HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: can.english
From: vinay@cs.toronto.edu ("Vinay K. Chaudhri")
Subject: Re: Hello?
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 5 Oct 92 12:57:32 GMT

In article <BvKDzK.KAz@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca> aryk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (A.J.S. Nusbacher) writes:
>In article <92Oct2.083413edt.181248@thor.ai.toronto.edu> vinay@cs.toronto.edu ("Vinay K. Chaudhri") writes:
>
>>It is not clear whether "English" refers to the language or the people or
>>both ?
>
>Is there a difference?

The difference is as much as the difference between blue and green.  Though
one could trace its origin to the other yet neither could be the same as the
other.



Newsgroups: can.english
From: aryk@gpu.utcs.utoronto.ca (A.J.S. Nusbacher)
Subject: Re: Hello?
Organization: University of Toronto -- Office of the Provost
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 21:21:19 GMT

In article <92Oct2.083413edt.181248@thor.ai.toronto.edu> vinay@cs.toronto.edu ("Vinay K. Chaudhri") writes:

>It is not clear whether "English" refers to the language or the people or
>both ?

Is there a difference?
Newsgroups: can.english
From: woods@robohack.UUCP (Greg A. Woods)
Subject: Re: "Funny" English :-)
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc.
Distribution: can
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 92 23:44:59 GMT

In article <1992Sep23.093359.28335@spxtech.qc.ca> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
> From article <1992Sep19.192434.23402@robohack.UUCP>, by woods@robohack.UUCP (Greg A. Woods):
> > 
> > BTW, your entymology is likely way off base.
>             ^^^^^^^^^^
>             Is there a bug in your editor? :-)))

No, though maybe you're lacking a good dictionary or thesaurus....  :-)

Entymology and entomology are not, to the best of my knowledge,
related fields of study.
-- 
						Greg A. Woods

woods@robohack.UUCP, woods@Elegant.COM  VE3TCP	UniForum Canada & ECI
+1 416 443-1734 [home] +1 416 362-9772 [work]	Toronto, Ontario; CANADA
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.english
Subject: Re: "Funny" English :-)
Date: 23 Sep 92 13:33:59 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 619

From article <1992Sep19.192434.23402@robohack.UUCP>, by woods@robohack.UUCP (Greg A. Woods):
> In article <1992Sep15.105313.9571@spxtech.qc.ca> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:

> 
> BTW, your entymology is likely way off base.
            ^^^^^^^^^^
            Is there a bug in your editor? :-)))

> 
-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.english
From: watpod78@alfred.carleton.ca (Phil Culhane)
Subject: Hello?
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 15:58:21 GMT

Can I guess that this might be "Can" - adian English?

Does anyone subscribe to this service who would chat if there were
someone else out there?

Current quandaries include Montgomery, Carman, George Elliot Clarke
and always Frederick Philip Grove.

Please show signs of life if you're out there.  Even if can.english
wasn't intended for Canadian, it's empty, therefore available.

Phil Culhane
Newsgroups: can.english
From: watpod78@alfred.carleton.ca (Phil Culhane)
Subject: the language or the people
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 23:31:57 GMT

Pray for the day when the latter is only a historical form of
differentiation.

But, really, does anyone out there have any ponderances on Canadian
English Literature?  Would anyone care to work over some of my own
hypotheses?

?
Newsgroups: can.english
From: woods@robohack.UUCP (Greg A. Woods)
Subject: Re: "Funny" English :-)
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc.
Distribution: can
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 16:17:56 GMT

In article <1992Oct3.234459.28303@robohack.UUCP> woods@robohack.UUCP (Greg A. Woods) writes:
> In article <1992Sep23.093359.28335@spxtech.qc.ca> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
> > From article <1992Sep19.192434.23402@robohack.UUCP>, by woods@robohack.UUCP (Greg A. Woods):
> > > 
> > > BTW, your entymology is likely way off base.
> >             ^^^^^^^^^^
> >             Is there a bug in your editor? :-)))
> 
> No, though maybe you're lacking a good dictionary or thesaurus....  :-)
> 
> Entymology and entomology are not, to the best of my knowledge,
> related fields of study.

OOPS!

Well, I never said I wasn't dyslexic!  :-)  [and so far as I know, I'm
not *really*!]

