HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: millerl@wharton.upenn.edu
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: rec.games.frp.campaign
Date: 12 Nov 92 16:02:58 GMT
Organization: Newt World Order

In article <1dscc3INNqp3@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU>, randall-joshua@yale.edu (Joshua Randall) writes:
> In article <BxKsnF.DJL@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca () writes:
>>I disagree.  A slight delay on a post which would probably come out every
>>two weeks or less is not signifigant.
> 
> Have you actually ever read r.g.f.archives?  The posts there come out
> only about every two weeks, and it is UNmoderated.  Moderation
> invariably makes things slower.

Actually, rgf.archives *is* moderated. It is moderated in order to keep
discussion out of it. Any newsgroup designed to include discussion
should most certainly not be moderated.

>>Player moves are made in e-mail.
> 
> You have changed your mind on this point so often that I forget your
> most recent decision.  Not only should player moves be made in E-mail,
> so should all parts of the actual campaign.  The only thing that
> should be posted to r.g.f.archives should be story-like interludes.

Here I agree with Josh, only I would say it more strongly. The only part
of pbem campaigns that should be posted *anywhere* would be stories.
Since archives was designed to hold campaign aids including roleplaying
stories, you should post your edited pbem logs to archives.

-- 
whoah,
+++++++++++++++++++++++23
Loren Miller                           internet: MILLERL@wharton.upenn.edu
Mediocrity is a hand rail.                         -- Baron de Montesquieu
Xref: sparky news.groups:21172 rec.games.netrek:9548
From: tom@soda.berkeley.edu (Tom Holub)
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.games.netrek
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.netrek reorganization
Keywords: RIDICULOUS.  SIMPLY RIDICULOUS.
Date: 11 Nov 92 04:48:45 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley, CS Undergraduate Association
NNTP-Posting-Host: soda.berkeley.edu


  Please, people, don't have this discussion in rec.games.netrek.
That's what news.groups is for, and I suggest that all of you who 
are interested read the group, at least until this blows over.
 -Tom
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: thornley@micro.cs.umn.edu (David H. Thornley)
Subject: Re: rec.games.frp.campaign
Organization: University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, CSci dept.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:51:47 GMT

In article <BxBLtM.H60@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu> cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca () writes:
>                      Revised Proposal (November 6, 1992)
>
>                            rec.games.frp.campaign
>
>Proposed Newsgroup: rec.games.frp.campaign
>
>Type: moderated
>
>                        Acceptable Posting Items/Topics
>
>    1. FAQ.
>    2. Campaign moves.
>    3. GM Statistical Posts
>
These can easily go in r.g.f.archive, a group that was specifically set
up for some of this stuff, and one that has absolutely no traffic
problems.  Drop these.
>
>    4. Discussion of Campaigns
>
>    Controlled discussion of existing campaigns (live or net), ideas for new 
>campaigns, and campaigning in general.
>
This is, IMHO, the good part of the proposal.  It won't work as stated.

Moderated discussion groups are a bad idea.  Moderation slows down the
flow of conversation, and really is only of value when the topic needs
to be enforced.  I haven't noticed much problems with off-topic posts
in the r.g.f hierarchy so far.

I will therefore vote against this proposal if it is not amended to
remove the duplication with r.g.f.archives and to remove the moderation.

DHT

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: lazlo@triton.unm.edu (Lazlo Nibble)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 92 22:51:42 GMT
Organization: None for me, thanks . . . I'm driving.

smithj@hpsad.sad.hp.com (Jim Smith) writes:

> It really has been a devastating month for the rec.music.synth crowd,
> and it's sad to see the group dissipated by this incursion. 

The only person threatening to dissipate rec.music[.makers].synth is Dave
Hayes.  Renaming the group will not change its contents in any way.

If you don't like the name change as a matter of principle, that's fine.
But please don't try to defend your opinion with bogus arguments about how
the name change will hurt the group.

