HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: thomas@datamark.co.nz (Thomas Beagle)
Subject: Re: Copyright Laws in New Zealand
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 20:40:22 GMT
Organization: Datamark International Ltd.

In article <BvBBpC.4IM@comp.vuw.ac.nz> thetroll@rata.vuw.ac.nz (The Troll) writes:

>Indeed accepting free advice from *anyone* where money is at stake is
>a very bad practice.

Indeed, accepting *any* advice from lawyers where money is at stake is
a very bad practice too.

Or so it would seem.

-- 
    Thomas Beagle | thomas@datamark.co.nz  or  thomas@cavebbs.welly.gen.nz
Datamark Intl Ltd | 
 Technical Writer | I don't need a disclaimer, I live in a sane society.
Xref: sparky nz.general:1353 nz.netstatus:235
From: dogbowl@dogbox.acme.gen.nz
Newsgroups: nz.general,nz.netstatus
Subject: Re: nz.waffle?? (was Re: Hello....hello...is anybody home)
Summary: Don't give local groups nz.* names
Keywords: not NZ.*!
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 92 15:09:04 +1200
Organization: The Dawghaus BBS, Palmerston North, New Zealand (+64 6 357 9245)

ford@pinn.nacjack.gen.nz (Jamie Walker) writes:

> kilroy@acme.gen.nz (earthbound misfit, I) writes:
> 
> > Can we please try and refrain from just creating nz.* groups on an ad-hoc
> > basis? Note that you're doing your users a disservice by treating this
> > newsgroup as valid because it probably appears (outside of junk) at about
> > 2 sites nationwide (and is a nz.waffle newsgroup really necessary
> > anyway?).
> 
> There is absolutely nothing stopping two or more sites from exchanging 
> their own newsgroup privately between them. Nothing at all. Why do you 
> suggest otherwise?

He's not. What he is asking is that you don't give these groups 'nz.*'
names. Bear in mind that *anything* with a 'nz.*' name gets sent to the
USA, and Australia. They don't want to see random groups appearing
in their junk boxes either.

The local groups here are 'manawatu.*'. Wellington has 'wgtn.*'

How about renaming the groups to 'Auck.*' or 'nacjack.*'?



dogbowl@dogbox.acme.gen.nz
The Dawghaus BBS, Palmerston North, New Zealand (+64 6 357 9245)
~|~|
Newsgroups: nz.general
Subject: Re: nz.waffle?? (was Re: Hello....hello...is anybody home)
From: richard@nacjack.gen.nz (Richard Vowles)
Date: 5 Oct 92 16:34:22 GMT
Organization: Malleus Maleficarum - Nil Mortifi Sine Lucre


>Oh no, not this immature crap. What would have been so terrible about trying
>to create an nz.waffle newsgroup if you really thought it was worthwhile.

Why should I do that? Why should I bother about trying to create a newsgroup
on the main circuit when it would cost me time and money that I didn't
need to spend? How stupid are _YOU_?

>As for it using "the local network setup", guess what: you fucked up.

No, sorry, _I_ didn't fuck up at ALL. _I_ wasn't responsible for you getting
the feed, STATUS was, and he passed it onto KCBBS as he didn't realise
he was getting it. He has modified his system, and it won't go out in the
future. Its just a fact of life that little mistakes happen.

>I received bogus postings to nz.waffle from my feed site, Massey University.
>They received it from VUW. If you knew thing one about how news systems
>worked you might have realised that giving your pet newsgroup a name like
>nz.waffle was likely to cause it to leak like a plastic grocery bag full of
>nails.

Quite right you are. I presumed (silly me) that if a newsgroup didn't exist
in the .newsrc file (as there had been no Control message through creating
it), that it wouldn't be passed around, it would have been rejected as a
unknown newsgroup (having no known newsgroups on the Newsgroups: line to
make it legit).

Calling it my 'pet newsgroup' is also somewhat silly. I don't run WAFFLE.
The newsgroup was just created as a support echo for the people who do, and,
considering it was quite a sensible proposition, I was quite amible to
creating it and transporting it around.

>I ask again: are you really this stupid? Don't you realise the inherent
>problems in creating a newsgroup under your toy rules but trying to put it
>in a heirarchy that already has a different set of rules, and a different
>set of expectations among news admins? This is almost as bogus as the INET
>bullshit.

