HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: vanover@bcsaic.boeing.com (Jann VanOver)
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
Subject: Re: CFD: seattle.misc
Date: 1 Sep 92 19:18:57 GMT
Organization: Boeing Computer Services AI Center, Seattle

In article <klg.715279663@statsci> klg@statsci.com (Kevin L. Gross) writes:
>davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu (David W. Barts) writes:
>
>   In article <1992Aug30.211125.946@jazzie.com>, sds@jazzie.com (Sean Shapira) writes:
>   > [ edited ]
>   > Some might say, "Isn't that what seattle.general is used for?"
>   > Yes, but if seattle.misc existed, the content of seattle.general
>   > might focus just a bit more on topics of "general" interest to
>   > the Seattle community....  Crossposts would be fine, especially
>   > if the followups were directed to seattle.misc.  Personally, I
>   > would put seattle.misc to use quite regularly.
>   > 
>   > Comments, anyone?
>   
>   I think that this naming strategy would just confuse people.  It would
>   result in a lot of crossposted material (or incorrectly posted stuff).
>   
>   If the traffic volume on seattle.general gets large enough, I think it
>   is a better idea to create groups pertaining to the topic(s) that are
>   responsible for most of the volume.  Currently, the only topic I can
>   think of that would fit this description would be "seattle.politics".
>   
>   --
>   David Barts  N5JRN                      UW Civil Engineering, FX-10
>   davidb@ce.washington.edu                Seattle, WA  98195
>
>I wholeheartedly agree with David. Just scattering the postings to
>multiple groups would result in a lot of incorrect postings. The creation
>of seattle.politics would be the obvious volume cutter. 

Or seattle.callerid!  ;-)


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
VanOver@atc.boeing.com
       "Why don't y'all go home?"     Bette Davis in The Little Foxes
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: bruceki@polari.online.com
Subject: Re: mail from uunet to polari
Organization: Seattle Online Public Access Unix (206) 328-4944
Distribution: seattle
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 23:11:34 GMT

In article <1992Aug29.172010.352@ssc.wa.com> fyl@ssc.wa.com (Phil Hughes) writes:
[much deleted]
>For those of you on polari who are looking for your mail, sorry.  I will
>attempt to find a way to get the stuff we have here forwarded.  I suggest
>you ask Bruce or whoever what mail paths work this week.

  Our logon banner states the email address you should use:

  username@polari.online.com

  It's correctly routed and fast.  We've had that logon banner up
for over 4 months now; if folks are using other paths for their mail
it's up to them.  
  Bruce
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: bruceki@polari.online.com
Subject: Re: mail from uunet to polari
Keywords: grumble
Organization: Seattle Online Public Access Unix (206) 328-4944
Distribution: seattle
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 1992 17:41:12 GMT

In article <1992Aug28.192127.2479@ssc.wa.com> fyl@ssc.wa.com (Phil Hughes) writes:
>ssc, then cell-one, then mcgp1 to get to polari.  So, I looked in the
>uunet map.  No polari.
>
>So, first, why isn't polari in the uunet map?  Second, is this happening
>to others (that is, forwarding zillions of messages for polari) locally?
>Finally, can this be fixed?

  Phil, first, if you have a question about polari why not mail root@polari
or postmaster@polari?  

  Second we've switch for reasons of economics to a psi-based news and
mail feed; folks who use our domain name or let smart mailers send their
mail get to us via uupsi4 & company.  If folks send their mail explicitly
through uunet to polari they're doing it by hand; or at least thats how
I'm figuring it. 


  Bruce
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: ralphs@halcyon.com (Ralph Sims)
Subject: Re: Feed Capacity Available
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc. (206) 455-3505
Distribution: seattle
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 19:15:15 GMT

kelsey@mdd.comm.mot.com (Joe Kelsey) writes:

>In <1992Sep3.181138.3689@stephsf.com> wengland@stephsf.com (Bill England) writes:

>>   With the Demise of Polari as a news  distributer (Bruce switched 
>>   to PSI who, I believe, does not allow Usenet to their customers to 
>>   be redistributed.)