--
Lazlo (lazlo@triton.unm.edu)
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: ts@uwasa.fi (Timo Salmi)
Subject: Re: CFV: comp.archives.msdos.announce and comp.archives.msdos.d
Organization: University of Vaasa, Finland
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 05:38:18 GMT

In article <917@dsbc.icl.co.uk> jjf@dsbc.icl.co.uk (J J Farrell) writes:
>In article <1992Nov12.100843.13310@uwasa.fi> ts@uwasa.fi (Timo Salmi) writes:
>This vote is getting a bit beyond a joke. I voted in response
>to the original invalid CFV a week or so ago. I read that that was
>invalid, so watched out for the valid CFV.
>
>I saw the new CFV (10 Nov 20:26 GMT) a few hours ago, and voted in
>response to that. This time I get
>
>> Your message was not delivered to   vote@tacom-emh1.army.mil
:
>Anyone know when I'll be able to send a vote that WILL be accepted?!

Please, hold your horses just a little bit.  The recipient machine
had a hard-disk crash (Mr Murphy lurking :-( ) and the vote alias
was lost for a moment.  I just got to know that it is back on and
the votes can again be sent to vote@tacom-emh1.army.mil.  I
understand your aggravation, but please have a heart for the
circumstances beyond our control.  Temporary losses of connections
are unfortunately still quite common in our electronic community. 

   All the best, Timo

..................................................................
Prof. Timo Salmi
Moderating at garbo.uwasa.fi anonymous FTP archives 128.214.87.1
Faculty of Accounting & Industrial Management; University of Vaasa
Internet: ts@uwasa.fi Bitnet: salmi@finfun   ; SF-65101, Finland
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce)
Subject: Re: Group splits, killfiles...
Organization: Homosexual Fascist Lobby, Rampant Paranoia Division
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 10:58:20 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.185403.2064@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:

>In article <96769@netnews.upenn.edu> rsk@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (Rich  
>Kulawiec) writes:
>
>> if you see a thread starting that doesn't issue you,
>> add the subject to your news.groups killfile. 
>
>Hmmm. This would have been a great way to add the rec.music.makers  
>proposal article subjects to your killfile based on the first RFD which  
>didn't affect rec.music.synth.

The first RFD also had a different subject from subsequent ones.

-- 
____ Tim Pierce                / 
\  / twpierce@unix.amherst.edu / I use antlers in all of my decorating.
 \/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg)
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.dent
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 19:13:55 GMT
Organization: TC Telemanagement, Clearwater, FL

According to ellswort@studsys.mscs.mu.edu (Alec Ellsworth):
>to discuss Dentistry and any dental related issues.

Dentistry is medicine.  Thus a far, far better name is:

   sci.med.dentistry

Why not?
-- 
Chip Salzenberg at Teltronics/TCT  <chip@tct.com>, <73717.366@compuserve.com>
                 just another elitist Usenet administrator
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 22:51:29 GMT

In article <BxE3wJ.M4s@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim  
Pierce) writes:
> In article <1992Nov7.071644.4478@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com  
(Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
> 
> >In YOUR opinion it was properly run - obviously more than a few people  
> >disagree with you.
> 
> They are wrong.
> 

Wow - a categorical denial of the validty of opposing viewpoints...must  
simplify your life a lot.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky news.groups:21437 news.admin.misc:325
From: hartman@ulogic.UUCP (Richard M. Hartman)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.misc
Subject: Re: About the elitism in news.groups
Date: 12 Nov 92 19:47:27 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: negligable

Since this sounds like the suggestion I originally brought up, even 
though the Subject line has changed, I'd vote for it.  As I pointed
out, the abbrevs. we use in news.groups are not obvious to the people
in the groups to be affected, and to be fair the msgs posted to their
groups should be practically screaming "ignore this at your peril, your
world is about to change".

I think that a message with a separate and more informative
subject line than "RFD:..." or "CFV:..." should be posted to the potentially
affected groups.  The same message could be multiply posted if more than
one group is involved to make life somewhat easier (this cuts # msgs down
to two, a RFD/CFD/whatever for news.groups and the more explicit one for
everyone else).  This new message should redirect followups to news.groups,
and the idea of References: to the associated CFV/RFD/whatever is a good
one.  One issue remains (that I can see) before we try to modify the
guidelines: is there a practical, standardized form that the Subject:
line should take e.g. 
	"Subject: !!! Newsgroup xxx.yyy might be renamed to xxx.zzz!!!"