You don't seem to realise that we don't have any 'toy rules', we don't
have any rules whatsoever. There is no copyright on nz.* as a name, anyone
can use it. What puts you in such an 'educated' position to accuse anyone
else of 'stupidity' just because of using a name that is very appropriate?
We decided that it made sense, and someone along the line accidently passed
it on. You then started to bleat like a molested ewe instead of just bringing
it to our attention, and asking for it to be fixed. With your negative
attitude, you should be in FIDONET.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Its not simply a question of getting hot, but how much heat you can take"

FIDONET: Richard Vowles 3:772/110.0         USENET: richard@nacjack.gen.nz
Packet Radio: ZL1UTF@ZL1AB.#11.AKL.NZL.OC   The Demi-Monde: 199:310/1

Newsgroups: nz.general
From: kilroy@acme.gen.nz (earthbound misfit, I)
Subject: Re: Bogus newsgroups 
Date: Thu, 01 Oct 92 05:55:17 GMT
Organization: ACME BBS - Public Access Usenet, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Summary: are you sure we shouldn't create nz.flame? How about nz.fan.jon-clarke?

jonc@status.gen.nz (Jon Clarke) writes:

> dogbowl@dogbox.acme.gen.nz (dogbowl) writes:
> 
> > BTW : It's quite amusing to read the complaints about alt.znet.* in
> >       the news.sysadmin areas :-)
>  
> [...]
>  
>  Please read  news.newsgroups FAQ on the ALT groups and then maybe 
>  get off your high horse and do something a litle constructive instead
>  on jumping on the band wagon ie suggesting that maybe only a few
>  messages in the SAMPLE news feed which has not had a control create
>  sent (thus just a SAMPLE news group as per the FAQ) instead of the
>  amount that has been been sent to sample news group.

Jon, when you can construct a paragraph (or two) with grammar that is
*sufficiently* correct that other people can actually understand it, I'll try
and make some sort of appropriate reply.

						- k
-- 
Craig Harding            kilroy@acme.gen.nz             ACME BBS +64 6 3551342
"Jub'er lbh pnyyvat n obmb"
Newsgroups: nz.general
Newsgroups: nz.general
Subject: Re: nz.waffle??
From: don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (Don Stokes)
Date: 4 Oct 92 08:11:02 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Wolery

dgd@kcbbs.gen.nz (David Dix) writes:
> Guidelines yes, but that is all they are and perhaps its time we seriously
> looked at reviewing how we create new nz newsgroups. 
> The existing guidelines simply do not work since just about _all_ new nz
> newsgroup proposals have failed.

There has been, count 'em, _one_ serious new nz. group proposed and a vote
taken since the current "rules" were put up and agreed on.  The group was
nz.org.decus, and as the proposer and vote-taker, I think I am entitled to
comment.

Proposing the group and counting votes was not a difficult job.  It takes
a little patience, but all "democratic" processes do.  The three week period
to do the thing was not excessive.  The at least 20 voters rule was cleared
easily.  At the end, there wasn't a clear majority in favour, so I declared
the vote failed.  Sure, I was a little disappointed.

I think the system works well enough.  What say someone actually _propose_
nz.waffle as a new newsgroup, carry a vote and see if there really is any
interest out there, rather than making totally unfounded claims about the
unfairness of the system.  You never know -- there are a lot of people using
Waffle out there, it may even pass.  Mind you, I don't really see the need;
if you want a question answered, ask it in alt.bbs.waffle -- you've got a
much bigger audience.

Or if you really do want a local discussion, agree to create a local 
hierarchy.  We've done that in Wellington (and note that it was _not_ part
of the original group setup -- wgtn.* was created by the BBS community
and it spread throughout Wellington), and they've even managed to do it
in the Manawatu.  Why is it so difficult north of the Bombays?  

Let's not turn the net into total chaos, with every two-bit sysadmin or
home user charging forth and creating their own groups for the hell of it.

Hmmf.  If you're going to have nz.waffle, I'm having nz.don.  So there.  8-)

--
Don Stokes, ZL2TNM (DS555)                        don@zl2tnm.gen.nz (home)
Network Manager, Computing Services Centre            don@vuw.ac.nz (work)
Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand              +64-4-495-5052
Newsgroups: nz.general
Subject: Re: Copyright Laws in New Zealand
From: Steve_Baldwin@kcbbs.gen.nz (Steve Baldwin)
Date: 30 Sep 92 21:17:06 GMT
Organization: Kappa Crucis Unix BBS, Auckland, New Zealand

I'm not quite sure I understand where you are coming from. 

First you comment that a programmer or a bank manager has little credibility 
in the area of copyright and then go on to say that you have written 
for a science fiction publication and explain your interpretation of 
the copyright laws.

