HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: grp@dmu.ac.uk (Graham Perkins)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.cs.undergrad
Date: 22 Jan 93 12:03:15 GMT
Organization: De Montfort University, Leicester, UK.


>This is a request for discussion on the creation of a newsgroup
>for worldwide Computer Science Undergraduates.

>Group Name
>----------
>comp.cs.undergrad
>The group will be for the use of Undergraduate Computer Science Students.

We cannot afford the disk space, comms lines, and comms cost to put
even a subset of our undergraduates on international mail/news networks.
The existence of a group specifically for students would create massive
pressures in educational institutions worldwide for facilities which, really,
have marginal effect on the educational process.  Our resources are better
devoted to improving local software environments. 
                  

>It is intended mainly for the discussion of technical issues in an informal,
>undergraduate manner, as opposed to many other "comp.*" groups, where the 
>discussion is often far too obscure, and assumes more practical knowledge
>and experience than it is possible for an undergraduate to have obtained.

Surely the newsgroup structure should be based around subjects, rather
than readership status.  Most of the newsgroups receive discussions,
problems, and answers on a variety of levels: from simple syntax errors
to sophisticated issues of language design philosophy.  If an undergrad
newsgroup, why not another for lecturers, one for associate professors, 
another for senior/principal lecturers, another for departmental heads,
etcetera.. until nobody is communicating with anyone else outside
a very narrow peer group.


>Also, the group should be used to exchange hints and knowledge gained by
>other undergraduates that may be of interest to the world wide student body.
>This will enable a much richer supply of knowledge than can be supplied by 
>lectures alone.

o.k., us lecturers don't know much about our subjects in comparison
with the total global knowledge.  But you won't solve that problem
by creating a massive repository of hints and tips, many of which will
undoubtedly be incorrect!

Most of the proposed subject areas are already covered by other news groups.
If students wish to prepare themselves for future professional employment,
perhaps they would be best advised to read the ordinary newsgroups like
the rest of us professionals.

That's my opinion, sorry if it sounds a little harsh.
I'm fed up with having to turn down another half-a-dozen
new groups every time I get onto the news system!
From: chuckp@u.washington.edu (Chuck Pliske)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: RE: RFD: comp.sys.mac.pb
Date: 22 Jan 93 02:50:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: shelley.1jnne6INNefn
Distribution: world
Organization: University of Washington
NNTP-Posting-Host: chuckp.staffdev.washington.edu
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d17
X-XXMessage-ID: <A784A107CF01372A@chuckp.staffdev.washington.edu>
X-XXDate: Thu, 21 Jan 93 02:50:47 GMT

Re: RFD: comp.sys.mac.pb

I think its a fine idea.  There are many, many issues peculiar to pb's, 
and different from issues peculiar to laptops in general.  I would scan 
such a group, and welcome it.

Chuck
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: bartlone@med.ge.com (Michel Bartolone)
Subject: Re: Proposed startrek split
Reply-To: bartlone@med.ge.com
Organization: GE Medical Systems
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 21:26:17 GMT

I have a question. I have been listening in on a group that is thinking about discussing
a move from the alt to the rec. heirarchy. My question is not why, or something like
that, it is this..they have a certain number of people in the group that DO NOT have access
to the rec. groups, but DO have access to the alt. groups..so they might loose some people, but 
they stand to gain quite a bit..what I want to know is what can be done for those folks that only 
get the alt groups..can you have both, and have one just be an alias of the other on an official 
basis? I've heard that this is the case with alt.aquaria, rec.aquaria, and sci.aquaria..can any one
verify this?
---
bartlone@gemed.ge.com cs688@freenet-in-a.cwru.edu
From: genzuk@mizar.usc.edu (Michael Genzuk)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: PowerBook Newsgroup
Date: 27 Jan 1993 10:44:54 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: mizar.usc.edu


Stephen Graham writes:

>I'm opposed to a group specifically for Powerbooks. As others have pointed
>out, Powerbooks aren't the only Mac portables in existence nor will they
>be the only ones produced in the future. Comp.sys.mac.laptop makes much
>more sense.

As one of the supporters of the comp.sys.mac.powerbook group, I would have
no problem with a mac.laptop group.  My main objective is to limit the 
posts that must be sifted through to get to articles of interest to
Mac portable users.  My experience is that if you are away from the Net
for a few days, sometimes a few hours, mountains of posts accumulate.  By
the time many people sift through the articles it is easy to miss posts
in the area of concern.  I prefer a title of powerbook, but would be
receptive to laptop.  Symantics is less important to me than results.

