HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: colemk@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Matthew K Cole)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Gay Sailor Reinstated
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:29:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: master.1du7ptINNq8k
Reply-To: colemk@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Matthew K Cole)
Organization: Computer Science Department at Rose-Hulman
NNTP-Posting-Host: l130a4.nextwork.rose-hulman.edu

>Original message deleted.

I caught a little bit about this on the Today show this morning (Nov. 12).   
I missed the actual interview, but I saw a little recap on one of the news  
segments.

They said that he would be returning to work today or tomorrow, and that  
they forsaw no problems.  Even Meinhold himself said that he felt that  
once he got back in, there would be no problems; at least not with his  
co-workers.

I'm not sure that I agree with this.  They wouldn't let him back on the  
base the first time even though they were supposed to.  What, or who, is  
going to make them let him on this time?

Granted I do not catch much news anymore, so if anyone knows please  
respond.

     Matthew
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: georgere@microsoft.com (George V. Reilly)
Subject: Re: Anyone going to COMDEX in Las Vegas?
Date: 08 Nov 92 08:13:37 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Corporation

balistik@big-brother.nevada.edu (Shawn Hicks) writes:
) platinum@montage.UUCP (Doug Swallow) writes:
) >I'm planning on being in Las Vegas for COMDEX from Wednesday, November 18
) >until Saturday, November 21. Any other soc.motss'ers going to be around and
) >want to get together for dinner, drinks or other entertainment?

) This is a great time to post this:

) Any motssers attending COMDEX that would like to see some
) sort of get-together, send me Email with a rough schedule,
) and/or the hotel you plan on staying in so that I can 
) contact you while you are here. 

) It has been my experience in the past that few motssers, if
) any, attend COMDEX.  However, the Las Vegas motss crowd is
) always willing to meet visitors whenever possible.  

) Send Email to: balistik@nevada.edu  or  clc@nevada.edu  or
) rickc@nevada.edu.  We all work odd hours and are able to
) meet at almost any time of the day.

Take them up on this.  I had the great pleasure of meeting
Shawn and Chris for lunch at SIGGRAPH last year.  I regret
that I didn't have a chance to meet them again during
SIGGRAPH, though I did enjoy meeting them again at the
motss.con in Portland this year.
________________
George V. Reilly   <GeorgeRe@Microsoft.Com>
From: flier@excalsys.excalsys.com (Rich Reynolds)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: CO-2 Ammendment PASSES
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 17:58:55 MDT
Organization: Excalibur Systems, Inc.
Reply-To: flier@excalsys.excalsys.com (Rich Reynolds)
X-Mailer: uAccess - Macintosh Release: 1.6v1


> 
> I worry that one reason the Colorado amendment might have passed is
> that it is not as obviously horrendous as the Oregon one, with its
> explicit requirements to discriminate. I mean, its horrendousness is
> obvious to *me*, but to people who haven't reason to think about these
> issues it might appear at first sight to be relatively harmless. It
> might have passed in Oregon. It might well pass elsewhere.
> 
> What other states, if any, permit the amending of their constitutions
> by a simple majority vote of the electorate?
> 
> Robert [whose euphoria over the Presidential and Oregon results has
>         been pretty well soured by the Colorado one]
> 

Your euphoria about Oregon may be short lived......

The CFV/OCA crowd planned this with amendments of two different flavors
with the plan being they would them push whichever one made it.  They
found out that the plan for Oregon was just too much for reasonable
people to stomach.

I understand that OCA will now push another amendment in Oregon based
on the Colorado language and that they are also targeting Washington
and California.

The fight is just beginning!!!

Rich

>>>>>>>>> flier@excalsys.com <<<<<<<<<
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: nomad@watson.ibm.com (Lee `nomaD` Damon)
Subject: Re: Pink dollar, red circle slash...
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 16:17:16 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM T.J. Watson Research Center

In article <BxD0JA.874@queernet.org> rogerk@QueerNet.ORG (Roger B.A. Klorese) writes:
>In article <1992Nov7.004904.29643@reed.edu>, nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
>writes:
>|> In article <1992Nov6.203022.22584@nevada.edu> balistik@big-brother.nevada.edu
>|> (Shawn Hicks) writes:
>|> >The Triangle works.  It's simple.  It's pink.
>|> 
>|> yeah, but it looks awful against typical white-person skin.
>
>Get one on a black-circle background.

