http://www.seattletimes.com/news/local/html98/bill_19991215.html

Link

Wednesday, December 15, 1999, 07:27 a.m. Pacific

Y2K bug bites early in Bellevue

by Chris Solomon Seattle Times Eastside bureau

BELLEVUE - It's hardly the collapse of world financial markets or jet planes corkscrewing into the ground, but the Y2K bug has claimed a victim in Bellevue.

Because of a contractor's computer-related goof, about 6,000 water-and-sewer-utility customers served by Bellevue received bills printed with a due date of Jan. 6 - of the year 1900.

"It's just a printing error," stressed a weary-sounding Bellevue city spokeswoman, Colleen O'Grady, fielding questions from the media. Some asked if residents were panicking. They weren't.

"There's no problem in the utility system and services. . . . They've all been tested," O'Grady said.

The vendor that prints the forms for the city did not have a "Y2K patch" to correct a computer from mistaking the "00" in 2000 for the year 1900 on one portion of the bill, O'Grady said.

The correct due date - Jan. 6, 2000 - did appear on the bill's remittance portion, but that didn't stop several customers from calling to point out the error.

The city plans to send letters to customers explaining what happened.

The federal government and many experts around the nation agree that the country has prepared its major computer systems for the date change. Foul-ups, they have said, are likely to be relatively minor - such as the printing error - and cause inconvenience, not pandemonium.

Those who received the misprinted bills can relax for another reason, too: 100 years of late fees won't apply.

-- Homer Beanfang (Bats@inbellfry.com), December 15, 1999

Answers

We're certain that, at first, these types of errors will be widely reported and trumpeted all over the media, while uncontrollable fires, sewage backups, hazmat accidents, explosions, meltdowns, etc -- those they'll try to keep a lid on.

Reporting the silly inconsequential stuff furthers their ridicule PR campaign ...

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), December 15, 1999.

Yeah, Right....

The press always tries to keep a lid on reports of disasters like uncontrollable fires, meltdowns, etc. Never see much of that in the local news.

-- The Engineer (The Engineer@tech.com), December 15, 1999.

The press sure as hell WILL keep the lid on if ordered to by the gov't. And lest you think the gov't incapable of abuse of power, please refer to the recent Seattle debacle. The fact that official (s) will be forced from office, and millions will be eventually awarded in lawsuits, does NOT mitigate the fact that the abuses DID happen, under full authority of the gov't. (Remember the illegal internment of Japanese Americans during WW II?)

16 days.

-- Dennis (djolson@cherco.net), December 15, 1999.

BPA troll, we were there, saw and heard firsthand the plans for Y2K Failure News Blackout.

-- Ashton & Leska in Cascadia (allaha@earthlink.net), December 15, 1999.

Hey BPA troll--

Why don't you try cognating for a split second before you post next time.

Okay, if I report an accident, or a fire it makes great news because there are juicy film clips, etc.

Or, I could report on less visually sensational, and only abstractly dire business IT failures which my editor has stressed we will not cover. Oh, and I'm a reporter and I didn't even find out about it because companies are threatening their employees which "leak" the news.

Oh, wait, but... Yeah, oh like the media aren't just totally hyping y2k, I mean they never belittle this story cause it just fits right in with our if it bleeds, it leads philosophy.

Yeah, right!!

bleach-blonde comes on at five... she can tell you about the...

sean

-- sean (yet@another.myopic.comment), December 16, 1999.

Dennis,

Yeah right, the press really kept a lid on the Seattle thing. Didnt report or show any of it. And they always do what the government says; just look at Watergate, The Pentagon Papers, etc. Didnt report any of that, did they?

A&L You were there? Then why dont you report all about it to this board? And of course you can back all of what you say up, cant you? Yeah, right.

Sean, Ah, yes and you report for the WSJ? Which never ever covers business failures. Only those juicy film clips. I dont know what paper you work for (if any) but if an IT failure doesnt effect anything then is it news? Dog bites man happens but it isnt news. Man bites dog is new. And speaking of cogitating,

And if you go back and look at what A&L first said:

We're certain that, at first, these types of errors will be widely reported and trumpeted all over the media, while uncontrollable fires, sewage backups, hazmat accidents, explosions, meltdowns, etc -- those they'll try to keep a lid on. Reporting the silly inconsequential stuff furthers their ridicule PR campaign.

Isnt that exactly the type stuff you said would be reported? And isnt what they said is being reported what you said would not be reported?

It seems your argument is with them. No with me.

-- The Engineer (The Engineer@tech.com), December 16, 1999.

Frightening that an Engineer can't read.

-- did he (flub@code.too?), December 16, 1999.

One of us can't. Go back and read what A&L wrote, then what Sean wrote.

Think about it.

-- The Engineer (The Engineer@tech.com), December 16, 1999.