Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000
From: canuckistani (dontwantanymedspissoff_at_shaw.ca)
Date: 02/27/04
- Next message: Richard: "Re: Telling the modern mainframe story"
- Previous message: Peter Lacey: "Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000"
- In reply to: EskWIRED_at_spamblock.panix.com: "Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000"
- Next in thread: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000"
- Reply: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000"
- Reply: Dr John Stockton: "Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:03:08 GMT
<EskWIRED@spamblock.panix.com> wrote in message
news:c1m53d$kdt$3@reader2.panix.com...
> In comp.software.year-2000 Jamie Andrews; real address @ bottom of message
<me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> > Please post your thoughts on this matter.
>
> MYOB, you officious bitch.
>
> --
> ...I'm an air-conditioned gypsy...
>
> - The Who
.......................................................
:)
Succinct, yet to the point.
It is 'discussion' you be wantin' Jamie Andrews? Fine.
c.s.y-2k was an experiment, a valid running snapshot of matters IT (or in
this instance, RTC) related but also a social/societal matter. True, cans of
beans did not explode upon roll-over but the fact remains that sufficient
concern was generated by the potential of the event that an outlet was
needed and this .comp newsgroup did provide an outlet in an admirable
manner.
As events did not unfold, the true worth of this newsgroup remained, to this
very day. An unlikely mix of personalities from different locations and
socio-economic backgrounds felt 'comfortable' here, to flame, to point out
issues or simply to put snarky one-liners that often are of exceptional
quality, into cyberspace.
My own viewpoints relative to roll-over are moot as they always were. I did
play a minor role by flogging, without resorting to fear mongering, RTC
intercept hardware and numerous 486's with poorly written BIOS chips did
indeed continue to function after roll-over. It has taken me a while to
recover from the financial beating that roll-over represented, yet in
retrospect is was well worth it. Equally, the 'social' aspect of activities
within this newsgroup was well worth it. Here one would be able to enjoy the
rants of the ever-time retentive Doctor John. Here one would chuckle when
reading one of Mr. Bernier's many priceless posts. As I stated, it all
represents a unique 'snapshot' of where things stood in confusing times.
If participation in this newsgroup enabled some to take a look at issues
from a different perspective, it has been well worth it.
If some wish to feed their misplaced sense of righteousness by causing the
removal of this newsgroup, well, perhaps that too is typical of what c.s.y2k
represents.
It still serves a purpose, albeit far removed from the original purpose.
Then again, so does the UN.
Leave well enough alone.
Or cause it to be delisted and be damned with you.
:)
John H. Immink
Victoria BC Canuckistan
itsjohn@hotmail.com
<spam THAT!>
- Next message: Richard: "Re: Telling the modern mainframe story"
- Previous message: Peter Lacey: "Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000"
- In reply to: EskWIRED_at_spamblock.panix.com: "Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000"
- Next in thread: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000"
- Reply: Richard Heathfield: "Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000"
- Reply: Dr John Stockton: "Re: Discussion: rmgroup comp.software.year-2000"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