Or use a dangly one. The God of soc.motss (yea, the Zwicky herself!) made
me a wonderful earring out of rudalite (I doubt I got that right). I
get lots of comments on it, and it goes with just about anything :). I
also have a couple of other dangly triangles. They aren't that hard to find
(in NYC anyway :).

nomad
-- 
work: nomad@watson.ibm.com               - Lee "nomad" Damon -         \
play: castle!nomad or nomad@castle.org                                  \
Systems Admin, The Farm, IBM TJ Watson Research Center, Yorktown NY    / \
      U N A S H A M E D                                               /   \
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: kfj@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Kirk Johanning)
Subject: Re: Sucking on Keanu Reeves
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 15:06:11 GMT
Organization: HP Response Center Atlanta

In <mattm-121192133042@mcmelmon.apple.com> mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon) writes:

>Taken from the Wall Street Journal:

>  Poor Jonathan (Keanu Reeves) spends most of his time
>  in the count's Transylvanian castle, having his
>  blood drained by a trio of nympho-vampires...

>Now, if *this* nympho had Keanu Reeves strapped up in a 
>Transylvanian castle, his *blood* would not be the relevant
>bodily fluid being drained...

Ditto!!

>I hadn't been playing on seeing Dracula - but this has 
>certainly changed my mind.  Though I hated the movie (to be
>honest, I didn't even finish it...), I though Reeves was
>positively *yummy* in Private Idaho.  Of course, so was
>Phoenix.  

>To *die* for...

Phoenix is ALWAYS *POSITIVELY* *YUMMY*!!

>*X*
>(Did I tell you, Dear Squirrel, about the Muffin's story -
>wherein he was tied up by some bimbos in San Diego and
>forced to do unspeakable things?  I think I did...  Oh, just
>thinking about him all strapped down and naked, squirming
>around, legs spread apart....  ARGHGHGHGHGHGH!!!

>I want to go home *right* *now*!)

Do tell!!
-- 
 ____   Kirk Johanning               ____    The opinions expressed above   ____
 \  /   HP Response Center Atlanta   \  /    are mine and may not reflect   \  /
  \/    kfj@hpuerca.atl.hp.com        \/     those my employer or anybody    \/
                                             else for that matter.
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: balistik@big-brother.nevada.edu (Shawn Hicks)
Subject: Nevada  was: (Re: Colorado)
Organization: Not yet, but we're working on it...
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 03:07:42 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.210457.22124@ncselxsi.uucp>, fisher@ncselxsi.uucp (Chuck Fisher) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.234222.23279@nevada.edu> balistik@big-brother.nevada.edu (Shawn Hicks) writes:
>>Or, better yet, move to Nevada.  We have a total state population
>>of around 1.2 million people.
>>
>>Imagine, a state with a Queer Majority....  
>
>Since I have a second home in Truckee, I get to Reno a dozen times a
>year.  My feeling in talking to a number of lesbians and gays that
>Nevada is still very conservative--"sodomy" is still illegal.  Instead
>of waiting for a new governor, why not work on Frankie Sue Del Pappa,
>the current Attorney General?  Many Nevadans feel forced to stay in
>the closet, something their neighbors in California are not so want to
>do.


Of the 1.2 million, about .83 million live in Las Vegas.  Reno is
very different.  For starters, it's more conservative.  Down here,
in Clark County, we have several polititians that support us,
including the Mayor.  "Sodomy" isn't illegal here, "Unatural Acts,
Crimes Against Nature" are.  The only arrests under these laws are
from people having sex in public restrooms and parks.  While I
agree that the laws need to go, I think several thousand more
queer voters would help them go faster.

My original point was that a single gay vote goes a lot farther
in a state with 1.2 million people than it does in a state with
20+ million people.

Those Nevadans that stay in the closet choose to do so for no
good reason.  I've been publicly gay for quite a while.  I have
had no major problems because of this.  Reno, on the other hand,
may be different.  


