HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns)
Subject: Re: Email Harrasment?
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 17:02:03 GMT

> 
> Obviously you didn't really read my reply before you sent me your emails, 
> that was exactly the way you were arguing things and that was why I told 
> you not to send me emails anymore. Now you try to use slander, fine, everyone 
> sees what's the nature of your presence here -- a policeman (that was your
> own description above, I just borrow from you) ? Perhaps a bandit is more 
> likely. How many times did you use fake names, anonymous emails, prove to us  
that
> you didn't use faked names in SCC. You action speaks for itself and what can  
I
> say? 
> 
> This would be my last reply both inpublic and in private. Please again, not  
to 
> bother me with emails, I didn't invite your for the discussion, did I ? You 
> always want the last word, don't you? Wasn't you sending me emails ignoring  
my 
> requests ? Well, you are welcomed to have it here.
> 
> Lin Can                                          
> 
> 

I have the same feeling. Yang Ze once put my name on somebody else's post. I  
still don't know why he did that. He also once told me that he would drop out  
of debate and never reply. But later, he did it again. I guess he feels better  
after he say the last word.

Carl
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: 129.83.161.10 (H. Chao)
Subject: RE:Shen Tong's Showdown (& F-16)
Organization: MITRE
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 14:22:34 GMT

Is ShenTong one of the bargain chips for selling F-16 to Taiwan?  Why
nobody (I mean U.S. Govermnent people) try to rescue him?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
From: cshi@cs.ulowell.edu (Chunde Shi)
Subject: Physics, Chemstry, Info Sce too! Re: Math Olympiad, China scored first.
Organization: University of Massachusetts at Lowell Computer Science
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1992 00:16:39 GMT

In article <gv8y-+@rpi.edu> kai@unix.cie.rpi.edu (Kai Yang) writes:
>
>  For those of you who're interested and haven't learned it
>already, China scored first in this year's IMO ( International
>Mathematical Olympiad ) that was held in Moscow.
>The first 5 teams were as follows :
>
>	1. China		240 p ( out of 252 )
>	2. USA			178 p
>	3. ROMANIA		177 p
>	4. Unified Team		176 p
>	5. England 		168 p


Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: usenet@news.acns.nwu.edu (Usenet on news.acns)
Subject: Re: F-16's fear?
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois, USA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 16:37:33 GMT

In article <65500097@acf3.NYU.EDU> yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , ) writes:
> v999qx29@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.edu writes:
> >In article <65500095@acf3.NYU.EDU>, yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , )  
writes...
> >> 
> >>Taiwan is a piece of land got back by China after we defeated Japan, I  
don't
> >>understand why Mr. Chang says it is a country, if it is a country as
> >>Mr. Chang claimed, there must be very few people know this.
> >> 
> >>By the way, when those asian countries were fighting Japan's invasion,
> >>where were those taiwanese boys and girls, they were not defending
> >>"their own country", I am sure some of them are serving their Japanese 
> >>masters, how did they become so tough in recent years?  
> >> 
> >>They don't have the right to say taiwan is a independent country now, 
> >>it's a piece of land owned by Chinese.
> >> 
> >> 
> >>Ze Yang
> 
> >Lets not talk about history in this matter. Or , how can you explain
> >that taiwan defended China against Japanese invasion in the Sino-Japanese
> >war but deserted by China . Where were mainland boys and girls when
> >Taiwanese succesfully stopped Japanese landing on the island. Probably
> >sucking Opium pipe on the bed then sold their brothers in Taiwan to
> >Japanese so that they can keep sucking their pipes. The wound Taiwanese
> >have suffered is painful enough and dosen't need anybody to worsen it.
> 
> Brave man cut off his wounded arm to survive himself, no
> matter what we do, there is only one purpose: survive and being strong.

Since you had bravely cut your wounded arm to survive yourself, you are not  
supposed to get it back. Check your logics! Next time, say something logical.