Michael at USC
--
How monotonous the sounds of the forest would be if the music came only
Newsgroups: news.groups,comp.sys.mac.misc
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: PowerBook Newsgroup
Organization: Elitist Usenet Administrators, Stuff and Nonsense Division
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:55:15 GMT

In article <CARLTON.93Jan20204954@scws8.harvard.edu> carlton@scws8.harvard.edu (david carlton) writes:

>In article <C165MD.7qq@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>, hades@coos.dartmouth.edu (Hades) writes:
>
>> Until the original poster has an approved RFD for the group, there
>> should be no talk about in news.groups.
>
>Why not?  People often send out feelers in news.groups before
>submitting an official RFD.

Because Joel Furr is likely to descend upon them and give them holy
hell, short-circuiting any useful pre-RFD discussion that might come
of it.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu /               Rocks say goodbye.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) /
From: pwd@Apple.com (Patrick W. P. Dirks)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: RENAME several groups to rec.outdoors.*
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:34:14 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Apple Computer

In article <1993Jan25.071531.28626@zia.aoc.nrao.edu>,
dbriggs@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Daniel Briggs) wrote:
> 
> In article <1jvvolINNeq1@rodan.UU.NET>
>   Tim Rigg <rigg@osnome.che.wisc.edu> writes:
> >In addition, obvious outdoors.* groups should be moved to that
> >hierarchy.  Specially, rec.hunting should be moved.  Other
> >possibilities include
> >[...]
> >rec.skydiving
> 
> Thanks for the consideration, but I'd rather that we stay where we are.
> rec.outdoors implies to me a sport where the primary motivation is a love
> of the outdoors, rather than a sport which is incidentally practiced
> outdoors.  The latter seems to me a rather pointless distinction.  No
> offense intended, but I think that we have more in common with
> rec.foods.beer than rec.outdoors.hunting.
> 
> Blue skies, all!
> 
> -- 
> | Daniel Briggs  (dbriggs@nrao.edu)                      |  USPA B-14993
> | New Mexico Tech / National Radio Astronomy Observatory |      DoD #387
> | P.O. Box O / Socorro, NM 87801   (505) 835-7391        | 
> Support the League for Programming Freedom   (info from lpf@uunet.uu.net)

I want to heartily second Dan's message.  Just because skydiving is
practiced outdoors does not mean I'd go looking under the rec.outdoors
hierarachy if I were looking for it.  I personally wouldn't think to look
under rec.foods.beer either, but that might, upon reflection, be a
heuristic worth remembering.  It seems just fine where it is: don't change
it, please.

Thanks,
-Pat Dirks.

P.S. This came totally out of the blue for me: there have certainly been no
complaints on rec.skydiving that we're in the wrong area...
From: koreth@spud.Hyperion.COM (Steven Grimm)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.startrek.reviews moderated
Date: 21 Jan 1993 09:24:16 -0800
Organization: Hyperion, Mountain View, CA, USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: spud.hyperion.com

In <93021.093135NHT@psuvm.psu.edu> Windsor A. Morgan <NHT@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>There hasn't been much talk in the last day or so(today being January 21).
>Does that mean people have given up on the proposed newsgroup?

Nope.  In fact, I'm just about to send off the second RFD to Dave Lawrence.

>I am opposed to it, and have posted another option, a moderated mailing list.

An option which in no way excludes a moderated newsgroup, and in fact could
work very well in conjunction with the group.

-Steve
From: dave@frackit.UUCP (Dave Ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: DISCUSSION OF soc.culture.native CHARTER GOES OFFLINE
Date: 26 Jan 93 23:12:24 GMT
Organization: Data Factory Services, Harrisburg, Pa.


 In article <C15z0E.LIC@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>, hades@dartmouth.edu writes:
 > gst@spdcc.com (Gary S. Trujillo) writes:
 > 
 > >I have posted a followup to this article to the alt.native newsgroup, where
 > >I suggest that the discussion of the charter continue until it is resumed
 > >in news.groups prior to a vote being conducted.
 > 
 >     The discussion period is over. There will be no further discussion
 > of this group on news.groups for 6 months, although if people think that
 > there is enough of a consensus to go to a CFV then that can be posted.

Uhhhhhhh.. Brian? Who died and made you a net.ghod? 