Shawn

Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mdrayton@sr.hp.com (Mike Drayton)
Subject: Re: the purpose of soc.motss (was: off-topic discussions)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Clara Division
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1.1 PL5
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:24:06 GMT

Nelson Minar (nelson@reed.edu) wrote:
> In article <1djqkhINNor7@mizar.usc.edu> adolphso@mizar.usc.edu (adolphson) writes:
> >Could you please explain what it is, exactly, that you'd like to see
> >written about here to the exclusion of all else?
> 
> I know. Let's split soc.motss! Yeah! Here's what I propose:
> ....
> soc.motss.diesel

Oh, absolutely!  I mean, last Saturday afternoon when I was rebuilding
the vacuum pump, inspecting the bushes, checking my spray pattern,
and measuring the volume delivered, I really _really_ could have used 
some help and support from some other diesel-queens!

Or would it be women's space?

> I'd propose soc.motss.sex, but...

I wouldn't be interested in that at all. 
--------
Mike Drayton      mdrayton@sr.hp.com       Hewlett-Packard Co.
                                           Santa Rosa, California
From: anderson@macc.wisc.edu (Jess Anderson)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: principles
Date: 7 Nov 92 20:41:57 GMT
Organization: Madison Academic Computing Center, UW-Madison


In article <1992Nov5.113130.6763@Princeton.EDU>
spencer@burn.Princeton.EDU (S. Spencer Sun) writes:

>This is often a source of disagreement between my friends
>and me, but I place utmost importance on principles.

Unless you place what I would call an unduly high value on
martyrdom, I think "utmost" is a bit over the top.  Your
general drift, being true to principles, even at some real
inconvenience to yourself, is something I certainly agree
with.  But my compromise point is probably in a different
place than yours.

>IMHO "I value my life and well-being above any other
>principles" is not a good principle.

I wouldn't run life and well-being quite so casually
together as all that.  I might be pay out quite a lot of
well-being in support of my principles, but in any realistic
case, I would almost certainly shuck some of my better
principles to stay alive, if nothing else to remain in a
position to campaign later for my principles once again.

>It severely weakens any others that you might hold.

Isn't it a balancing act, rather than something quite as
absolute as it sounds here?

>Your principles go a long way towards defining who you are
>as a person (some weird kind of existentialism?  :-) ).

>If your principles change when something important is on the
>line, then you principles weren't really what you said they
>were, and you aren't who you claimed to be.

Yes, but this is not necessarily bad.  Discovering that you
and the circumstances you inhabit are different from what
you supposed, so you have to modify your principles, that
can be good.

Like I say, balancing seems to me to be the ticket.  You
gotta stand for something, but what amounts to sectarianism
or total inflexibility usually adds up to impaling yourself
on the spike of the impossible, which seems pretty useless.

Most of the time, life does not require us to throw
ourselves on a live grenade to save our buddies.
Fortunately, it's possible to be a good person at a far
lower cost.

-- 
Jess Anderson <> Madison Academic Computing Center <> University of Wisconsin
Internet: anderson@macc.wisc.edu <-best, UUCP:{}!uwvax!macc.wisc.edu!anderson
Room 3130 <> 1210 West Dayton Street / Madison WI 53706 <> Phone 608/262-5888
<>  <>  <> Discrimination, Bigotry, and Hate are not Family Values <>  <>  <>
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Mike Reaser)
Subject: Re: Boycott Worse than Pointless
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 22:48:54 GMT
Organization: a stone mountain of Kudzu

In <mattm-051192110133@mcmelmon.apple.com> mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon) writes:

>Indeed, here we have an amendment saying it is now illegal to toss
>someone from their job for being gay.  And how does the American
>gay community react?  By seeking to destroy the Colorado economy,
>thereby putting them out of work anyway.

>Brilliant.  Really fucking brilliant.

>God save Colorado from a tide of Totalitarian Tinkerbells.

<<Raising one hand in confusion while scratching beard with the other>>

Teacher, can someone explain to me the logic paths used to deduce
the statement above?  From my reading, it's anything _BUT_ "an amendment
saying it is now illegal to toss someone from their job for being gay."

What cognizant function allowed the leap (nay, a high jump) of logic
from the resolution's language about "sexual orientation", singling out
LGB-folks, to an interpretation that such discrimination is _ILLEGAL_?

Am I confused, or (as I tried to ask about this creature a few days ago)
did he take his drugs and forget to share with the rest of us?  

Help...

--
=======================================================================
 Mike Reaser, Hewlett-Packard N. Amer. Response Center - Atlanta
 Internet:  mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com
 NBCS: B4 f w g+ k s-               I barely speak for myself, so
 #include <standard.disclaimer>       don't make me speak for HP
=======================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Mike Reaser)
Subject: CO-2 gives me a headache -- HELP!
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 22:01:54 GMT
Organization: a stone mountain of Kudzu
Keywords: colorado amendment

Hi, folks -- I some help with my arguments.

