Well, Dan the Power Man has certainly supplied me with enough evidence to convince almost anyone he is who he says he is. On top of what he provided me, I put him through a few extra tests, which he passed. About the only way I could have more evidence from this distance would be if I sat beside him as he typed his posts in the forum.

Please don't e-mail me asking for detail; don't ask, 'cause I won't tell :)

-- Drew Parkhill/CBN News (y2k@cbn.org), April 27, 1999

Answers

OK...I understand that. But for the sake of this forgetful old lady, what should I refer to to come up with the importance of Dan the Power Man. Am I to assume he is connected with power...as in electric....or as Power in CEO or equivalent? I would appreciate some of the more important threads that this man has written so I can fully appreciate your detective work. Am I making any sense here? Its been a baaaaaaad day. Been hitting the thrift stores all day. LOL

Taz

-- Taz (Tassie @aol.com), April 27, 1999.

Thanks so much for helping me out, Drew. I hope this helps those who wanted this confirmation.

Taz, I'm an engineer working for a power company; I've been working full time on Y2K stuff (testing power equipment) for a year and a half. During some previous discussions folks wanted confirmation that I really was who I said I was.

Thanks again, Drew, and it was nice talking to you. See you around.

-- Dan the Power Man (dgman19938@aol.com), April 27, 1999.

Thank you Drew and thank you Dan.

Doomslayer

-- Doomslayer (1@2.3), April 27, 1999.

Drew, I had little doubt that Dan was a power man. You can usually tell when someone speaks with real knowledge and Dan does. Dan does not allay my concerns about y2k. I do not agree with all of his conclusions (even though I cannot argue the facts of which he has first hand knowledge.)

Drew, if I'm not mistaken, you have stated before, maybe on euy2k, that you have other contacts inside the electricity industry who have given you information indicating that they are not entirely confident of the grid's ability to function in y2k. Have you changed your opinions? (Or are you simply confirming Dan's background?)

-- Puddintame (achillesg@hotmail.com), April 27, 1999.

Puddintame,

In this thread, yes, I'm just confirming Dan's background.

I'll try to catch up on the other question tomorrow- it takes a bit of explaining, & I'm swamped at the moment.

-- Drew Parkhill/CBN News (y2k@cbn.org), April 27, 1999.

Drew,

Remember the Planning and Scheduling 101 lecture I gave about a week ago? Yes, Good. If you get a chance ask Dan how they are computing per-cent complete, and see if it makes any sense.

-- Watcher5 (anon@anon.com), April 27, 1999.

Sysman, dat enourgh 'credibility' for you? Happy Now?

-- Sheesh! (777@ggg.ggg), April 27, 1999.

Sheesh,

Yes, that will do it, and yes, I am happy now! This should help keep the flames away from Dan, and keep future discussions on topic. Thanks for your help here Drew. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), April 28, 1999.

Puddintame,

To pick up on your question about what other people in the power industry say: I would guess that the majority I've talked to are largely optimistic. Some do have reservations about their own company. I can't say off the top of my head that many are worried about the overall grid- I know one was, but he is not directly involved in a Y2K project himself (although he has a lot of experience in the industry). His concern was fuel. If I had to *guess*, I would say the concerns are more about localized problems; however, people do acknowledge that problems could indeed spread. I would say that overall, there is more confidence than there was a year ago.

Watcher,

I do remember that post. I probably won't be talking to Dan for a while; it would probably be better to repost it in a separate thread to hold the discussion publicly, rather than use me as an intermediary, since I'm not thoroughly versed in that system.

-- Drew Parkhill/CBN News (y2k@cbn.org), April 28, 1999.

Interesting how the hard-core pessimists have stayed away from this thread.

-- Doomslayer (1@2.3), April 28, 1999.

even better - why don't these doom-zombies require credentials from fellow doom-zombies? why is it that pollys have to proof themselves, doomer don't?

-- (.`.`@.`.`), April 28, 1999.

...and, how long is your penis, "@"hole? Show me your bona fides.

-- Night (y2k_nightmare@my-dejanews.com), April 28, 1999.

uh oh... dicklicker is back. board up the doors and windows, hide your little boys.

-- WebCop (stop@insani.ty), April 28, 1999.

I assume I qualify as a "gloomer and doomer" - though I can be convinced of any probable outcome if I'm presented with evidence supporting somebody else's guessed and opinions. To date, I've seen no evidence indicating enough companies will be remediated to avoid significant problems.

I also have been shown no specific evidence that the physical and infrastructure troubles will last longer than 3-5 months, less in some areas. Economic impact? Could be double/triple that.

Regardless, I read all the above and didn't see anything to disagree or agree with. The guy knows his stuff, in the area he specializes in. My experience contradicts his in several areas, and since we are extrapolating from different points it's not surprizing we get different conclusions. Most specifically, I predict more widespread, more frequent, and longer periods of disrupted services (all systems) than he does.

-- Robert A. Cook, PE (Kennesaw, GA) (cook.r@csaatl.com), April 28, 1999.

Glad to see some of you are satisfied with this.

The reason we report % complete is because that's the way NERC asks for it. You can see the excel spreadsheet on NERC's web site that we power companies fill out each month.

Hey Mr. Cook, you don't have to refer to me in the third person. I'm still here...when the new NERC report comes out I hope we can discuss/debate its merits and drawbacks. I concur with your assessment of our viewpoints.

-- Dan the Power Man (dgman19938@aol.com), April 28, 1999.

Good evening guys. Can we please move this discussion to y2kboard@yahoo.com), April 28, 1999.

Damn, HTML got me again! Never mind. I do want to try and keep this discussion in one place, and I do hope that Rick gets involved. We can all learn very much here. Please guys, give it your heart and soul. Power is the big one. <:)=

-- Sysman (y2kboard@yahoo.com), April 28, 1999.

Dan,

You go guy! I've been telling them alot of the same stuff...but I got flames! You are on target, guy!

PS They don't consider spouses in the industry as reliable.

-- DAC (finally@this time.com), April 30, 1999.

What is all the fuss about? One employee from one of 8000 power companies in the country confides in Drew that he actually is who he says he is, and from that, somehow y2k is no longer a threat to the power industry? Are the people on this thread smoking dope? What the heck is up with that?

I think its fine that Dan is who he claims to be, but my original request was not for his true identity, but rather for him to tell the name of his compliant company. Other companies are coming clean these days, why not Dan's? This is May 1999, What the hell are they waiting for? Is this some kind of game?

Cut the BS. If you are ready, say so. By name.

-- a (a@a.a), May 01, 1999.

"Cut the BS. If you are ready, say so. By name."

this is from a somebody named "a" whose e-mail is "a@a.a"

-- ha. thats funny (chuckles@hotmailX.com), May 02, 1999.

I fail to see why Dan is continually being asked to name his company.

Dan is not authorized to make announcements concerning the y2k status of his employer. It is as simple as that.

Continually asking this question is akin to the child in the backseat of the car saying, "Are we there yet?"

-- J (jart5@bellsouth.net), May 02, 1999.