Carl
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:25527 soc.culture.taiwan:13345
Organization: Queen's University at Kingston
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 12:29:18 EDT
From: <FUH@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Test, Please Ignore
 <1992Sep10.063228.27583@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
 <14SEP92.19522193@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw>

This is only a test.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,talk.politics.china
From: wangf@unixg.ubc.ca (Frank Wang)
Subject: Re: Is Zhu Rongji a conservative
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:57:33 GMT

In article <9209151514.AA24768@janus.ctr.columbia.edu> yjj@ctr.columbia.edu (Yuan Jiang) writes:
>
>When Li Peng called for a modest economic growth,
>he was called a "conservative" and a bad guy.
>
>When the "reformer" Deng Xiaoping called for speedy development,
>everyone including dissidents applauded.
>
>Now the "good guy" "reformer" Zhu Rongji calls for a slow down.
>Is he still a reformer?  How about Wang Bingqian.
>
>A deeper issue I've been trying to address: is Deng's
>campaign (typical CCP movement) style in developing
>economy really good for China?
>>              * * *  C h i n a   N e w s   D i g e s t  * * *
>2. Vice-premier Zhu Rongji Warning on "Runaway" Economy .................45
>3. Former Finance Minister Wang Bingqian Urges Economic Slowdown ........45

As an premier, Li Peng took the resposibility for the economy recovery
from 89 to 92.  He did well no matter how much we do not like him.
China's economy cannot be controlled buy either conservative or reformer
alone.  These two sides work just like opposition parties in western
countries.  The goal of ecomomic growth was very healthy at the beginning
of this year, about 7-10%.  Keep this growth rate for more years (as
long as possible), China's economy will be very strong.  It will have a
big say in world economy though it does not need high GNP per capital.
Deng Xiaoping is a trouble maker.  He is doing something like Mao did
in 1958, the BIG LEAP.  Short cut does not mean faster, in Chinese:
YU4 SU4 ZE2 BU4 DA2.  I came back in the end of July from Beijing.  I traveled
south and talked with some businessman from fairly big companies in 
Beijing. The too fast ecom. growth (reforming) has already caused
their companies troubles then.  Ordinay people did not feel harsh on
the retail price then but if the government do not do anything on 
the growth, they will feel bad soon.  Zhu Rongji is doing the right
thing.  Li Peng did the right thing on econ. last few years.  Deng
Xiaopin did something wrong.  He should be a real retiree.  Please
go home to write a book, Deng.

Reform is necessary but it can't be too fast.   


F. Wang
From: yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , )
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan (Stop Stereotypes)
Date: 7 Sep 92 18:02:00 GMT
Organization: New York University

cyc@z.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang) writes:

>The reason is very simple, almost every Taiwanese want to be their own 
>boss and start a small bussiness, but very few want to be employed by a big
>company. 

I know that befor hearing from you, but that won't work, you have to
consider other people's interst also, find a better excuse for
TI.

>Yi-Chieh

Ze Yang
From: lix@murray.bu.edu (Xiaowen Li)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Chinese culture
Date: 14 Sep 92 00:36:48 GMT
Organization: Boston University

In article <1992Sep13.223119.5922@tamsun.tamu.edu> x0y3510@tamuts.tamu.edu (Xuejun Yang) writes:
>(deleted)
>get real, be realistic and objective. Don't apply rich people's 
>way of thinking on poor people, that's so-called Chinese reality but
>I doubt if poor is equal to bad culture.      

Not equal, but being poor itself suggests something wrong in Chinese
culture. We, especially young people, are responsible to learn from
western cultures, and find out exactly what is wrong in Chinese one.

It is not easy, but in 80,000 CSS, there must be someones.
--
From: cqu@ringer.cs.utsa.edu (Chang-ning Qu)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: Insensitive mainland chauvinist view.
Date: 15 Sep 92 04:50:53 GMT
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio

In article <1992Sep12.001230.15450@shmps.ohio-state.edu> jchang@shmps.ohio-state.edu writes:
>For all you insensitive, bloody thirsty, chavinistic pigs from mainland,
>go back to hell, that is where you belong.
>
>For all you scum bags who want to take Taiwan using force, may your
>descendants be cursed and suffer.
>
>For all you shit face who hate Taiwanese and support CCP's agression
>toward Taiwan, go home and f**k yourself.



   It seems you are very rude and bad mannered.
I just assume not all high-educated students
from Taiwan with this way of behavior like you.
Newsgroup is a place of talking and convey the
individual opinion on different issues and this
is very helpful to understand each other.
   you could claim your point of view if you
agree or disagree something, but just don't
show your ugly inside in public by posting dirty
and insulting words!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Organization: Computing Technology Services, Michigan Technological Univ.
Date: Sunday, 13 Sep 1992 23:29:36 EST
From: Tao Yao <TAYAO@MTUS5.BITNET>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: CCDOS needed