>Note that PSI physically cannot place such a restriction on any site.  What
>PSI attempts to do through contract restrictions involves preventing a site
>that pays for leaf-node service from forwarding posts from downstream sites.
>You can easily get around this restriction by simply forwarding your
>downstream posts through an alternate site -- something easy to arrange since
>the post volume generally amounts to a trickle compared to the receive
>volume...

....or by paying the rates they want for the 'forwarding'.  Shouldn't
be any more than $500/month. ;-(
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu (David W. Barts)
Subject: Re: CFD: seattle.misc
Summary: too confusing
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 04:26:14 GMT

In article <1992Aug30.211125.946@jazzie.com>, sds@jazzie.com (Sean Shapira) writes:
> [ edited ]
> Some might say, "Isn't that what seattle.general is used for?"
> Yes, but if seattle.misc existed, the content of seattle.general
> might focus just a bit more on topics of "general" interest to
> the Seattle community....  Crossposts would be fine, especially
> if the followups were directed to seattle.misc.  Personally, I
> would put seattle.misc to use quite regularly.
> 
> Comments, anyone?

I think that this naming strategy would just confuse people.  It would
result in a lot of crossposted material (or incorrectly posted stuff).

If the traffic volume on seattle.general gets large enough, I think it
is a better idea to create groups pertaining to the topic(s) that are
responsible for most of the volume.  Currently, the only topic I can
think of that would fit this description would be "seattle.politics".

--
David Barts  N5JRN                      UW Civil Engineering, FX-10
davidb@ce.washington.edu                Seattle, WA  98195
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: klg@statsci.com (Kevin L. Gross)
Subject: Re: CFD: seattle.misc
Reply-To: klg@statsci.com (Kevin L. Gross)
Organization: Statistical Sciences, Inc
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:47:43 GMT

davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu (David W. Barts) writes:

   In article <1992Aug30.211125.946@jazzie.com>, sds@jazzie.com (Sean Shapira) writes:
   > [ edited ]
   > Some might say, "Isn't that what seattle.general is used for?"
   > Yes, but if seattle.misc existed, the content of seattle.general
   > might focus just a bit more on topics of "general" interest to
   > the Seattle community....  Crossposts would be fine, especially
   > if the followups were directed to seattle.misc.  Personally, I
   > would put seattle.misc to use quite regularly.
   > 
   > Comments, anyone?
   
   I think that this naming strategy would just confuse people.  It would
   result in a lot of crossposted material (or incorrectly posted stuff).
   
   If the traffic volume on seattle.general gets large enough, I think it
   is a better idea to create groups pertaining to the topic(s) that are
   responsible for most of the volume.  Currently, the only topic I can
   think of that would fit this description would be "seattle.politics".
   
   --
   David Barts  N5JRN                      UW Civil Engineering, FX-10
   davidb@ce.washington.edu                Seattle, WA  98195

I wholeheartedly agree with David. Just scattering the postings to
multiple groups would result in a lot of incorrect postings. The creation
of seattle.politics would be the obvious volume cutter. I don't agree that
the volume is large enough to warrant any new groups, but the increasing
volume of politic'n in seattle.general might be a generating factor for
seattle.politics.
-- 
-Kevin L. Gross          klg@statsci.com           Disclaim THIS: 
 This message is protected under the 1st Amendment to the Constitution
 of the United States of America. I'm protected under the 4th, 5th and
 9th Amendments among others, or at least I used to be.
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: wengland@stephsf.com (Bill England)
Subject: Re: Seattle Newsgroups (was CFD: seattle.misc)
    <1992Sep3.175406.3591@stephsf.com>
Distribution: seattle
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 00:59:26 GMT
Organization: Stephen Software Systems Inc., Tacoma/Seattle, +1 800 829 1684
X-Bytes: 1029

In article <1992Sep3.175406.3591@stephsf.com> wengland@stephsf.com (Bill England) writes:
>  I've started a little experiment that will show just how much
>  circulation of seattle.general depends on stephsf.com.  I have
>  been forwarding seattle.general to uunet.uu.net for about three
>  years.  This has now been discontinued.  The volume may  drop
>  of substantially at least to sites connected to soundex  com. 