-- 
 vogon1!compnect!frackit!dave@psuvax1.psu.edu            |  Dave Ratcliffe  |
 - or - ..uunet!wa3wbu!frackit!dave                      |  Sys. <*> Admin. |
                                                         | Harrisburg,  Pa. |
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: forbes@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (Scott Forbes)
Subject: Re: This latest r.a.s.* split
Organization: Usenet Sports Programming Network
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 19:41:17 GMT

+-- cstone@husc8.harvard.edu (christopher stone) writes:
| forbes@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (Scott Forbes) writes:
| > +-- griffith@fx.com writes:
| > | [. . .]
| > |   and 2) in a year (two at the most), TNG will be in the same boat as
| > |   TOS, at which time the TNG groups would vanish in a blaze of
| > |   inactivity if a split was made.  Creating groups with a planned
| > |   destruction date has always been frowned on.
| >
| >This is one of the few points that I tend to agree with strongly:
| >Creating rec.arts.startrek.CURRENT.tng (or r.a.s.tng.current) is a
| >bad idea that I'll be voting against.  A more useful idea would be an
| >unrestricted r.a.s.tng group (which we seem to have anyway, judging
| >from the number of misposted articles in r.a.s.current) that will
| >continue to be useful after TNG stops being a "current" topic.
| 
| OK, but the same objection also applies to reviews: eventually both
| ds9 and tng will go off the air, perhaps ten years from now, and
| you'll still get a defunct newsgroup.

If that were true, then net.startrek would have been a 'defunct'
newsgroup from 1982 (when it was created) until the start of TNG.
There will still be books and maybe even movies to review in a
general-purpose r.a.s.reviews newsgroup, long after TNG and DS9
both go off the air.

And, presumably, there would still be TNG discussion even after the
series stops producing new episodes.  An r.a.s.current.tng group
would be somewhat less than useful in these circumstances, since
there would still be TNG-related traffic but most of it would not
be "current" as described in the charter.

I don't see how r.a.s.reviews could become 'defunct', since it doesn't
limit itself to a particular show AND a specific timeframe.  I also
don't see r.a.s.tng (or r.a.s.current) becoming defunct in this way.
But I do see it happening to r.a.s.current.tng.

                                                           =====
"The only thing worse than incoming enemy fire           =---=====
is incoming friendly fire."                             =-----=====
                   -- Murphy's Laws of Combat #5        ==---======
--                                                       =========
Scott Forbes       forbes@ihlpf.att.com                    =====
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.arts.startrek.current
From: msmallwo@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu (M. Lee Smallwood)
Subject: Re: r.a.s.c Split - survey
Organization: Virginia's Public Education Network (Richmond)
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 22:30:22 GMT

I am glad you like the idea. I do not know how to write a
charter or anything, so I **hope** that someone else that likes
this idea takes it from here. Also, I CANNOT get news.groups,
so I would love some nice person to keep me up on the
discussion of this idea. I REALLY hope that this works out.

---
Lee Smallwood	msmallwo@vdoe386.vak12ed.edu	Tazewell HS

		KEEPER OF THE TIDE
                (Tazewell and Va-Pen chapters)
From: pss1@kepler.unh.edu (Paul S Secinaro)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.nt
Date: 25 Jan 1993 12:48:22 GMT
Organization: University of New Hampshire  -  Durham, NH
NNTP-Posting-Host: kepler.unh.edu
Keywords: Microsoft Windows NT Win32

In article <1jvvqbINNeqn@rodan.UU.NET> georged@sequent.com (George Dolbier) writes:
>PROBLEMS:
>---------
>	First problem: the name. comp.os.nt is short and to the point, 
>but maybe too short.  comp.os.windows-nt is too long, comp.os.windowsnt
>is too mushed, comp.os.ms-windows.nt IS NOT the correct location.

How about comp.os.winnt or comp.os.win-nt?  Might be a little too
abbreviated, though.  I don't mind comp.os.nt myself.

>	Second problem: subgroups. Initialy comp.os.nt will be enough to
>hold all discussions relating to Windows NT. But soon it will become
>apparent that subgroups will need to be created. Cross that bridge
>when we come to it is what I say.

It might be better to create subgroups from the start.  That way, you
don't get people posting to the comp.os.nt node forever, like has
happened with some other group splits.  Maybe something along the
lines of:

comp.os.nt.
          .programmer (possibly splitting into subgroups by API?)
          .apps
          .setup
          .drivers
          .misc
          .advocacy (of course! :-) )

Paul



-- 
Paul Secinaro
pss1@kepler.unh.edu
Synthetic Vision and Pattern Analysis Laboratory
UNH Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering
From: rick@crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu (Richard H. Miller)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.outdoors.orienteering
Date: 21 Jan 1993 21:03:15 GMT
Organization: Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tx
NNTP-Posting-Host: crick.ssctr.bcm.tmc.edu

In article <1993Jan21.142539.5142@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu>, jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (Joel Furr) writes:
> I support rec.*.orienteering, but I feel the name should be
> rec.sport.orienteering.  Orienteering is a sport.