Hi netters:
     Any one know where can I get CCDOS used on IMB-PC? If you know,
Please e-mial me. Thanks very much. :)   ^_^

tayao@mtus5.cts.mtu.edu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: roten@CUBA.gsfc.nasa.gov (Charles Roten)
Subject: Re: Seng Tong and Chinese Politics
Organization: /cuba_b/dirbe/roten/.organization
X-Newsreader: GNU Emacs 18.57.1, GNUS 3.13, NNTP 3.10
	<92251.121943CHENJC@QUCDN.QueensU.CA>
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 21:31:00 GMT

In article <92251.121943CHENJC@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> 
CHENJC@QUCDN.QueensU.CA writes:

>In article <1992Sep7.075530.16330@mariner.amc.edu.au>, 
>lwang@mariner.amc.edu.au (Lou  Wang) says:
>> the other admiration stuff on ST deleted.
>The whole China will benefit from Seng Tongs' actions.
>>..............
>   Don't bother, and no interest to comment your whole shit, but can't 
>   help feel funny to see your above words. You over-emphasized ST's 
>   showdown, man!

>   JC

After reading articles like this one, I understand why some Chinese folks 
feel pessimistic about their culture.  

I hope that I am just reading the ravings of an emotional 5 year old in 
the body of a college student.  _That_, I can understand. 

--
Charles Roten | Hughes-STX, Incorporated | 
  roten@cuba.gsfc.nasa.gov               | 'Use the Source, Luke!'
  7601 Ora-Glen Dr., Greenbelt, MD 20706 | 
  301-513-7805 (w),  301-317-0872 (h)    |            Obi-Wan Stallman
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.hongkong
From: dht@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Joyous Dave baby)
Subject: Re: Territory of Ancient China : Collection
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 03:06:07 GMT

claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu) writes:

>After reading some of your posts, I have a feeling that your sources might have
>been influenced by a will to glorify China's past, so they usually exaggerated
>its borders and influences.

Very possibly, the mainland version seems to record bigger territories than
the Taiwanese version.

The source is:

Zhong Guo   Li Shi    Di Tu   Ji
(China      History   Map     Collection)

Published in PR China by Di Tu  Chu Ban She
                         (Map   Publisher)

It's a collectiono eight books full of maps.

-- 
1)-----------------------Rev 6:8 "... They were given authority over a quarter
of the Earth, to kill by the sword, by famine, by plague, and wild beasts."
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:25066 soc.culture.taiwan:13011 soc.culture.hongkong:10572
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.hongkong
From: liuyh@vis.toronto.edu (Yuanhui Liu)
Subject: Re: Territory of Ancient China : Shang Dynasty
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 8 Sep 92 18:41:38 GMT

In article <9225200.20499@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> dht@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Joyous Dave baby) writes:
>**Period:
>
>1751 B.C. -> 1111 B.C.
>
>**Dynasty:
>
>Shang Dynasty, the first Chinese Dynasty with a detailed record history.
>
>**Area under Central Control:
>
>Same as Xia Dynasty, plus modern Province of GanSu.
>
>**Area under Central Influence:
>
>none.
>
>**Neighbouring States/Tribes/Civilizations:
>
>Mongolians continued to be a threat.
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

just want to point out, the threatening nomads in the north at the
time are not mogolians, there were various tribes, some later mixed
with Han Chinese.  


>Tribe in the south (same as Xia Dynasty).
>
>-- 
>1)-----------------------Rev 6:8 "... They were given authority over a quarter
>of the Earth, to kill by the sword, by famine, by plague, and wild beasts."


Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: s9874194@phobos.ucc.umass.edu (s9874194)
Subject: Joint News Paper
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 14:20:00 GMT


I just read this week's HXWZ. I am very glad to see that Beijing is going
to have its first newspaper published by a joint venture. Beijing has 
recently started loosing its control on publications. It is the first
step toward freedom of press, as well as the freedom of speech. I always
believe that the process of liberal and democratization will follow
the vigrous and steady economic growth. I think that this is another
step toward the direction.

c.q.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: sichao@bnr.ca (Sichao Wang)
Subject: Save SCC as a clean land !
Reply-To: sichao@bnr.ca (Sichao Wang)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Fri, 04 Sep 92 22:38:43 GMT

Dear SCC readers,

   We have been seeing too much dirty personal attacks in this group.
   It makes people feel so sick and disgusting. Is that part of Chinese
   "culture"? At least I don't agree. Behave yourself, ladies and 
   gentlemen! Don't make other Chinese feel disgraced for a few uneducated p    
   persons who seems loudly discussing the so-called democracy!