  Direct connections affected are soundex and uunet.  Rosedale,
  Tacoma, and Stephsf still are relayed a full seattle feed from 
  uunet.

  I intended to switch seattle completely back on  if the volume
  in the group drops.  (Hopefully I'm not the only one who leaks
  the feed to uunet.)
-- 
 +-  Bill England,  wengland@stephsf.COM -----------------------------------+
 |   * *      H -> He +24MeV                                                |
 |  * * * ... Oooo, we're having so much fun making itty bitty suns *       |
 |__ * * ___________________________________________________________________| 
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: wengland@stephsf.com (Bill England)
Subject: Re: Seattle Newsgroups (was CFD: seattle.misc)
    <klg.715279663@statsci> <BtxMrt.MyK@kimbro.uucp>
Distribution: seattle
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 00:54:06 GMT
Organization: Stephen Software Systems Inc., Tacoma/Seattle, +1 800 829 1684
X-Bytes: 2089

In article <BtxMrt.MyK@kimbro.uucp> briank@kimbro.Celestial.COM writes:
>klg@statsci.com (Kevin L. Gross) writes:
>>[...]

>There is more than just article count to be considered here.
>
>As Bill England keeps pointing out, seattle general is distributed
>to more than 10 percent (if I remember correctly) of all usenet
>sites.  I did a sendsys to seattle distribution and got back 3/4
>of a meg in sys files.  Many were from way outside the pnw area.
>Quite a few were from Europe.  For their own reasons, a lot of
>people seem to want to keep in touch with *our* :-) region.
>
>Breaking up the seattle newsgroup(s) and creating a few new groups
>would seem to be the proper thing to do.  If some people want to
>cross-post among the various groups, well let them.  No harm is

  If the volume really warrented it.  As I remember this seattle.admin
  group just barely passed even after I tvery loosely interpeted
  the Network voting guidelines.  Strict interp of the rules
  would have indicated this group should never have existed.

  I've started a little experiment that will show just how much
  circulation of seattle.general depends on stephsf.com.  I have
  been forwarding seattle.general to uunet.uu.net for about three
  years.  This has now been discontinued.  The volume may  drop
  off substantially at least to sites connected to soundex com. 


>-- 
>D. Brian Kimmel - home system	(206) 937-5742      Modem: (206) 937-6779
>briank@Kimbro.UUCP              uunet!camco!kimbro!briank
>briank@Kimbro.SeaSlug.ORG
>-- 
>D. Brian Kimmel - home system	(206) 937-5742      Modem: (206) 937-6779
>briank@Kimbro.UUCP              uunet!camco!kimbro!briank
>briank@Kimbro.SeaSlug.ORG


   Tch, Tch ... Brian!  You DOUBLE SIGED!  (and on an RFD no less   ;-)   )


-- 
 +-  Bill England,  wengland@stephsf.COM -----------------------------------+
 |   * *      H -> He +24MeV                                                |
 |  * * * ... Oooo, we're having so much fun making itty bitty suns *       |
 |__ * * ___________________________________________________________________| 
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: markz@ssc.wa.com (Mark Zenier)
Subject: Re: CFD: seattle.misc
Organization: SSC, Inc.,  Seattle, WA
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 17:55:01 GMT
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

davidb@zeus.ce.washington.edu (David W. Barts) writes:
: If the traffic volume on seattle.general gets large enough, I think it
: is a better idea to create groups pertaining to the topic(s) that are
: responsible for most of the volume.  Currently, the only topic I can
: think of that would fit this description would be "seattle.politics".