		-Richard Hartman
		hartman@ulogic.COM

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Practice random kindness and senseless acts of beauty.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: Music Group Reorg Disagreement (was Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored)
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 12:21:37 GMT

ksdavis@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (Karleenus Schwartz Davis) writes:
>Don't you dare try to say this is merely 'feedback and suggestions'
>when you're posting under the subject line "*BAD* music reorg will not
>be honored."  

It's feedback and suggestoins alright. Just not in the manner that you
expect. 

> This thread was started by someone screaming "REVOTE!!"

Damn straight.

>asking for an immediate revote.  Explaining over and over why there
>can't be a revote takes precedence over considering new suggestions.

And that explanation has no grounds other than inconsideration, elitism,
and stubborness. 

>If people would calm down about why this vote was "BAD," when clearly
>it was the fault of the guidelines and not the man,

It's interesting that you fault the guidelines, yet you wish to uphold 
them to the letter anyway. Are you in the habit of supporting what you
know to be at fault?
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

        There is a saying: "I believe it because it is impossible"
If you make any study of people in a state of what they are pleased to call 
belief, you will find that you can usually best describe them by the saying:
                  "My belief has made me impossible."
From: cbnorman@cayley.uwaterloo.ca
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: This has nothing to do with .campaign.
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:01:33 GMT
Organization: University of Waterloo

In article <1dpuhbINN140@MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU> randall-joshua@yale.edu (Joshua Randall) writes:
>In article <n0e0at@ofa123.fidonet.org> Kay.Shapero@f524.n102.z1.fidonet.org writes:
>[stuff deleted]
>
>not come to vote.  I firmly believe that cbnorman has an entire
>contingent of FidoNet people who will vote yes, and carry the day.  Do
>*not* put this up to vote; it is redundant.
>
Perhaps you should propose that usenet readers who also read fido should
not be elligible to vote for any new newsgroups, Josh.  That would solve
all your problems.
From: C96@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (Alexander EICHENER)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: soc.culture.singaporean
Date: 10 Nov 92 15:10:15 GMT
Organization: University of Heidelberg, Germany

In article <1992Nov9.051726.21697@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg>
mmurali@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg (Magical_Flute) writes:
 
>
>TAN GIM WEE (eng20009@nusunix1.nus.sg) wrote:
>: IMHO, NUS is not doing anything about this proposed new newsgroup
>: because the computer centre here has recently created about 10 local
>: newsgroups catering to the needs of the people in NUS.
>: Anyway, given the large number of Singapore bashers in netland, this new
>: group will probably be just another avenue for them to enjoy themselves.a
 
He's probably more than right here... sigh.
 
mmurali again:
>The formation of a newsgroup also provides a channel for
>Singaporeans to use Singlish and local slang- something
>which foreigners cannot understand or something for
>foreigners to appreciate!
 
Indeed. So you are proving yourself that there is *NO NEED* for an
_international newsgroup_! Slang and Singlish are fine - in a local
group. International groups aren't made up for this purpose.
 
Greetings,
Alexander Eichener
<c96@vm.urz.uni-heidelberg.de>
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.music.synth
From: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov
Organization: Jet Propulsion Lab - Pasadena, CA
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:41:44 GMT

shirriff@sprite.berkeley.edu (Ken Shirriff) writes:
>Well, I for one am a r.m.synth poster who was not aware of the vote until I
>saw the current discussion.  I went back and checked and there were indeed
>calls for votes in rec.music.synth with the subject: "3rd CFV and VOTE ACK:
>rec.music.makers.* groups".  Since I don't read rec.music.makers or care what
>happens there, I skipped over that posting and didn't learn about the vote.
>Perhaps the CFV subject line should make it clear to whom the CFV is relevant?