I would expect that anybody that is involved in producing original works 
(ie programmers) would have a vested interest in knowing something about 
copyright.
We see mention of it on every bit of software that we buy, download 
or pirate as the case may be.

Of course you qualify your posting with a disclaimer of sorts that leaves 
anybody wondering whether it was text for text's sake or had knowledgable 
content.

Steve.
Newsgroups: nz.general
Subject: Re: Winston Peters
From: jonathan@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Jonathan Histed)
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:02:20 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz writes:

>The Nats don't like people who refuse to join "the club". Usually, these
>people are weeded out long before they ever get nominated as candidates. But
>Tauranga has a tradition - at least in recent times - of holding different
>views on democracy as compared to the rest of New Zealand. Tauranga has many
>supporters of Citizens Initiated Referenda (CIR). More so than elsewhere. They
>also believe that Winston Peters is there to represent them.
> 
>The other Nat MPs - with a few exceptions - talk about representation: then
>follow the rules of "the club". Winton Peters does more than talk.
> 
>He has his flaws, but would he risk his own self-destruction if there was
>absolutely nothing in this BNZ affair? The best way to destroy Winston Peters
>is to have the public inquiry he is asking (in accordance with Nat election
>policy) for. If there is no basis in his claims.......he will have no
>credibility forever and a day.
> 
>But......perhaps the staunch refusal to hold the inquiry is because there IS
>something to his claims and they would rather suffer the innuendo than have the
>truth revealed.......

As Don McKinnon said last night, the Serious Fraud Office etc would be very
interested in hearing from Mr Peters. I don't think it is up to the
politicians to decide whether there is a case or not - leave that up to the
law enforcers!

The public seems to have grabbed the wrong end of the stick with this. From
what i've seen, Peters was dumped not because of his calls for an inquiry
into the BNZ, but because of his continued use of Parlimentary Privilege to
make accustions about other members of parliament, and MEMBERS OF THE
PUBLIC. These accusations are totally unfounded, and Peters has NEVER backed
them up with evidence. This "Hit and Run" attitude had a LOT more to do with
the dumping than anything about the BNZ bailout.

--
Jonathan W Histed
jonathan@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz
--
-- 
---
Jonathan W Histed              Auckland, New Zealand 
jonathan@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz
---
From: harper@kauri.vuw.ac.nz (John Harper)
Subject: Re: Manipulation of Referendum Results
Organization: Victoria University of Wellington
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 22:40:17 GMT

In article <Bvo5w6.BAD@comp.vuw.ac.nz> duncan@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Duncan McEwan) writes:
>
>I also felt (as someone else pointed out earlier) that the disadvantage of STV
>suggested by the Irish senator on one of the pre referendum programmes,
>that candidates end up competing over purely local affairs, even among
>other candidates from their own parties, was a pretty major problem.
>
This problem isn't confined to STV. Last time I was in Rhode Island its two
senators (1 Dem, 1 Rep) voted the same way on an issue because of its likely
effect on New England. In other parts of the USA both Dem and Rep senators
voted the opposite way. 

John Harper Mathematics Dept. Victoria University Wellington New Zealand
Newsgroups: nz.general
Newsgroups: nz.general,alt.config
From: kilroy@acme.gen.nz (earthbound misfit, I)
Subject: Re: Bogus newsgroups 
Date: Sat, 03 Oct 92 02:08:50 GMT
Organization: ACME BBS - Public Access Usenet, Palmerston North, New Zealand
Followup-To: alt.config

jonc@status.gen.nz (Jon Clarke) writes:

> kilroy@acme.gen.nz (earthbound misfit, I) writes:
> 
> > >  Please read  news.newsgroups FAQ on the ALT groups and then maybe 
> > >  get off your high horse and do something a litle constructive instead
> > >  on jumping on the band wagon ie suggesting that maybe only a few
> > >  messages in the SAMPLE news feed which has not had a control create
> > >  sent (thus just a SAMPLE news group as per the FAQ) instead of the
> > >  amount that has been been sent to sample news group.
> > 
> > Jon, when you can construct a paragraph (or two) with grammar that is
> > *sufficiently* correct that other people can actually understand it, I'll try
> > and make some sort of appropriate reply.
>  
>  Should your reply not read, "Ok so I goofed, sorry". Instead of the
>  dribble above.

It actually should have said "what the *fuck* are you talking about?", but I
decided to be slightly more polite about it. Seriously, if you wrote
incoherent garbage like that at work would you expect anyone to understand
it?