   When disccussing a problem, there are always many disputes over the topic. 
   People with different understandings will have different points of views.
   That's OK. That's why there is a discussion. Use your rational logics, use 
   your evidence, and prove your points. Personal attacks don't justify 
   anything, it only makes people see more about the attacker's ugly face.

   Please remember the name of this group: social-CULTURE-china! Save this
   group! Leave it as a CLEAN land!

 

    

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: cyc@z.eecs.umich.edu (Yi-Chieh Chang)
Subject: Re: 150 F-16 to Taiwan
Keywords: F16, Americans, Chinese
Organization: University of Michigan EECS Dept., Ann Arbor
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 00:02:41 GMT

In article <1992Sep4.032442.11281@u.washington.edu> yuliu@milton.u.washington.edu (Yu Liu) writes:
>I heard this news from a radio talk show. I think from any points of view, it
>is a bad news for both mainland and Taiwan. I don't agree unification by arms,
>nor do I like Taiwan independence. To my surprise, many American callers said
>"It doesn't matter that we sell them..", "I feel all right to do so", or 
>"It should be done a long time ago". Yes, the American goverment is sending
>the killing machines to OUR motherland, not to these American's home yard,
>as it has been doing so to many other countries. So they can just sit there
>and watch the two tigers fight, and at the same time enjoy getting billions of
>dollars. What a dirty politics! A few days ago, we did donation to south
>Florida to help people from the hurricane. Now, the American is selling
>fighters to our home, and they feel it is all right. When the Americans are
>suffering, we give them a hand, and when we have argument, they send us a gun.
>Shame the Americans!
>
>Y. Liu
>------------------------------------
>Disclaimer: All views presented here are my own, not UW's.
>yuliu@milton.u.washington.edu

I think the selling of F-16 is a good news to Taiwanese, especially TIers,
but definitely bad news for Chinese. Arm race is a bad thing for sure, but
when the bad guys got the gun what you can do about it ? You can either
unarm them or arm yourselves if you don't want to get killed.
Taiwan's buying F-16 is only a sign that all Chinese should learn and
remember forever that Taiwanese have every intention to make their own 
decision on their own future. Taiwan is Taiwanese business none of Chinese'
business. 

Yi-Chieh
From: v999qx29@ubvmsd.cc.buffalo.e[Adu
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: Re: F-16's fear?
Date: 9 Sep 92 02:41:00 GMT
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <65500111@acf3.NYU.EDU>, yangze@acf3.NYU.EDU (Ze Yang, , , ) writes...
>xyang@bcars279.UUCP writes:
> 
>>Chinese"? BTW, Chairman Mao was the best in such thing -- how many 
>>innocent citizens died during Culture Revolution in the hands of other 
>>citizens? Please note that only very few (or close to none) died 
> 
>Reason for culture revolution can be so simple, our society need change,
>people can feel that the old way doesn't work, that's the reason.
> 
>Ze Yang

Or Mao need to get his power back?
Xref: sparky soc.culture.china:24868 soc.culture.taiwan:12890
From: joe@astro.as.utexas.edu (Joe Wang)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
Subject: Re: Mainland China is #3 Economic Superpower?! :-(
Date: 5 Sep 92 23:58:03 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.china
Organization: McDonald Observatory, University of Texas @ Austin

In article <Bty2vH.Lr7@multisys.com> rot@multisys.com (Republic of Taiwan) writes:
>What's good of a huge country?

Large markets with uniform economic regulations tend to generate more
wealth than small markets.  There are several reasons for this.  With
a huge country, there's less administrative cost in moving goods and
services over long distances.  With a huge country, you can use
economies of scale to produce products at lower cost.  (The unit cost
of producing a billion toothbrushes, for example, is going to be less
than the unit cost of producing ten million toothbrushes, because a
large percentage of the costs are fixed.)  Also with a huge country,
you can pool resources in a way that you can't with a little country.
Finally, a manufacturer in a huge country is likely to face more
economic competition than a manufacturer in a small country, and
competition improves products.

Also, a huge country is more likely to take a look at the big picture.
If you have a collection of little countries, then each country may be
tempted to take action that benefits it, but hurts them collectively.

Finally, a huge country is in a better position to negotiate with
outside countries than a collection of small countries.  With a group
of small countries, an outside power can try and use a divide and
conquer strategy, and to turn one group of countries against another.

Of these reasons, the one that Sun Yat-Sen gave as a justification for
"big China" was mainly the third one.  He reasoned, that if the
various provinces did not cooperate, then China would be split apart
by the great powers.  Times, of course, have changed, and this reason
is much less important now that China has no serious direct military
threat to its existence.  Competition has shifted from
military-political to economics, and the strongest reasons today for
the creation of a "Greater China" are more economic than
military-political.  Indeed, the method by which a "Greater China" is
being created is more economic and military-political.