That should have read:

No, not a bug, just a spelling error.  Entymology is not a word, and
the correct word, etymology, has no relationship to entomology, other
than in my supposed dyslexic dilusions!
-- 
						Greg A. Woods

woods@robohack.UUCP, woods@Elegant.COM  VE3TCP	UniForum Canada & ECI
+1 416 443-1734 [home] +1 416 362-9772 [work]	Toronto, Ontario; CANADA
From: lyndon@unbc.edu (Lyndon Nerenberg)
Newsgroups: can.uucp
Subject: Re: NEW MAPS POSTED (AND REPO
Summary: No need to put redundent info in the maps.
Date: 29 Sep 92 23:45:35 GMT
Organization: University of Northern B.C.

charles.berlinguette@outlan.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Charles Berlinguette) writes:

> I'd like to get my system entered into these maps...

Since you already have a domain name, there's no real need, unless you
plan on becoming a uucp mail hub and routing a lot of third-party mail.
From: pacolley@ember.UUCP (Paul Colley)
Newsgroups: can.uucp
Subject: Re: NEW MAPS POSTED (AND REPO
Date: 2 Oct 92 02:49:24 GMT
Reply-To: pacolley@ember.UUCP (Paul Colley)
Organization: Ember---private system

In article <340@unbc.edu> lyndon@unbc.edu (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes:

>charles.berlinguette@outlan.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Charles Berlinguette) writes:
>
>> I'd like to get my system entered into these maps...
>
>Since you already have a domain name, there's no real need, unless you
>plan on becoming a uucp mail hub and routing a lot of third-party mail.

There's one other reason:  If he registers his name in the maps,
there will be less problems with misdirected mail.  If he doesn't
take the UUCP name, sooner or later somebody will...

Trust me.  There are a large number of sites that apparently can't
tell the difference between "ember.uucp" and "ember.some.domain.name".

The worst offender is a U.S. military site.  I really don't care
how their software is comming along, and would really like for them
to stop sending their @$#! mailing list to me!  But attempts to
get in contact with somebody at the offending sites just disappear
into a black hole; no bounce, no reply, no fix.

Boeing's missile division also had a related problem, but did
eventually fix it when I complained.

- Paul Colley
University:  colley@qucis.queensu.ca
Home:        pacolley@ember.uucp   watmath!ember!pacolley  +1 613 545 3807
<Ring> [...] "Sorry, I'm all booked up." "Who was that?" "The library." - B.C.

Newsgroups: can.uucp
From: woods@robohack.UUCP (Greg A. Woods)
Subject: Re: NEW MAPS POSTED (AND REPO
Organization: Elegant Communications Inc.
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 92 03:48:53 GMT

In article <340@unbc.edu> lyndon@unbc.edu (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes:
> charles.berlinguette@outlan.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Charles Berlinguette) writes:
> 
> > I'd like to get my system entered into these maps...
> 
> Since you already have a domain name, there's no real need, unless you
> plan on becoming a uucp mail hub and routing a lot of third-party mail.

On the other hand, a large segment of us firmly believe that sites
(i.e. at least the mail gateways for all sites) should register both
UUCP names, and domain names.

[At least until ISDN (or something like it) is in widespread use, and
nobody need use UUCP for e-mail any longer.... :-)]
-- 
						Greg A. Woods

woods@robohack.UUCP, woods@Elegant.COM  VE3TCP	UniForum Canada & ECI
+1 416 443-1734 [home] +1 416 362-9772 [work]	Toronto, Ontario; CANADA
From: charles.berlinguette@outlan.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Charles Berlinguette) 
Newsgroups: can.uucp
Subject: NEW MAPS POSTED (AND REPO
Date: 27 Sep 92 10:49:00 GMT
Reply-To: charles.berlinguette@outlan.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Charles Berlinguette) 
Distribution: world
Organization: Outland BBS-UUCP

I'd like to get my system entered into these maps...