What the hell is a SAMPLE news feed? Have you ever bothered to read
alt.config to learn how to create an alt group? The recommended method is to
discuss it on alt.config to arrive at consensus on a suitable name, send out
some newgrp messages, and start using the group. The de-facto method is to
just send the newgrps and start using it, which usuaslly works. Not only does
your infantile gibberish about "SAMPLE news feeds" not make any sense (where
did you come up with this shit Jon?), if you knew anything about the way alt
works you'd realise it's exactly 100% the wrong way to do it.

Followups to alt.config, this isn't an nz issue.

						- k
-- 
Craig Harding            kilroy@acme.gen.nz             ACME BBS +64 6 3551342
"Jub'er lbh pnyyvat n obmb?"
From: gnat@kauri.vuw.ac.nz (Nathan Torkington)
Subject: Re: Bogus newsgroups (prescriptivist alert)
Organization: Contract to CSC, Victoria Uni, Wellington, New Zealand
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 02:05:03 GMT

jonc@status.gen.nz (Jon Clarke) writes:

> get off your high horse and do something a litle constructive instead
> on jumping on the band wagon

Presumably the band wagon is carrying the high horse that he's on.

Learn not to mix your metaphors; flaming may backfire if you go in
with all guns blazing over a damp squib.  Then again, there's no smoke
without fire, but hey - we might all be barking up the wrong end of
the stick, and if we are then we probably can't see the wood for the
trees and we should all back off and about face before we lose face.
If he makes you see red, hoisting the red flag at the bull may not be
the solution to the problem.

Nat ;-)
Newsgroups: nz.general
Subject: Re: nz.waffle?? (was Re: Hello....hello...is anybody home)
From: jonc@status.gen.nz (Jon Clarke)
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 92 01:26:18 GMT
Organization: The Z*NET Global News Gateway. Parnell New Zealand

thetroll@rata.vuw.ac.nz (The Troll) writes:
 
                 (lots deleted) 


> Not all of us, have the time to sit down and spend time writing a quietly
> vicous note on USENET manners and behaviour. Please bear with us we are
> only human. And the same USENET policy that allows Craig be sysadmin of
> his site and annoy you with his profanity, allows you to be the sysadmin
> of your site and annoy others with your behaviour. 
> 
 Whilst you may only be human net.manners do not go astray! 
 
 While we are on the subject chap what in paticular has 
jonc@status.gen.nz done to YOU! In fact from the tone of your mail
I would suggest he has gone as far as opening an OLD WOUND which lays 
bear for attack ... Hmmm debate ....
 
Again I reiterate there is NO need for foul language in this NEWSGROUP
what so ever. 
 
As you are aware there are others world wide reading this mail and the 
attempt (however belittling) to use such foul words IMHO does indeed
refer to the lack of social graces that is attributed to the lower
social economic groups of this country in the more profane districts
of this country we happly refer to as Gods Own, and indeed as you stated 
the lower levels of education that like it or not is with us today
may well attribute to this fame from the sites indeed doing just that.
 
 (opps did I see a Fruedian slip, no reverse psychic me thinks)

                                                  _
 Jon Clarke                                     o( )       
 jonc@status.gen.nz                            /  /\        GE: J.CLARKE6
 The Z*NET Global News Gateway in Auckland New Zealand      HSBC NZM  EBD
Newsgroups: nz.general
Subject: Re: nz.waffle?? (was Re: Hello....hello...is anybody home)
From: jonc@status.gen.nz (Jon Clarke)
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 92 06:29:46 GMT
Organization: The Z*NET Global News Gateway. Parnell New Zealand

kilroy@acme.gen.nz (earthbound misfit, I) writes:

> 
> As for it using "the local network setup", guess what: you fucked up. I
 
 Craig,
 
 As the system administrator of your site I am a little upset to see not
 once but twice in two different messages use of this sort of language.
 As sysadmin YOU should KNOW better than to do this. 
 
 I must say it is most disturbing to have a not only a site but also its
 sysadmin posting mail to open news groups in this manner. I gave you 
 the benefit of the doubt in all the email you have sent to me this 
 morning as no one can read that bar you I and a nosey site on the way
 but in nz.general and alt.config over steps the bounds of decency IMHO.
 
 Whilst it is good to have frank and open discussion in these groups
 use of profane language only demeans your cause and puts the nz domain
 in ill-repute for allowing this sort of traffic to be propogated 
 worldwide.
 
 This is my two cents worth.

