HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: brown@NCoast.ORG (Stan Brown)
Subject: comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer, 'rmgroup's respectfully suggested
Organization: Oak Road Systems, Cleveland Ohio USA
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 19:18:33 GMT


If you are a sysadmin, please consider deleting the obsolete newsgroup
comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer.  If you are not a sysadmin, but your system
accepts posted articles for c.s.i.p.p, please post to comp.os.msdos.programmer
not c.s.i.p.p, and please pass this message along to your syasadmin.   Thanks!

The details:

comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer is not in the "List of Active Newsgroups"
posted in news.groups,news.lists, since c.s.i.p.p was changed to
comp.os.msdos.programmer more than two years ago, in September 1990.
Instead of deleting the old group, many sites have aliased
comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer to comp.os.msdos.programmer, so that articles
are still being sent out with the old newsgroup in the Newsgroups line.

In the "Usenet Readership Report for Dec 1992", Brian Reid
(reid@decwrl.DEC.COM) writes, in part:

>        +-- Estimated total number of people who read the group, worldwide.
>        |     +-- Propagation: how many sites receive this group at all
>        |     |      +-- Recent traffic (messages per month)
>        |     |      |    +-- Share: % of newsrders
>        |     |      |    |   who read this group.
>        V     V      V    V
>      49000   86%   519   2.9%  comp.os.msdos.programmer
>      20000   52%    52   1.2%  comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer

You may consider this a non-problem.  But users at the affected
sites aren't getting the best use out of Usenet since they're missing
over 50 % of the potential respondents.  (If everyone who subscribed to
comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer also subscribed to comp.os.msdos.programmer,
questions posted to the former group would reach 41% of the combined
readership.  If the sets of subscribers to the groups were disjoint,
c.s.i.p.p subscribers would represent 29% of the total.  The truth is
somewhere between the two extremes; hence (subtracting from 100%)
subscribers to c.s.i.p.p only are missing between 59% and 71% of their
intended audience.)

To reiterate:

If you are a sysadmin, please consider deleting the obsolete newsgroup
comp.sys.ibm.pc.programmer.  If you are not a sysadmin, but your system
accepts posted articles for c.s.i.p.p, please post to comp.os.msdos.programmer
not c.s.i.p.p, and please pass this message along to your syasadmin.

Thanks!

-- 
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems                      brown@Ncoast.ORG

no .signature--I'm just not in the mood, okay?
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.messianic
From: kepley@cs.unca.edu (Brad Kepley)
Subject: Re: talk.politics.usa.conservative (Was: Re: RFD: talk.politics.patriot)
Organization: University of North Carolina at Asheville
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 03:58:35 GMT


>Unfortunately, this means you can't possibly be right in stating that 
>"conservative" has a political meaning in England or Scotland.

From The World Book Encyclopedia, entry by James L. Godfrey:

CONSERVATIVE PARTY is one of the two main political parties in Great Britain.
The second is the Labour Party...etc...etc..

and also under CONSERVATISM

...The name 'Conservative' was first used around 1830....was applied to 
descendents of the old Tory party...conservative ideas were expressed as 
earlyas the 1700's in the writings and speeches of Edmund Burke....

I don't know what a "Peter da Silva" is but either you have misquoted him
(which is what I suspect) or he is an ignoramous.  Conservatives are simply
descendents of Burke, the greatest mortal who ever lived in my opinion.
They were the first critics of the philosophes and the parents of the 
Romantics.
Newsgroups: news.groups,sci.crypt
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.crypt.research
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 02:00:16 GMT


The most useful aspect of a moderated group is to keep a decent level
of civility going. I don't think that would be a problem with a
true sci.crypt, so it's talk.crypt that would need the moderator.

Of course if a true sci.crypt starts attracting non-science flamers,
then a moderator might be useful for triaging out that traffic.

My own preference is for talk.crypt to be moderated, and sci.crypt to
be kept on point by peer pressure, once the split has taken place.

