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: C.K. Houston who wrote (5896)	6/3/1999 5:39:00 PM
From: flatsville	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 9818

Silly, stupid me. When I read announcement for the Ratcliffe v. Westergaard match and it indicated the event was to ba a "Formal Debate" I thought they meant just that...with appropriate scoring and judges. It was a popularity contest!!! The audience "voted" which debater's argument was the most convincing. Guess which message the audience preferred? Yes, the man who thinks "overseas banking is still largely manual" won! (Notice anything re: the numbers of votes in relation to the two questions asked? I mean you know they served crackers...ROTFLMAO) albany.net THE ECONOMIC IMPACT OF Y2K: A MAJOR CHANGE OR A MINOR GLITCH? The Winner: Mitch Ratcliffe Here's the quick result from last night. Racliffe argued that Y2K is much more than minor glitch but not a major change in the economy. Westergaard argued that we'll see a 5-10% worldwide recession (less bad in the USA than other countries) The audience voted 40-17 in favor of Ractliffe at the end. They also voted 48-9 that the debate did not change their views about Y2K. Watch for the audio webcast of the debate on ZDY2K. It will be posted as soon as possible. Until then, you can read Dick's written summary. (The above URL contain a link to Dick's written summary. After reading the summary I've come to the conclusion that neither Ratcliffe or Westargaard sound much like debaters, seasoned or otherwise. Hardly seems to matter as formal debates are not structured in the manner summarized.)