                                                  _
 Jon Clarke                                     o( )       
 jonc@status.gen.nz                            /  /\        GE: J.CLARKE6
 The Z*NET Global News Gateway in Auckland New Zealand      HSBC NZM  EBD
  
Newsgroups: nz.general
From: andy@comp.vuw.ac.nz (Andy Bond)
Subject: Re: Manipulation of Referendum Results
Organization: Distributed Systems Group, Comp Sci, Victoria University of Wellington
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 00:56:10 GMT

In article <BvGyF7.Iut@comp.vuw.ac.nz> Ewan.Tempero@comp.vuw.ac.nz writes:
...
>Answer 1: Those who didn't vote don't deserve (and certainly shouldn't
>expect) to be counted.

Maybe they voted by not voting.  I heard that some people stayed away
because the next referendum is the one where any actual change is
decided.

Of course I voted STV like the rest of you people ... right?  RIGHT!

andy
Newsgroups: nz.general
From: Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz
Subject: Re: Winston Peters
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 11:02:48 GMT

In article <1992Oct1.220220.5914@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz> jonathan@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Jonathan Histed) writes:
> 
> The public seems to have grabbed the wrong end of the stick with this. From
> what i've seen, Peters was dumped not because of his calls for an inquiry
> into the BNZ, but because of his continued use of Parlimentary Privilege to
> make accustions about other members of parliament, and MEMBERS OF THE
> PUBLIC. These accusations are totally unfounded, and Peters has NEVER backed
> them up with evidence. This "Hit and Run" attitude had a LOT more to do with
> the dumping than anything about the BNZ bailout.

Fair comment.

-- 
Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | On Sept. 19th, 88% of NZ voters opted
Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         | for proportional representation. It
withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            | looks like we may get a more  
**** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       | democratic system "real soon now".
Newsgroups: nz.general
From: chris@toru.isor.vuw.ac.nz (Chris Johnston)
Subject: Manipulation of Referendum Results
Originator: chris@aqua.isor.vuw.ac.nz
Organization: Institute of Statistics and Operations Research, VUW, Wellington, NZ
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 22:23:08 GMT


I noticed the following signoff in a recent article......
|> 
|> -- 
|> Steve Withers - Wellington, New Zealand | On Sept. 19th, 88% of NZ voters opted
|> Steve.Withers@bbs.actrix.gen.nz         | for proportional representation. It
|> withers_s@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz            | looks like we may get a more  
|> **** Happy user of OS/2 v2!! ****       | democratic system "real soon now".


WRONG, WRONG, WRONG !!!!!!

I do believe that 88% of the 48% who voted is 42% of the VOTING population (NOT
the NZ pop)!

Additional to this is the fact that two of the four options could not really be
called PR.

Also consider that only 75% of 48% (ie 36%) voted for MMP. This means that the
only other choice we are being offered was favoured by a minority of the voting
population!!!

Has anyone seen the summary results for the referendum? It is interesting to note
that those in the rich urban seats tended to vote for STV as the preferred
alternative. (I also voted for this).

As a personal observation I have noticed amongst the people I know that the people
who voted for STV were the ones that like to cast a critical and thoughtful eye
over a problem before making a decision. Those that voted for MMP were the ones
who stated they just went with the flow or hadn't looked into the other options
very much. 

90% of the people I have spoken to voted STV. This is probably a product of the
circles I move in but an interesting point to note is that no one discussed the
issue beforehand!!! ie Everyone made up their own mind independently!!!

Perhaps I coulds end with my tongue firmly in my cheek:

THEY SAY THAT DOG OWNERS LOOK LIKE THEIR PETS, DOES 36% OF THE POPULATION THINK
LIKE OUR MAJOR EXPORT??????

chris
From: liam@durie.amigans.gen.nz (Liam Greenwood)
Newsgroups: nz.general
Subject: Re: nz.waffle?? (was Re: Hello....hello...is anybody home)
Date: 2 Oct 92 22:36:35 GMT+12
Organization: It's Home, really...
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Richard Vowles (richard@nacjack.gen.nz) wrote:
>
> >Can we please try and refrain from just creating nz.* groups on an ad-hoc
>
> It wasn't for general consumption, status must have inadvertently passed
> it onto KCBBS, and KCBBS passed it out to the world. We created it here
> in Auckland for discussion of Waffle, as most of the UUCP sites are waffle.
     ^^^^^^^^

If it's just for Auckland than why don't you call it something like
auckland.waffle ? Like the Wellington groups are wgtn.xxxx etc. Seeing as the
nz heirarchy is a part of the whole vote or don't play system it would perhaps
be better to keep your regional groups out of that heirarchy.

--
 Liam Greenwood ------ liam@durie.amigans.gen.nz ------ Wanganui, N.Z.
                 Don't tell my Mother I'm a programmer,
               she thinks I'm a piano player in a brothel

Newsgroups: nz.general