I'd go for seattle.telcom, right now.  ;-)

Mark Zenier  markz@ssc.wa.com  

Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: fyl@fylz.wa.com (Phil Hughes)
Subject: Re: mail from uunet to polari
Organization: FYL
Distribution: seattle
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 03:14:39 GMT
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

bruceki@polari.online.com writes:
: In article <1992Aug28.192127.2479@ssc.wa.com> fyl@ssc.wa.com (Phil Hughes) writes:
: >ssc, then cell-one, then mcgp1 to get to polari.  So, I looked in the
: >uunet map.  No polari.
: >
: >So, first, why isn't polari in the uunet map?  Second, is this happening
: >to others (that is, forwarding zillions of messages for polari) locally?
: >Finally, can this be fixed?
: 
:   Phil, first, if you have a question about polari why not mail root@polari
: or postmaster@polari?  

The best reason I can think of is that I was on a system that would
try to send mail through mcgp1 to polari.  If you read the beginning
of my message you would realize that was the problem.  Mail to polari
would have been routed by the same (defunct) path.  Second, the
question wasn't just for polari, it was to determine if others were
having the same problem.  Seems like seattle.admin would be a
reasonable place for those questions.

:   Second we've switch for reasons of economics to a psi-based news and
: mail feed; folks who use our domain name or let smart mailers send their
: mail get to us via uupsi4 & company.  If folks send their mail explicitly
: through uunet to polari they're doing it by hand; or at least thats how
: I'm figuring it. 

Many of the hundreds of messages that I forwarded for you (you don't
have to send money, just recommend SSC pocket references for UNIX, ...
to your 3041 users) were from mailing lists.  I don't know (or care)
what method they were using to route the messages but I suggest that
polari users contact these list servers and get the situation
corrected.

Many mailers (ssc's for example) would have rerouted the messages
except we still thought mcgp1 was alive.  On this system I now have a
local entry to reroute polari and online.com mail through uupsi4.
However, your own map entry still indicates a uunet connection.
Based on that, I would have expected uunet to forward stuff to you.
Or, when you terminated the uunet connection you would have asked
uunet to forward your mail to psi.

On the productive end uunet has now been asked to forward your stuff
to psi, you have been made aware that your map entry is apparently
wrong, ssc and others (I expect you are included on that list) know
that they should delete their mcgp1 connection and Seattle will
become a better connected neighborhood (or at least Seattle maps will
become more accurate).

Again, telling everyone on your system to buy an SSC pocket reference
would be nice but a simple thank you for my efforts to "get the mail
through" would be sufficient.
-- 
Phil Hughes - FYL - 8315 Lk City Wy NE - Suite 207 - Seattle, WA 98115 
Phone: 206-526-2919 x74      Fax: 526-0803
E-mail: fyl@fylz.com or nwnexus!fylz!fyl or cpac.washington.edu!fylz!fyl
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: ralphs@halcyon.com (Ralph Sims)
Subject: Re: mail from uunet to polari
Organization: Northwest Nexus Inc. (206) 455-3505
Distribution: seattle
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 02:26:06 GMT

bruceki@polari.online.com writes:

>In article <1992Aug29.172010.352@ssc.wa.com> fyl@ssc.wa.com (Phil Hughes) writes:

>>For those of you on polari who are looking for your mail, sorry.  I will
>>attempt to find a way to get the stuff we have here forwarded.  I suggest
>>you ask Bruce or whoever what mail paths work this week.

>  Our logon banner states the email address you should use:

>  username@polari.online.com

>  It's correctly routed and fast.  We've had that logon banner up
>for over 4 months now; if folks are using other paths for their mail
>it's up to them.  