Gee, how much does someone make as a professional orienteer? Does the NCAA 
regulate it or is it a club sport? Who is the high-school champs this year?

(We went through this with rec.outdoors.fishing. There are several people who
view the rec.sports hierarchy as the province of the organized sports; those
with leagues, teams, scores and the like. The rec.outdoors was specifically
formed to handle those subject areas which didn't quit fit into that mold.
Orienteering is probably close to the dividing line considering some of the
rec.sports groups which have come through but I think it does belong in the
rec.outdoors hierarchy. Perhaps if we can get some more here, we can move
some of the second level groups such as rec.climbing to this hierarchy.)


-- 
Richard H. Miller                 Email: rick@bcm.tmc.edu
Asst. Dir. for Technical Support  Voice: (713)798-3532
Baylor College of Medicine        US Mail: One Baylor Plaza, 302H
                                           Houston, Texas 77030
From: bell@cs.unc.edu (Andrew Bell)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.arts.startrek.reviews moderated
Date: 21 Jan 1993 15:54:24 -0500
Organization: The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
NNTP-Posting-Host: beethoven.cs.unc.edu

In article <1jmka4INNe9g@spud.Hyperion.COM> koreth@spud.Hyperion.COM (Steven Grimm) writes:
>I've outlined in another message some reasons why news is a lot more
>convenient than a mailing list (easy-to-use kill functionality, a broader
>range of topics than is being proposed on the list, and news' built-in
>short-term archiving, to name three).

Moreover, a mailing list moderator has to keep track of the mailing lists
and run bulk mailing jobs, etc.  I run a mailing list, and keeping the
subscriber list updated takes up about half of the time.  I'm adding
automation to reduce that, but few folks use the protocol I've given out
that the automation will be able to handle, so I'd still have to handle
most of it by hand.

Depending on the number of subscribers, a mailing list may also impose a
significant workload on a site's mailer.  News imposes much less of a load.

Also, I've been unable to find generic mailing list software, and had
to write my own shell scripts.  Are there any PA mailing list software
packages available for generic UNIX sites?

   Andrew Bell, editor of the Miniatures Mailing List
   bell@cs.unc.edu
  

Lines: 5
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 14:35:48 MST
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: $stephan@sasb.byu.edu (Stephan Fassmann, Software)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.miniatures
Keywords: miniatures figures ancients napoleonics renaissance naval
Organization: BYU



I think it would be great.
A place to talk about paints, styles and schemes.
I vote Ya.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: Patrick McClaughry <patrick_mcclaughry@sematech.org>
Subject: comp.sys.mac.powerbook
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A7840C6CEE01160E@manzana.eng.sematech.org>
X-Xxdate: Thu, 21 Jan 93 14:16:44 GMT
Organization: SEMATECH
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d17
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 14:14:05 GMT

Hello,

I feel that a separate newsgroup comp.sys.mac.powerbook would 
well serve the Internet community.  I own a Powerbook and would
very much like to see a more localized place to find important
information.  
Thank you,
-Patrick McClaughry
From: ahill@boi.hp.com (Andy Hill)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.outdoors.orienteering
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 20:03:00 GMT
Reply-To: ahill@boi.hp.com
Organization: LaserJets by Bill & Dave
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]

I also think that rec.sport.orienteering would be more appropriate (on a
worldwide basis, orienteering is certainly more of a sport than simply
an outdoor activity).  Don't want to be too USA-centric, ya know...

--
Andy Hill
ahill@boi.hp.com
From: geoffb@coos.dartmouth.edu (Thumper)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: comp.sys.mac.powerbook
Date: 21 Jan 93 13:45:07 GMT
Reply-To: geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU
Organization: Amos Tuck School
Disclaimer: I don't represent Dartmouth and Dartmouth doesn't represent me.

In <1jlf1oINNr4b@stimpy.css.itd.umich.edu> kwun@css.itd.umich.edu (Michael Kwun) writes:

>I'm also all for a comp.sys.mac.powerbook
>I'd be behind a comp.sys.mac.duo as well.

I think that sumarizes my objections to this proposal quite well. ANY
addition of model or vendor specific groups in comp.sys.mac.* would be a
disaster.
It might be fun at first but then what do we do when the group doesn't
generate enough traffic to be worth a damn after a couple years?