David
-- 
David Sternlight
RIPEM Public Key on server  --  Consider it an envelope for your e-mail

Newsgroups: news.groups,sci.med
From: kpc@pluto.arc.nasa.gov (k p c)
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.med.psychiatry
Originator: kpc@zog.arc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: kpc@ptolemy.arc.nasa.gov
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center AI Research and Aero Branches;
	Sterling.
	<1992Dec15.153028.11076@polaris.utu.fi>
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 02:32:15 GMT

there is a bionet.neuroscience for neuro research, an alt.support for
support, a sci.psychology for cognitive and apparently pseudoclinical
psychology, cogneuro for cogneuro, and alt.psychoactives for
psychopharmacology.  why would we want sci.med.psychiatry?

i do think we need a group to discuss brain and mind with a clinical
slant.  i recommend sci.med.brain to encompass psychopharmacology etc.
in general without excluding the valuable contributions of clinical
neuro people.  (alt.psychoactives has too many alt.drugs type posts
and doesn't cover discussions of brain imaging, etc.)
-- 
i'm open to comparing research career notes with other young cogsci people.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: talk.politics.usa.conservative (Was: Re: RFD: talk.politics.patriot)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1993 20:32:22 GMT

In article <1992Dec31.194439.27889@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (Joel Furr) writes:
> [Peter has] rather highhandedly explained that "conservative" sure doesn't
> mean "to the right of the political spectrum" [... and so it's] ridiculous
> to propose that the word "conservative" be used in a newsgroup name to mean
> "a political philosophy on the right of the political spectrum."

No, actually, I didn't. In fact I think it's a fine name for the group, and
will lead to many interesting discussions as different groups of conservatives
get together and find out what their comPatriots think.

While I'm here, though, "the right of the political spectrum" is just as
meaningless as "conservatives". Greens (envirnmental conservatives) are not
on your spectrum. Neither are agriculturalists (environmental progressives).
There are economic conservatives, religious conservatives, tribal
conservatives, and so on. And all of these people somehow think they can fit
into one of two pigeonholes? Hah!
-- 
Peter da Silva                                            `-_-'
Ferranti International Controls Corporation                'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012 USA
+1 713 274 5180                            "Zure otsoa besarkatu al duzu gaur?"
From: Blue-Knight@bknight.jpr.com (Yury German)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Babylon5
Distribution: world
X-NewsSoftware: GRn 1.16f (10.17.92) by Mike Schwartz & Michael B. Smith
Date: 29 Dec 92 01:34:23 GMT
Organization: Blue Knight Productions

What is the newsgroup that has all the information about upcoming TV movie
Babylon5. I have no time to look through each of the SCI-FI newsgroups and
such....
Maybe someone can help me.... Maybe someone knows the newsgroup and
Mailing list. If you do can you please reply in EMAIL or here. Thanks!

-- 
    _____________________________________________________________________
   |                                                                     |
   | Yury German                  Blue-Knight@bknight.jpr.com            |
   | Blue-Knight Productions      GENIE: Blue-Knight                     |
   | (718)321-0998            ** Graphic Design and Video Productions ** |
   |_____________________________________________________________________|

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: RFD: sci.crypt.research
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 04:45:32 GMT


In response to the RFD, I much prefer the suggestion to leave
sci.crypt alone, as it is properly named for the indicated
purposes, and create a new talk.crypt for the policy, legal, ethical,
etc. discussions.

I'm not sure how we do this. Can this RFD handle such an alternative,
or do we need a new RFD:talk.crypt, with both votes being taken
at the same time?

David
-- 
David Sternlight
RIPEM Public Key on server  --  Consider it an envelope for your e-mail

Newsgroups: news.groups
From: shade@chdasic.sps.mot.com (Douglas Shade)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.autos.vw reorganization
Reply-To: shade@chdasic.sps.mot.com
Organization: Motorola SPS ASIC, Chandler, AZ
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 19:43:09 GMT


>This is a formal Request for Discussion regarding the establishment
>of three newsgroups and deletion of one present newsgroup....
>...lots of @#*% deleted...

I think we're doing just fine.  The air cooled guys are starting to post 
with a "[A]" on the subject line making the article regarding air cool
painfully easy to find.