What are the steps required etc?
From: se_schn@pavo.concordia.ca (SCHNAAR, SHELDON E.)
Newsgroups: can.uucp
Subject: UUCP in Montreal
Date: 3 Oct 92 01:53:00 GMT
Distribution: can

I hope someone here will be able to help me.
Organization: Concordia University
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

Where can I get information on UUCP?  Specificaly, what software is required [I
use an IBM PC] how much does it cost and where does one contact UUCP in the 
Montreal area.
Newsgroups: can.uucp
From: dennis@nebulus.ampr.ab.ca (Dennis Breckenridge VE6TCP)
Subject: Re: NEW MAPS POSTED (AND REPO
Organization: Alchemy Mindworks, Edmonton, Alberta
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 00:08:07 GMT

pacolley@ember.UUCP (Paul Colley) writes:

>In article <340@unbc.edu> lyndon@unbc.edu (Lyndon Nerenberg) writes:

>>charles.berlinguette@outlan.ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Charles Berlinguette) writes:
...

>The worst offender is a U.S. military site.  I really don't care
>how their software is comming along, and would really like for them
>to stop sending their @$#! mailing list to me!  But attempts to
>get in contact with somebody at the offending sites just disappear
>into a black hole; no bounce, no reply, no fix.

What I do here is set up an alias with the offending machine pointed
right back to Postmaster@offending.machine. This is the last ditch
effort after all my attempts to politely tell them that they are 
misdirecting mail. 

Now if I can teach Canada Post the same trick...hmm
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dennis S. Breckenridge         dennis@nebulus.ampr.ab.ca         VE6TCP/VE6NOS
           Let's put the blame where it belongs: on somebody else!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: se_schn@pavo.concordia.ca (SCHNAAR, SHELDON E.)
Newsgroups: can.uucp
Subject: UUCP
Date: 5 Oct 92 08:09:00 GMT
Distribution: qc
Organization: Concordia University
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


Okay, someone responded to my post but I can't reply to him, because my
system does not seem to recognize his address.  The person I refer to is
Jean Marc Pigeo  <jmp@comback.login.qc.ca>  Could you like reply with your IP 
or some other means that I can contact you with?
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: dclayton@bnr.ca (Don Clayton)
Subject: Re: I couldn't hold back any longer...
Reply-To: dclayton@bnr.ca (Don Clayton)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Distribution: can
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 20:13:34 GMT

In article <Bv76p7.DMK@mach1.wlu.ca>, brea9430@mach1.wlu.ca (breadner kenneth cecil joseph u) writes:
|> Our local paper just ran what I assume to be a condensed version of the text
|> of the Charlottetown agreement, for which I commend them. It's nice to know
|> what we are actually voting on.
|> 
|> But.
|> 
|> But:
|> 
|> --I am sure everyone in Canada knows this "referendum" is not a referendum
|> but a plebiscite. So being, it is non-binding, and, as several of you have
|> mentioned, the same result could have been independently attained at much
|> lower cost to the taxpayer by means of an informal survey. In point of fact,
|> this IS little more than an informal survey, excepting its scope. 
|> 
|> --Given the media's total refusal to see any politician's action as even
|> "potentially in the best interest of Canada", I find it extremely surprising
|> that nobody has come forward to denounce the "referendum" for what it is: a
|> straw vote. After all, the papers have gleefully reported the cost of these
|> proceedings (I apologise, the figure has slipped my mind), but I have yet to
|> see someone tell us what we are actually voting on, and what effect our vote
|> will have: none at all.

We are voting on the Accord (though it's legal text is not ready) and the question
for the ballot has been stated.  The vote is not legally binding (except in Alberta
I think), but that does not mean it will have no effect.  No politician is crazy
enough to pass something in their province which has a 20% approval rating (unless
he really doesn't like his job), so these people will force change.

|> --I will indeed vote on Referendum Day, but only because I have contributed
|> to the cost of the campaign. Don't let anyone tell you any different: a Yes
|> vote and a No vote will have the identical non-existent effect. This is,
|> after all, only a plebiscite which for some ungodly propagandist reason is
|> being referred to as a "referendum".

I completely disagree - anytime we participate in the democratic process and
make our voices known we have accomplished something.  This, in my mind, is
one of the best ways to spend my tax dollars.

VOTE in the referendum, either YES or NO!!!!

If you do not, you give up your right to comment on it.  