Bruce, you're sounding cynical.  There is a problem with your site's
mail.  There's been a problem in the past with email replies to news
postings your users make.  Instead of saying it's someone else's
problem you should be ensuring that your user's email will get to
them.  There's a problem in the maps, perhaps.  There's a problem
in your cutover from uunet to psi, perhaps.  But there definitely
seems to be a problem in your system's overall administration,
not perhaps.  You've grown beyond a one-admin site.  Instead of
resting on your mongo big laurels, you should take some serious
time to iron out the wrinkles.

Your local problems affect the entire electronic community in
the Seattle area.  Perhaps it's time to rethink your strategies.

Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: fyl@ssc.wa.com (Phil Hughes)
Subject: mail from uunet to polari
Organization: SSC, Inc.,  Seattle, WA
Distribution: seattle
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1992 19:21:27 GMT
Keywords: grumble

mcgp1 seems to be down.  We have about 180 messages queued for them.
But that is for only three days.  Normally we see a message or three a
day.

So, I looked to see where they were all going.  145 of them are to or
through polari.  Most of these messages came through uunet (and then
nwnexus) to get here.  In other words, we pay to forward this stuff.

Now, as we all know that polari talks to uunet directly I just didn't
understand what was happening -- why stuff was going through nwnexus, then
ssc, then cell-one, then mcgp1 to get to polari.  So, I looked in the
uunet map.  No polari.

So, first, why isn't polari in the uunet map?  Second, is this happening
to others (that is, forwarding zillions of messages for polari) locally?
Finally, can this be fixed?

This is not to say that ssc isn't willing to forward mail.  We have been
on the net for close to 10 years, have fed lots of stuff to lots of people
and generally spent a lot of money to take part in the cooperative effort.
But something is wrong here.

-- 
Phil Hughes, SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155  (206)FOR-UNIX
     uunet!nwnexus!ssc!fyl or fyl@ssc.wa.com            (206)527-3385

Newsgroups: seattle.admin,seattle.general
From: sds@jazzie.com (Sean Shapira)
Subject: CFD: seattle.misc
Followup-To: seattle.admin
Summary: Yet another seattle.* newsgroup?
Organization: Jazzie Systems, Seattle, Washington, USA
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 92 21:11:25 GMT

Suggestions like this come up fairly often, but perhaps it's
time to discuss one again.  Note that followups are directed
to seattle.admin.

Creating a seattle.misc newsgroup would have a beneficial 
effect on the overall seattle.* hierarchy.  The charter 
might be something like, "Anything of interest to one or 
more people in or interested in Seattle."  (Only one person 
need be interested in the topic, though only a few of us 
could keep up such one-sided "discussions" for long.  ;-)

Some might say, "Isn't that what seattle.general is used for?"
Yes, but if seattle.misc existed, the content of seattle.general
might focus just a bit more on topics of "general" interest to
the Seattle community....  Crossposts would be fine, especially
if the followups were directed to seattle.misc.  Personally, I
would put seattle.misc to use quite regularly.

Comments, anyone?
-- 
Sean Shapira        seans@microsoft.com        sds@jazzie.com
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: bruceki@polari.online.com
Subject: Re: Seattle Newsgroups (was CFD: seattle.misc)
Organization: Seattle Online Public Access Unix (206) 328-4944
Distribution: seattle
Date: Wed, 2 Sep 1992 19:46:05 GMT

In article <BtxMrt.MyK@kimbro.uucp> briank@kimbro.Celestial.COM writes:
[much deleted]
>
>There is more than just article count to be considered here.
>
>As Bill England keeps pointing out, seattle general is distributed
>to more than 10 percent (if I remember correctly) of all usenet
>sites.  I did a sendsys to seattle distribution and got back 3/4
>of a meg in sys files.  Many were from way outside the pnw area.
>Quite a few were from Europe.  For their own reasons, a lot of
>people seem to want to keep in touch with *our* :-) region.
[more deleted]

  Sorry; I don't consider this to be a valid reason.  seattle.* 
exists to serve the greater seattle and washington state area;
that other folks are interested in watching what goes on doesn't
enter into the picture.  If a new group or new split of an existing
group makes sense for the seattle or washington state area we should
do it.  The fact that folks in europe are getting the group doesn't
(shouldn't) make any difference at all.  