Excellent point. Perhaps this is why so many r.m.s readers did not vote.
This is clear enough evidence for me to at least ask for a revote with
a proper subject line.
-- 
Dave Hayes - Network & Communications Engineering - JPL / NASA - Pasadena CA
dave@elxr.jpl.nasa.gov       dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov         ...usc!elroy!dxh

               Most anything that annoys you is a mirror. 
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: cs911157@ariel.yorku.ca (SYED K NAZEER)
Subject: Re: RFD: SOC.RELIGION.ISLAM.AHMADIYYA-MODERATED.
Originator: cs911157@c01.ariel.yorku.ca
Organization: York University, Toronto, Canada
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 21:48:17 GMT


In article <1992Nov5.171638.30636@davidsys.com>, merchant@davidsys.com (Rukhsana Merchant) writes:
>> In article <1992Nov4.192850.177@otago.ac.nz>, amjad@otago.ac.nz writes:
>> > In article <1992Nov3.002700.1@uwovax.uwo.ca>, 3040_3744@uwovax.uwo.ca writes:
>> >> In article <1cscdiINNqd6@life.ai.mit.edu>, gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer) writes:
>> >>> In article <1992Oct28.170008.3789@bernina.ethz.ch> nadeem@igpho (Nadeem Malik) writes:

... much stuff deleted ...

This posting may as well at least tie the net record for layers of postings quoted in it.  What a waste of media.

>> There is only ONE perspective in Islam for *all* the Muslims and that is
>> following the sunnah of Prophet Muhammed (SAW).

And you claim that *all* the Muslims in the world do that?  Do you know *all* of them personally or have, at least, studied about *all* of them?  If you have, why are you not the present Khalifa of *all* the Muslims?

My point is, that Muslims within the vast body of Islam are different from each other in certain ways.  No one in his/her right mind would refer to all of them under one generality.  Heck, no one in his/her left mind would do it either!

>> If the Ahmadiyya community claim to have another perspective, they are a 
>> *different*  religion!!  (No matter how many dictionaries define it to
                             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> be a sect of Islam.)  I *will not* call another person claiming to be
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>> Muslim a non-believer, but I also know that a Muslim has no need for
>> *Ahmadi* in front of Muslim. 

Typical attitude of many unaware people: "I am right because I know I am right and everyone is wrong because I know that everyone is wrong!".

>> Create a seperate newsgroup since the need is to propaganda the Ahmadiya
>> religion.  The mainstream Muslims define Islam as following the
                  ^^^^^^^^^^
>> sunnah of Prophet Muhammed (SAW) and the Holy Quran.  Period.

Please elaborate on the word mainstream: Do you mean the Sunni's, or the Shia's, or the Wahabi's or the Ismaili's?

>> Since the Ahmadiyya community claims to have a different perspective,
>> then they need a seperate newsgroup, but NOT under soc.religion.islam.

"I know what you are going to eat and not what you want to eat!."

>> 
>> Rukhsana Merchant
>> 


Khurram Nazeer
From: gwydion@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu (Mercenary Programmer)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: soc.religion.islam.ahmadiyya Moderated
Date: 6 Nov 1992 13:20:45 GMT
Organization: /etc/organization
NNTP-Posting-Host: hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu

In article <1992Oct31.065759.22689@muddcs.claremont.edu> irilyth@fenris.claremont.edu (Josh Smith) writes:

>On the other hand, I agree that it would have been gentlemanly for Mr. Rana
>to withdraw his claims, recognizing that he could not convince the Usenet
>community without proof. Nevertheless, it is not entirely gentlemanly to
>lambast him so thoroughly for what he, at least, feels was an honest
>mistake. Mistakes are not the same as lies, but both should be admitted when
>brought to light.

It is very easy for you to pass judgement on us.  You are not in a
position where your ethical behaviour has been questioned.

Furthermore, I do not believe that it was an honest mistake.  I
believe it was a political ploy intended to throw more mud on the
issue.  *If* it can be conclusively proved that the moderators of SRI
are biased, then this would certainly have given the new newsgroup
proposal more weight.  If it cannot be proved, even so, it will still
be helpful to yell it as loud as possible.  This is what was done.
It certainly shows shrewd thinking, if nothing else.