Don
My brain, my thoughts, my words.
If I had a million dollars, I'd buy you a K-car (a nice reliant automobile),
If I had a million dollars, I'd buy you a fur coat
  (but not a real fur coat, that's cruel),
If I had a million dollars, we wouldn't have to eat Kraft Dinner
  (but we would eat Kraft Dinner), of course we would, we'd just eat more. - BNL
From: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Subject: Re: October 26th Referendum
Reply-To: knight@mrco.carleton.ca (Alan Knight)
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 18:16:41 GMT

In <1992Sep29.163050.8422@mdivax1.uucp> robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson) writes:

>The floor provision, on the other hand, presents serious long term dangers.
>In 40 or 50 years it is quite possible that BC's population will equal
>Quebec's. However, because of Quebec's 25% floor in the HoC, BC will be
>seriously under-represented and a major inequity will exist in terms of
>relative power. This is simply not fair (please argue otherwise if you

Why do you single out BC as being seriously under-represented in this
case?  If Quebec drops to being less than 25% of the population, due
to increases in B.C. or anywhere else, then the rest of the country
would be under-represented, but it would be evenly spread throughout
all the other provinces.
  Historically, in fact, Ontario (and presumably other high-population
density areas) have been under-represented, while places like northern
Manitoba are over-represented.

-- 
 Alan Knight  knight@mrco.carleton.ca  +1 613 788 2600x5783   Join
 Dept. of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering                the
 Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1S 5B6        LPF

Newsgroups: can.general,ott.general,can.politics
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: October 26th Referendum
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 1992 22:13:56 GMT

In article <1992Oct2.124812.1199@bcrka451.bnr.ca> sjm@bcrki65.bnr.ca (Stuart MacMartin) writes:
>I've heard a lot of strange reasons to vote "no".  To list a few
>(paraphrased, not direct quotes, and not all from here):
>
>> We can't trust politicians, and especially not these ones.
>> They should not be allowed to touch the constitution.
>
>  And just how is the current constitution to be changed, then?
>

Elected constitutional conventions to propose options and texts,
the people and legislatures to debate and ratify.

>> They should be working on the economy, and jobs.
>
>  Like it or not, the constitution is linked to the economy.
>  Foreign investment likes a stable country, and until our
>  country is stable, foreign investment is harder to get and keep.
>  This affects the dollar and interest rates.  (Mind you, the "Yes" side
>  rhetoric is probably inflaming the problem the last few weeks.)
>  The constitution is one of the most important things for our
>  politicians to work on if we want economic stability.
>

If you read the leading business commentators for the Toronto Star
(David Crane, Mr. Industrial Policy) and for the Globe and Mail
(Terence Corcoran, Mr. Free-Enterprise), both suggest that 
Charlottetown is bad for the economy and will lead to a worse
business and economic environment for the challenges we face,
mainly because of the increased bureaucracy and government and
the chaotic provisions for bilateral accords to confuse what
level of government is responsible for what, and they specifically say
the provisions for training and telecommunications are not good
for the future global economy.

That Charlottetown will bring more stability is a dubious proposition.

>> This constitutional wrangling has been going on too long.  Let's give
>  them a clear message by voting "No".
>
>  ...which will only force constitutional wrangling and possible political
>  breakup wrangling to continue.
>

There are 20 some asterisks in Charlottetown, and the official position
of the Quebec Liberal Party remains the Allaire Report and that Quebec
fully maintains its right to self-determination.

>
>> We mustn't give up our representation by population.
>
>  We never had it.  A party can control the country without anywhere near
>  a majority.  If I vote but the person I vote for does not get elected,
>  I have *no* representation.  Furthermore, a party can control the country
>  when it has been given a sound defeat in certain large regions of the
>  country.  How else could Trudeau have ignored the west?  The west is
>  a political non-entity.  This agreement does nothing to fix the first
>  problem, but at least ensures that major regions of the country cannot
>  be totally mistreated or ignored.  This is a major improvement over today.
>

BC and Alberta will be underrepresented in the Commons, the Senate, and
the Supreme Court.

Gerald
From: west@jade.ab.ca (Darrin West)
Subject: Too many for too few.
Organization: Jade Simulations International, Inc.
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 22:20:23 GMT

So the reformation proposal suggests 350 parliamentarians.  People are
worried about having to spend money to find room for that many chairs.

