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 : 2000 Date-Change Problem: Scam, Hype, Hoax, Fraud -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cheeky Kid who wrote (964)	12/12/1998 4:01:00 PM
From: Sawtooth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1361

<<BUT YOU WAIT AND SEE. When the year 2000 rolls over, EVERY, and I mean EVERY Y2K incident will be blow well out of proportion by the Y2K cultists....I have one last question. Do the Y2K cultists have a secret hand shake?>> Hi, Cheeky. Just one question so I can follow things a little better here. Could you please define what a "Y2K cultist" is? Are there some actual Y2K cults? Or, are you referring to anyone who thinks that the Y2K computer issue might result in some problems? Somewhere in between? TIA; much appreciated.

To: Cheeky Kid who wrote (964)	12/12/1998 10:38:00 PM
From: J.L. Turner	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1361

Cheeky, Thanks for your response,I was however asking a serious question and was hoping for a serious answer.Do you claim residual failure does not exist?If it exists do you have any proof that it happens less than 1% of the time? Just because I quoted "Infomagic" doesn't mean I buy his theory.I simply thought that this thread would have the expertise to confirm or deny the residual failure part of his theory. Obviously no one here is up to the challenge. PS Do Pollyanna cultists have secret handshakes?(VBG)