Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Discuss Year 2000 Issues -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ken who wrote (7427)	7/30/1999 4:30:00 PM
From: John Hunt	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 9818

You Can Lead A Horse To Water, But.... Hi Ken, Why do you care whether these pollys prepare or not? I sure don't ... No Messiah (Save The World) complex here ... Quite happy here to sit back and watch Darwin's theory in action. I am more than willing to share any relevant experience that I have, or anything I find on the net that I think is important, as long as the other person is willing to listen and at least think about it. Once they prove that they are not doing so, poof, they are invisible. You must be a masochist. < vbg > John

To: Ken who wrote (7427)	7/30/1999 6:54:00 PM
From: Lane3	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

Ron, I'm going to assume just this one time that you're really trying to communicate rather than just preach. To me that means that you want to understand what I'm saying and want me to understand what you're saying. I know this assumption is a bit of a stretch, but... I did not ask a question. I know that may have been confusing because the correct punctuation of the last sentence of my post would have placed a question mark at the end, but it was a rhetorical question, not expecting an answer, intended as a short-cut to the point I am now going to make the long way. (I intentionally left the question mark off because I didn't want to imply a question and thought the period would be more clear. (Miss Miles in the 4th grade always said there was a price to be paid for not being careful with our punctuation.)) I will parse my post for you. O.H. Rundell said: Without electricity we (OKC)have 36 hours of water To which you responded: 'Humans cannot live more than 4 days without water'. Although both points are about both water and time, there is no logical connection between 1) the length of time the water will run after the power goes off and 2) the length of time the body will run once it has been deprived of water. None. Trying to draw an appropriate conclusion from O.H.'s statement, I said: May I suggest that one could also see in it some good news--that when the electricity goes out, one still has a day or so postpone the inevitable by filling up a couple of buckets, the pool, the bathtub... Yeah, "postpone the inevitable" was a sarcastic reference to your response. Yeah, it would have been clearer to say "avoid death from dehydration," but not nearly as much fun. Mea culpa. The red herring notwithstanding, from the information that water will run 36 hours without electricity, one can logically conclude that after the power goes out, one still has time to decide to draw some water. I read post #7423. That one doesn't have anything to do with the effect of a power outage on the water supply either. And speaking of logical connections, contingency planning doesn't mean that a disaster is expected any more than your buying home insurance means you're expecting your house to burn down. Karen p.s. My water utility has working manual pumps. One of my well-read friends told me so.