To heck with the RFD.  To heck with the vote.
---
shade@chdasic.sps.mot.com                        \/
602-821-4096                                    \/\/...its not a car 


Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.misc
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL:  Yes votes >= 200+2*No Votes
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 01:19:27 GMT

In article <EMCGUIRE.92Dec22051335@fuller.intellection.com> emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire) writes:
> I also agree that mailing lists and newsgroups are not the same thing.
> However, a newsgroup which is successful on the basis of traffic alone
> would probably make it as a mailing list to start with.

What does traffic have to do with success? Traffic is almost entirely
irrelevant. Better measures are things like readership, and percentage
of crossposting (groups like news.answers excepted, of course).
-- 
Peter da Silva                                            `-_-'
Ferranti International Controls Corporation                'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012 USA
+1 713 274 5180                            "Zure otsoa besarkatu al duzu gaur?"
Xref: sparky news.groups:24935 sci.crypt:6228
From: lenoil@catalogic.com (Robert Lenoil)
Newsgroups: news.groups,sci.crypt
Subject: sci.crypt.research
Date: 28 Dec 92 10:57:42 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: Catalogic, Mountain View, California [Voice: 415-961-4649]

In article <23998@elevia.uniforum.qc.ca> alain@elevia.uniforum.qc.ca (Alain Simon) writes:
>	I would much rather create a talk group dedicated to political
>	aspects, philosophical issues, and subversive proposals
>	than move an existing group with a strong mandate and a very
>	clearly identifiable hierarchy (sci).
>	
>	NO 	to sci.crypt.research
>	YES	to talk.crypt
>	YES	to keeping sci.crypt as is
>	NO	to moderating either

I started up rn today with the intention of unsubscribing to sci.crypt
because of the transmogrification of the newsgroup into a legal/political
forum instead of an academic one. I'm very glad therefore to see this RFD for
a new group. As for whether the practitioners should move to a new group
(sci.crypt.research) or the lawyers/politicians should get a new group
(talk.crypt), I don't have a strong preference. However, I would point out
that having the word "research" in the group name would be a stronger hint
as to the group's purpose than trying to infer the respective group agendas
based solely on the prefixes "sci" and "talk." But then again, USENET has
a large readership of UNIX users that are quite at home with terse word
fragments. Wdnt u agre? :)

If the two group names don't provide enough guidance to would-be posters,
then moderating the academic newsgroup might be necessary. Or would a weekly
"Welcome to sci.crypt[.research]" posting be enough to alert readers to the
respective group charters? I welcome responses from people with actual
anecdotal evidence.

-Robert
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.motss
From: endora@sage.cc.purdue.edu (Ken McCamish)
Subject: Re: Soc.Motss.*
Organization: Purdue University Computing Center
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 1992 04:52:43 GMT

In article <72157@cup.portal.com> Minotaur@cup.portal.com (A Frank Swilling) writes:
>Owen Rowley casts his vote:
>
>
>I vote in favor of the name soc.lesbigay!  It has the right blend
>of simple pride and in-your-faceness for a forward-looking gang
>like us.
>
>Since any division of sub-groups is going to be arbitrary, may I
>suggest
>
>soc.lesbigay.mind
>soc.lesbigay.body
>soc.lesbigay.soul
>
>Politics and various intellectual musings would be a natural for
>.mind.  Medicine and a broad range of physical pursuits would
>find a proper home in .body.  And just about anything else that
>makes getting up in the morning and taking that first deep breath
>would fit under the heading .soul.
>
>Besides, those names have a touch of poetry, which we've got in
>spades around here!
>
>:-)
  
 
Amen!  Make that two votes!  (Unless there are more that I haven't gotten
around to reading yet.)  I like the whole idea.



      *           -The very idea that my opinions might resemble those of
     ***           Purdue University frightens me.  Please don't even
    *****          think about it.

endora@sage.cc.purdue.edu -the patron witch of mothers-in-law

-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-----_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-____-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_
"Blame not thyself; Cry         /    "Yes, we're all      /"I have to go to the
witch!  - Samantha Stevens     /  different! "           / bathroom, there's
                              /  "I'm not"  "Shh!"      / pees in there!" -
                             /                         / - Jeni Stein
_______---------_________--------_________----------_________--------________
Newsgroups: news.groups,rec.arts.movies
From: ecl@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Evelyn C. Leeper)
Subject: Re: Rec.arts.cinema : rmgroup?
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 1992 13:32:14 GMT