  Bruce  
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: wengland@stephsf.com (Bill England)
Subject: Feed Capacity Available
    <1992Sep3.175926.3630@stephsf.com>
Distribution: seattle
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1992 01:11:38 GMT
Organization: Stephen Software Systems Inc., Tacoma/Seattle, +1 800 829 1684
X-Bytes: 867

   With the Demise of Polari as a news  distributer (Bruce switched 
   to PSI who, I believe, does not allow Usenet to their customers to 
   be redistributed.)  Stephsf.com now has a bunck of unused news 
   feed capacity.

   I can provide a free news feed and e-mail forwarding to any site 
   that can dial Tacoma locally and is not a leaf site (ie currently has 
   one or more news feeds.) 


  (Please ... no solicitations of "Buy my great network service!".  
  Thanks but, I all ready have uunet and I know who the rest of 
  you are.)




-- 
 +-  Bill England,  wengland@stephsf.COM -----------------------------------+
 |   * *      H -> He +24MeV                                                |
 |  * * * ... Oooo, we're having so much fun making itty bitty suns *       |
 |__ * * ___________________________________________________________________| 
Newsgroups: seattle.admin
From: bruceki@polari.online.com
Subject: Re: mail from uunet to polari
Organization: Seattle Online Public Access Unix (206) 328-4944
Distribution: seattle
Date: Sun, 30 Aug 1992 11:50:45 GMT

In article <1992Aug30.022606.24637@nwnexus.WA.COM> ralphs@halcyon.com (Ralph Sims) writes:
>>bruceki@polari.online.com writes:
>>  Our logon banner states the email address you should use:
>>  username@polari.online.com
>
>Bruce, you're sounding cynical.  There is a problem with your site's

  Darn right I am.  Here's why:
  1) Mail ORIGINATING FROM polari is correctly routed
  2) Mail sent to the address that's listed for every user on logon is 
     routed correctly.  
  3) Mail sent from other sites that use our current map entry should
     be routed through uupsi4 -- we have the connection listed as DIRECT
     and the connection to uunet listed as DAILY -- much higher cost.  
  4) Mail sent to uunet SHOULD be rerouted at uunet through to uupsi4;
     that's the purpose of the domain name.  

  What precisely do you suggest I fix?   What'd I miss here?  

  Bruce
Newsgroups: wi.general
From: roth@ordin.cs.wisc.edu (Bill Roth)
Subject: Position papers available on ftp
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison -- Computer Sciences Dept.
Distribution: wi
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1992 14:04:49 GMT

For those of you who are interested, position papers for Bill Clinton
and Ada Deer (who is running for Congress in the Madison Area) can be
found on the ftp server at pslu1.psl.wisc.edu in the directories
/pub/politics/{clinton,deer}. 

For you political historians out there, position papers for Tom
Harkin's abortive bid for the presidency can also be found.
-- 

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Roth, University of Wisconsin Computer Sciences Dept.
Internet: roth@cs.wisc.edu. BITNET: ROTH@WISCPSL. HEPNET: PSL::ROTH
From: kah@vme.heurikon.com (Ken Heitke)
Newsgroups: wi.general
Subject: Are Bear games avail in Madison
Date: 2 Sep 92 00:00:29 GMT
Reply-To: kah@heurikon.heurikon.com (Ken Heitke)
Distribution: wi
Organization: Heurikon Corporation, Madison, WI

My brother is coming to town over the weekend and wants to watch the Bears
on Sunday (same time as Packers play).  Are there any fine establishments in
the Madison area that would happen to carry the Chicago games? 

			thanks,
			Ken Heitke	ken.heitke@heurikon.com

Newsgroups: wi.general,uwisc.general