Realistically though, when does the growth stop?  To "adjust" the ratios,
more seats were added.  No one had the guts to go the other way.  Just try
taking some seats from Manitoba and Saskatewan to make the ratios better and
avoid the growth.  What happens when population rises?  The ratios are
adjusted (but the number of seats never goes down).  It maybe stays the same
if the population growth is even, but what if it is not.  First one place
grows and gets more seats to fix the ratio, then another grows and gets more
seats.  I think we should put an upper limit on the number of seats and bite
the bullet on telling a region that although their population didnt grow,
they must give up seats because they did not grow as much as the average.
Is there anything on the books about this?

Just imagine what it would be like in the states.  Ten times the population
at the same representation ratio would mean 3500 parliamentarians.  Nothing
would ever get done.

-- 
Darrin West, MSc.
  Jade Simulations International Corporation. west@jade.ab.ca
Newsgroups: can.general,ott.general,can.politics
From: ross@bnr.ca (Ross Brown)
Subject: Re: October 26th Referendum
Organization: Bell-Northern Research
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 16:02:43 GMT

In article <Bv5114.B3n@animal.er.bell.ca> alex@animal.Bell.CA (Alex Laney)
writes:
>Don't let the foggy naysayers make our country disappear!

Perhaps more than 50% of the voters will say No on the 26th, but among their
many reasons for voting No, there won't be one on which more than 20% of them
would agree.  (NAC might claim to represent 52% of the population, but they
don't really.)

If I were in government, I wouldn't take a No result too seriously.  We raised
a generation of analytical people, and they're bound to find fault somewhere in
the accord.  This is why they can say with a straight face (and I believe them)
that they *will* vote No but *don't* want our country to disappear.

From one Yes supporter to another, please try not to panic.

==============================================================================
Ross Brown, Dept. 7C22  < Bell-Northern Research     >  Just the facts, ma'am.
Advisor, Telemgmt Svcs  < P. O. Box 3511, Station C  >  We don't care whose
ross@bnr.ca             < Ottawa, ON, Canada K1Y 4H7 >  opinions yours aren't.
==============================================================================

Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,ott.general
From: marky@engin.umich.edu (Mark Anthony Young)
Subject: Re: October 26th Referendum
Date: Fri, 02 Oct 92 18:26:59 EDT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor

audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet) writes:
>
>In 40-50 years, the Constitution will have been changed numerous
>times. As soon as Quebec's share of the population goes more than a
>few percentage points below 25%, the rep-by-pop argment will surface
>again. The only benefit I see with it, is that it might give a bit of
>"monnaie d'echange". That 25% limit is a proof of how absurd these
>negociations were: "we don't want no non-proportional senate!",
>"shut-up and take 25% of the HoC". 
>
Absurd is right.  In order to get their cherished "Equal" Senate, the
EEE people not only traded away "Effective", but also agreed to an
_entrenched_ unrepresentative House.

I, for one, would have been much happier if they had given Quebec 20%
of an effective Senate and made the House _strictly_ rep-by-pop.  But
for some reason that one E was so much more important than the others.

As for the Constitution being changed "numerous times", that will only
happen if politicians stop trying to do everything at once.  These
"monster" revisions (Meech, Charlottetown) cause too much trouble.
As for the 25% provision, that will require unanimous consent to
change, and if Quebec continues to lose population wrt the rest of the
country, then it'll want something major to agree to drop it.  That
will only make other provinces jealous (they're such children, these
politicians), and _they_'ll want something major as well.

Unanimous consent is a _stupid_ policy for changing the Constitution.

>I don't see why PEI (any other province) should be allowed to be so
>over-represented NOW, but that the POSSIBILITY that Quebec becomes a
>bit over-represented in 40-50 years is that evil.
>
PEI is over-represented by _two_ seats today.  Given recent demographic
trends and the tendency of the HoC to grow, Quebec will likely be
over-represented by _twenty_ seats by the middle of the next century.
It's the _magnitude_ of the over-representation that's the issue.
(And that's why Quebec's extra 18 seats it gets immediately is not
such an issue -- they only bring Quebec from being somewhat under-
represented to somewhat over-represented, and that only for about
five years (until the post-2001 redistribution).)

...mark young
Newsgroups: can.general