Of course there are disadvantages to a huge country.  The governments
of huge countries may be less equipped to deal with local problems and
needs, and may not understand local situations.  Huge countries may
result in governments that are more inflexible and resistant to change
because they are bigger.  Also, citizens in a huge country can
sometimes feel alienated from a central government that is far away.

The thing to try and do is to create governmental structures for China
which have both the advantages of a huge country and a collection of
little countries.  Not easy, but I think it can be done.

>Can we have enough food to eat with a huge country?

(See my comment about markets.)



Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan,soc.culture.hongkong
From: claudius@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nelson Lu)
Subject: Re: Territory of Ancient China : Qin (Chin) Dynasty
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 01:55:26 GMT

In article <9225200.20803@mulga.cs.mu.OZ.AU> dht@cs.mu.OZ.AU (Joyous Dave baby) writes:
>**Period:
>
>221 B.C. -> 206 B.C.
>
>**Dynasty:
>
>Qin Dynasty (also known as Chin Dynasty), Qin is also the first
>"Son of Heaven" or Emperor of China.
>
>**Area under Central Control:
>
>North:  it reaches the Great Wall of China, which was built by Qin,
>and extends from Western end of modern Inner Mongolia to modern
>North Korea.

Nope.  The records that I've read *specifically* said that northern Korea
(which Yen, one of the 7 powers in the Warring States period, *did* control)
was lost when Chin took over Yen, because it was too far away.

>**Area under Central Influence:
>
>It also occupied modern Taiwan and HaiNan Islands.

Huh?  Hai Nan, perhaps, but it had nothing to do with Taiwan.

>**Neighbouring States/Tribes/Civilizations:
>
>Mongolians became a much lesser threat with the completion of
>the Great Wall of China.  However, tribes in the West and
>SouthWest continued to be threats.

You should say "Hsiung-Nu" not Mongolians.  The people of Hsiung-Nu were
probably closer in stock to present-day *Hungarians* than Mongolians.
From: ABC@DEF.GHI.JK.LMN
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
Subject: TEST ONLY
Date: 4 Sep 92 05:44:37 GMT


		TEST ONLY, PLEASE IGNORE.
Organization: Sydney University Computing Service, Sydney, NSW, Australia
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 05:23:24 GMT
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.taiwan
From: u322543@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw
Subject: RE: Who Cares 150 F-16s.
Organization: Computer Center, NCU, Taiwan, R.O.C.
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 19:52:21 GMT



>>After five years, these plans may be nothing but toys.
>Toys?  How about MIG-29 after five years?

 It depends on the performance, structure, design and price of the fighter. For
 example, F-104 and MiG-21 are almost the fighters appeared at the same time,
 but almost no other country except Taiwan is using F-104s now and MiG-21s
 (or Jian-7) is still widly used. It is over 30 years.

--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
- Yishao Lai                    -
= u322543@twncu865.ncu.edu.tw   =
- u328385@sparc20.ncu.edu.tw    -
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china,soc.culture.japan,soc.history
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Subject: Re: US Ironclads (Was: Re: US colonializing )
In-reply-to: yjhbhc@dante.lbl.gov's message of 10 Sep 92 19:30:53 GMT
Organization: pubs
	<ROTEN.92Aug31133031@CUBA.gsfc.nasa.gov>
	<1992Sep1.145046.5533@news2.cis.umn.edu> <1992Sep2.053823.28489@anasaz>
	<BuByro.2HA@cs.dal.ca> <CB.92Sep10112746@tamarack13.timbuk>
	<26215@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
Date: 11 Sep 92 11:38:55 CDT

I wrote:

   >The first important iron ship was, I believe, the Dreadnought (I could
   >have the name wrong).

Joe Huang writes:

   The Dreadnought was built in around 1904 at the height of the naval
   arms race between England and Germany. ...

Well, at least I qualified my misidentification!  OK, I had the wrong
name, but there *was* an English ship of about 1870, to which my posting
applied; I think the rest of what I said was correct.  See Scientific
American, about 2 years ago.

Chris Brewster
cb@cray.com

Newsgroups: soc.culture.china
From: xia@slab.unt.edu (Hong Xia)
Subject: A Test
Keywords: test
Organization: School of Library & Info Sci, UNT
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1992 18:35:07 GMT

This is a test!!!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.china