given to permit analysis. Moderators will delete any inappropriate postings. Rumors will only be published when clearly described as such as must be posted to the rumor category (these will be confirmed or debunked as appropriate). All posts are to include as much information as possible about the incident. When possible a source should be given.

The GICC Team

-- The GICC Team (y2kgicc@yahoo.com), January 29, 2000

Answers

There are over two dozen volunteer analysts and moderators who help run the GICC but the real team is much larger and includes people like you who contribute incident reports. GICC team members are asked to help verify and research Y2K incidents that are reported. We are benefiting greatly from people like you that are researching and reporting. Over the last four weeks we have had a drop off in activity and membership but we are hoping to keep this going as a low maintenance activity with less need for moderating or analyzing.

There is more background available by clickin on the Publisher link at the top of the main page.

-- The GICC Team (y2kgicc@yahoo.com), January 30, 2000.

1. Could you please inform us who the GICC team is composed of and what is the purpose of this forum other than to document y2k problems?

2. In the above guidelines it states that moderators will delete any inappropriate postings. I think they should do that. Since I do not always have the time to analyze all the articles I find I certainly don't object to deletions. Even before the CDC it was hard to determine what was a y2k event or just normal breakdowns. It is even more so now.

3. You state there are plenty of Y2K related incidents to report. Then maybe the GICC team should be reporting them. I only see a few people posting to this forum.

Regards,

Martin Thompson

-- Martin Thompson (mthom1927@aol.com), January 29, 2000.

Please correct my idea of what the GICC considers appropriate posting.... During and after the rollover date (Dec 31 to Jan 1) the following event occurs:

* a "known to be" non-compliant, not-ready-for-Y2k system, fails.

* a "believed to be" compliant, ready-for-Y2k system, fails. User or company suspects/blames Y2k.

* article must contain words like "probably" "most likely" "appears to be" caused by Y2k.

* Articles containing words like "possibly" "maybe" "unknown" to be caused by Y2k, belong in the "Non-Y2k" Category (?). Later, if Y2k evidence is found, I can post "answers" to that article.

Ah yes... drawing a line in a sometimes-grey area can be a real headache.... not to mention having to spell things out for me! Take two aspirin before you reply ;-) -and thanks for your patience.

-- Lee Maloney (leemaloney@hotmail.com), January 30, 2000.