In article <C04FtH.MLx@polaris.async.vt.edu> jfurr@polaris.async.vt.edu (J. Furr) writes:
> In article <1992Dec30.190115.12558@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> geoffb@Dartmouth.EDU writes:
> >In <1992Dec28.133402.15296@mnemosyne.cs.du.edu> jfurr@nyx.cs.du.edu (JKF) writes:
> >>If memory serves, there is no way to "unmoderate" a newsgroup effectively,
> >>since some news software programs out there won't ever acknowledge it and
> >>CAN'T acknowledge it.  David Lawrence has said that basically what you
> >>have to do is rmgroup the group and then make a new one if people want. 
> >
> >If my memory serves, you can send out a control message with a new
> >moderator with somewhat better results, can't you? I seem to remember this
> >coming up during the recent discussion of rec.arts.erotica.
> 
> I don't recall it ever actually happening.  Usually someone says "well, DO
> it" and nothing ever gets done and a year later someone's asking why no
> posts ever appear in the given group.

I also have tried to contact Manavendra, with no response.  He's
probably left MIT but his login is still sitting there.

The first step (IMHO) is for someone to volunteer to replace him as
moderator.  I would then suggest that this be posted to news.groups for
discussion with the understanding that if no objections are heard, this
will take effect in thirty days.  Then send out the message (assuming
of course that someone knows how to do it).

Yes, this is not following general voting guidelines, but it seems to
me that replacing a defunct moderator shouldn't require the same effort
as creating a new group.  IMHO, of course.

Evelyn C. Leeper  |  +1 908 957 2070  |  att!mtgzy!ecl or  ecl@mtgzy.att.com
--
"God does not play dice with the universe."  --Albert Einstein
"Albert, stop telling God what to do."  --Niels Bohr
Xref: sparky news.groups:25016 soc.motss:54565
From: aberson@enh.nist.gov
Newsgroups: news.groups,soc.motss
Subject: RE: Soc.Motss.* (was Re: new newsgroup proposal:talk.politics.motss)
Date: 2 Jan 93 20:40:14 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: NIST

In a previous article, mara@panix.com (Mara Chibnik) wrote:
> 
>I'd be really interested to see who'd prefer to post to
>soc.motss.cabal and who'd go to soc.motss.noncabal.  

No problem.  Everyone really posts to soc.motss.noncabal.  The pods act
as moderator, and send everything from the cabalists to soc.motss.cabal.
Their decision will be final in all cases.

Oops!  Did I tell too much?

Sim Aberson   Ft. Lauderdale, FL   aberson@ocean.dnet.nasa.gov
"Home is where your roof landed" - t-shirt seen in Miami
"We Will Rebuild (tm)" - majority community response to Andrew
"We Will Redecorate" - gay community response to Andrew
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.misc
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL:  Yes votes >= 200+2*No Votes
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 01:23:40 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.171724.8079@trentu.ca> xtkmg@trentu.ca (Kate Gregory) writes:
> I also vote Yes if the group will draw traffic I don't care for
> away from a group I read -- even though I won't read the new group,

I don't do that. I've been tempted, but I don't. I've run a vote for
at least one group I didn't vote on, because of this...

The main problem I think is with the word "vote".
-- 
Peter da Silva                                            `-_-'
Ferranti International Controls Corporation                'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012 USA
+1 713 274 5180                            "Zure otsoa besarkatu al duzu gaur?"
From: jimk@slc.com (Jim Kenney)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.autos.vw reorganization
Date: 22 Dec 92 20:15:00 GMT
Organization: Servio Corp, Beaverton Oregon, US

Here in the Portland, Oregon area we only see one article every week
or so.  Very disappointing actually.  Is the traffic heavy where you
are that a split is warrented?  If so, send some of that news traffic
this direction :-) so we can see it too!

Jim Kenney   jimk@slc.com
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: talk.politics.patriot
Date: 21 Dec 92 18:10:00 GMT
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC

In article <1h2jbaINNmc5@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray) writes:
> Sersiously...where the hell is all the kneejerk, unthinking criticism
> coming from.  Are there no *intelligent* liberals on Internet?