Basalat Ali Raja.
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Date: 12 Nov 92 00:16:58 GMT
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft

In article <1992Nov10.213747.25430@daimi.aau.dk> rorschak@daimi.aau.dk  
(Jesper Lauridsen) writes:
> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
> 
> >In article <1992Nov8.160325.26727@daimi.aau.dk> rorschak@daimi.aau.dk  
> >(Jesper Lauridsen) writes:
> 
> >> Has it? I haven't seen any such thing - could you back that statement
> >> with some more facts or are you just using the standard flamewar  
method
> >> of avoiding to deal with the arguments of your opponents.
> >> 
> 
> >Yes I can:
> 
> >> jhildeb1@cc.swarthmore.edu (Jeff Hildebrand) writes:
> >>
> >> For example the CFV for rec.arts.sf.starwars was
> >> crossposted to rec.arts.sf.misc and maybe even sf.tv.
> >> Nothing happened to those groups but the crosspost was
> >> made to get people's attention. So if the CFV said nothing
> >> about the renaming in the subject line I don't think it's
> >> unreasonable for people to think that it was there only to
> >> attract some more people who might be interested. 
> >> 
> 
> Starwars discussion has in the years been posted often to rec.arts.sf*
> (note how this includes rec.arts.sf-lovers :-)), therefore a new
> starwars group would have influence on the discussion there.
>
This is what Jeff said. It's an informational post to people that might be  
interested. The future of the rec.arts.sf.misc group was not being  
modified although readers of it might be interested. Was rec.arts.sf.misc  
being renamed or removed?

> >So therefore people aren't entitled to some form of clear notification?  
> >Those are problems that can be solved. Why are you so resistant to  
clear  
> >notification?
> 
> This looks pretty clear to me:
> 
> Proposal E: Rename rec.music.synth to rec.music.makers.synth
> Charter: "Synthesizers and computer music"  [UNCHANGED FROM CURRENT]

The question is: was the path clear enough to get to the point of reading  
those two lines. It could definately have been clearer and we should  
attempt to change the guidelines to FORCE it to be clearer in the future.
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 22:37:48 GMT

In article <BxDttn.1B1@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim  
Pierce) writes:
> In article <1992Nov6.065425.473@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon  
Van Huizen) writes:
> 
> >If you scan  
> >several hundred messages a day would YOU notice a CFV if it didn't look  
> >like it was for your group?
> 
> I would and I do.
> 

Perhaps someday this too will be tested.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: *BAD* music group reorg will not be honored
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 05:57:56 GMT

In article <BxFGzs.B6v@unix.amherst.edu> twpierce@unix.amherst.edu (Tim  
Pierce) writes:
> In article <1992Nov8.231540.5813@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com  
(Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
> 
> >In article <1992Nov8.160325.26727@daimi.aau.dk> rorschak@daimi.aau.dk  
> >(Jesper Lauridsen) writes:
> >
> >> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:
> >> 
> >> >All we're saying is that the  
> >> >person that posted the RFD's and CFV's should have taken the time to  
write  
> >> >a subject line that indicated that r.m.s was affected.
> >> 
> >> Several groups were involved, subject lines are finite, long subjects  
lines
> >> are unreadable.
> >
> >So therefore people aren't entitled to some form of clear notification?  
> >Those are problems that can be solved.
> 
> If you can suggest a workable such solution, I think that you will be
> able to ensure that this sort of thing never happens again for the
> sake of "mislabeled" subject lines.  What do you have in mind?
> 

I have suggested many times that we as a group talk about ways to avoid  
the problem in the future. I have made some suggestions as have other  
people. If you insist on starting at ground-zero every 10 messages in an  
attempt to make me give up - I won't.

Your last e-mail message to me was quite civil and rational. Can we  
continue that mode of operation or is this going to continue to be a war?
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Xref: sparky news.groups:20445 rec.games.frp.dnd:5924 rec.games.frp.misc:7881