What else? comp.sys.mac.quadra? I honestly don't see the point.

-Geoff
--
geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU - Computing Support Consultant, Tuck School of Business

       "Economic deprivation makes freedom less relevant to a people."
				- Paul E. Tsongas
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.arts.poems,soc.culture.indian,news.groups
From: marek@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Marek Lugowski)
Subject: Re: What *HAPPENED* to rec.arts.poems.urdu? / Marek
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston Illinois.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:56:13 GMT

In article <1993Jan25.195926.4595@fuug.fi> an6966@anon.penet.fi writes:

>What happened with this news group?  It passed its vote fair and square
>and has been unfairly denied newgrouping since the net Cabal has
>"investigated" it without producing a report for over three months. 
>Again, I ask, WHAT HAPPENED?
>-------------------------------------------------------------------------
>To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help@anon.penet.fi.
>Due to the double-blind system, any replies to this message will be
>anonymized  [Finnglish for "rendered anonymous"   -- Marek],
>and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned.

Ahem.  Terrible apologies, sahib.  Me forgots to tell the world that
rec.arts.poems.urdu was ultimately deemed as fresh and innocent as a
diaphonous sheen of a Punjabi virgin's eye, a creature of such purity as to
merit 0% on the 500-question Purity Test *and* command a good camel in
dowry *at the same time*.  Given such splendid exquisitness, the net.Cabal
has decided to honor Goddess Kali with rec.arts.poems.urdu's sacrifice,
which is still pending, subject to our finding a suitably excellent and
mahogany-gold-with pearlescent-inlay-handle athame of purest Damascene
steel(e).

Pleased to ask you to bear with us with gracious delay.  Humbly yours,

				-- Marek Lugowski
				   net.Cabal, Local Vocal Agent
				   rec.arts.poems, USA region.

		"like a good neighbor, net.Cabal is there..."

				-- net.Cabal fight jingle



From: poulton@hpl-opus.hpl.hp.com (Ken Poulton)
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 10:15:12 GMT
Subject: Re: RFD: RENAME several groups to rec.outdoors.*
Organization: HP Labs, High Speed Electronics Dept., Palo Alto, CA
Newsgroups: news.groups

> In addition, obvious outdoors.* groups should be moved to that
> hierarchy.  Specially, rec.hunting should be moved.  Other
> possibilities include
> 
> rec.windsurfing 

Please don't move rec.windsurfing.


Ken Poulton
poulton@hpl-opus.hpl.hp.com
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: marlatt@spot.Colorado.EDU (Stuart W. Marlatt)
Subject: Re: RFD: RENAME several groups to rec.outdoors.*
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 19:15:25 GMT

In article <viking.727949999@ponderous.cc.iastate.edu> viking@iastate.edu (Dan Sorenson) writes:
>In <1jvvolINNeq1@rodan.UU.NET> Tim Rigg <rigg@osnome.che.wisc.edu> writes:
>
>>                        REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION
>
>>There is some discussion in rec.backcountry about creating a camping
>>subgroup.  If such a group is created, it should be placed in the
>>rec.outdoors. hierarchy which currently contains just
>>rec.outdoors.fishing.
>
>>In addition, obvious outdoors.* groups should be moved to that
>>hierarchy.  Specially, rec.hunting should be moved.  Other
>>possibilities include

Count me opposed to this reorganization. Specifically, breaking
up rec.backcountry to a number of rec.outdoors.* will not improve
efficiency, since a majority of postings will either require
numerous cross-posts, or will be missed by many who should see
them.

Climbing, skydiving, orienteering, hunting, and fishing can
justify their separate existance by traffic and by their rather
tangential relation to backcountry (their primary focus is on
an activity which takes place in the outdoors, but while is not 
specifically focused on the backcountry). Also, rec.hunting 
justifies its existance by the need for moderation - I don't think
most of the proposed rec.outdoors.* groups would be as potentially
volatile.

Rec. backcountry sees about 20-50 postings per day. Not excessively
high by usenet standards. Kill-files, 'k', and 'n' still work
well for dealing with the volume here.


------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where are the eagles and the trumpets?                                    
  --T.S. Eliot, A Cooking Egg                                             
..............................................................................
s.w. marlatt, <><  &  *(:-)               Prov. 25.2
University of Colorado:                   marlatt@spot.Colorado.edu  492-3939
National Center for Atmospheric Research: marlatt@neit.cgd.ucar.edu  497-1669
------------------------------------------------------------------------------