Anyone who self-identifies with a term like "liberal", "conservative", and
so on is unlikely to be the most open-minded type.
-- 
Peter da Silva                                            `-_-'
Ferranti International Controls Corporation                'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012 USA
+1 713 274 5180                            "Zure otsoa besarkatu al duzu gaur?"
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.misc
From: sridhar@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Sridhar Venkataraman )
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL:  Yes votes >= 200+2*No Votes
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 04:22:01 GMT

emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire) writes:
)sridhar@asuvax.eas.asu.edu (Sridhar Venkataraman ) writes:
)
)   I can give you atleast 2 examples for groups which passed by wafer
)   thin margins and are far healthier than groups which passed by 400+
)   votes.
)
)There is a direct correlation between a wide vote margin and a
)"healthy group" (if by this you mean high traffic).  Existing groups
)which fail the proposed 200+2*No rule did not appear as often in the
)traffic "top 250" as those which pass; and when they did appear they
)had less traffic.

Hmm.. I should have explained what I meant by "healthy". It is not a
quantitative measure of traffic! Better signal/noise ratio, in line with the
charter, almost nil flaming and just focussed on the topic which the
groups were intended for.

)Why should we ignore this correlation and establish our voting policy
)on the basis of your isolated counterexamples?

I am passing this one because my statement was ambiguous in some
sense and suffered a misinterpretation. 

)By the way, I do not mean that voting policy should be based on the
)week's worth of traffic data I used.  I consider those results
)preliminary and will follow up on both high- and low-traffic groups
)when the new arbitron data reach my spool.

With the advent of more and more NNTP servers, I am losing faith in
the arbitron data. I ran arbitron for the machines here and was
disappointed by the results because more than half of the .newsrc
files were unreadable or out of the normal login directories and there
were still lots of people reading news from our server through PCs,
Macs and other mainframes. BTW, I am just another ordinary user and my
only access to news is through NNTP. 

)If it turns out that the vote margin is /not/ a good advance indicator
)of traffic, then we should not use it that way.  In that case the 100+
)rule should be abandoned in favor of a advance indicator, such as the
)existence of a mailing list with a certain minimum number of sites
)receiving it.

The 100+ rule as I understand it is mainly to filter bad proposals and
test the need for the group assuming people know what they are voting
for. And this IMO the rule is good at.

Less articles/bytes in a newsgroup doesn't necessarily mean the group 
is bad or there are less readers for the group or the group is less
propagated. Infact a mention in Mathias' listing is good enough to
guarantee lesser propagation than it has at present. I would hate to
see a group figure in the same league as alt.binaries.*. I would be
interested in seeing the propagation or a measure of signal/noise
ratio (if ever there happens to be a way to determine it) for the
higher league groups (those which pass a more rigid voting rule).

Sridhar.
--
Sridhar Venkataraman			sridhar@asuvax.eas.asu.edu
Xref: sparky news.groups:24784 news.admin.misc:870
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Newsgroups: news.groups,news.admin.misc
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL:  Yes votes >= 200+2*No Votes
Date: 21 Dec 92 17:36:53 GMT
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC

In article <EMCGUIRE.92Dec18153008@fuller.intellection.com> emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire) writes:
> In article <id.V2WV.CO7@ferranti.com> peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva) writes:
>    You should only vote on a group if (a) you are interested in the
>    group and expect to read it, or (b) you think there is something
>    flawed about the proposal other than interest level.

> Any proposal is flawed which does not include a rationale showing that
> sufficient traffic on the topic exists to justify creating a newsgroup
> instead of a mailing list.

I see. You have decided (by psychic assistance, I assume) that the interest
level is too low therefor you vote "NO", artificially lowering the interest
level. Brilliant.

Has it ever occurred to you that there are reason that traffic on a topic
might be low other than lack of interest. For example, there being no existing
group appropriate to the topic?

Not every new group is a split.
-- 
Peter da Silva                                            `-_-'
Ferranti International Controls Corporation                'U` 
Sugar Land, TX  77487-5012 USA
+1 713 274 5180                            "Zure otsoa besarkatu al duzu gaur?"
Xref: sparky news.groups:24797 alt.native:1516