On one of HP's internal news groups, I'm fighting what I feel to be a
losing battle with folks who can't understand why any LGBO* person
would feel threatened by CO-2.

The main argument I'm running up against is that the amendment only
prohibits city, county, and state government units from enacting any
law pertaining to homosexual or bisexual rights or discrimination.

I've been trying to quote from the text of the amendment from the 
angle of the Fourteenth Amendment "equal protection" clause, outlining
how a strayt person could claim discrimination but no LesBiGay could in
return.  The response I've gotten is that the discrimination could not
be "sanctioned" by the government, but that nothing in the amendment
would keep one of us from filing a legal claim of discrimination.

I feel like I'm banging my head against a brick wall.  Could anyone
offer me a new "spin" that might show some of these folks what we're
saying?

Thanks in advance!

--
=======================================================================
 Mike Reaser, Hewlett-Packard N. Amer. Response Center - Atlanta
 Internet:  mhr@hpuerca.atl.hp.com
 NBCS: B4 f w g+ k s-               I barely speak for myself, so
 #include <standard.disclaimer>       don't make me speak for HP
=======================================================================
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: chuck@ssd.kodak.com (Charles S. Collins 726-9461)
Subject: Presbyterian ruling
Originator: chuck@fourier
Organization: Eastman Kodak
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 92 16:18:00 GMT

From Rochester, New York...

DOWNTOWN CHURCH STRENGTHENS ITS RESOLVE

Rev. Ron Sallade, the primary complainant who sought to bar Rev. Janie Spahr
from serving as co-pastor of the Downtown United Presbyterian Church, believes
"the issue" has finally been put to rest.  He should have been with the
congregation and its friends last night.

Its true that the Permanent Judicical Commission of the Presbyterian Church,
USA ruled last Friday that it was inappropriate for the Downtown Church to
call an openly lesbian pastor and declared the call null and void.  And it
would seem to Sallade and his cohorts that gays and lesbians would retreat
to the closet where they belong.  But nothing could be further from the truth.
In reality, the denomination's decision has unleashed a outpouring of anger
and commitment from across the country.

Phone calls and telegrams poured into the offices of Downtown Presbyterian
throughout the afternoon.  Last evening, supporters from across Western NY
joined church members to express outrage at the commission's decision
and solidarity with those who seek change.

Beginning with Virginia Davidson, who has led the congregation on a journey
toward full inclusion of gay and lesbian people since 1978, nearly 20
members spoke of how the church must continue its resolve.  The gathering
of several hundred frequently broke into applause despite the generally
quiet reflective tone of the evening.

At the close of the service of lamentation and renewal, the participants
encircled the sanctuary, holding hands as they sang "We are gay and straight
together and we are singing for our lives."

Although it isn't clear what the next step will be, one thing is certain.
Rochester can expect to hear more news from the Downtown United Presbyterian
Church.





-- 
Chuck Collins				Product Software Engineering
chuck@pixel.kodak.com			Eastman Kodak Company
(716)726-9461				901 Elmgrove Road
					Rochester, NY  14653-5811
From: laura@hoptoad.uucp (Laura Creighton)
Newsgroups: soc.motss
Subject: Re: Teledildonics
Date: 12 Nov 92 13:58:23 GMT
Reply-To: laura@hoptoad.UUCP (God)
Distribution: world
Organization: Nebula Consultants in San Francisco

In article <1dc0t1INNj22@master.cs.rose-hulman.edu> mgrthh@RoseVC.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Thomas H. Hopson) writes:
>
>>The last digit on the ISBN is a checksum used to help insure that the
>>entire number is entered correctly by humans. By a lot of quite
>>fascinating but not particularly motss relevant math, one good
>>checksum scheme involves a base 11 result. So how do you represent
>>that eleventh digit, since you've already used 0-9? Simple. Call it
>>"X".
>
>For someone who is going through the reasonably arduous task of cataloging
>their book collection, could you give me a pointer to where this 'fascinating'
>checksum scheme is documented?
>
>And yes, I know that this isn't motss-relevant, but, oh well.

can somebody please create soc.motss.politically.correct.of.absolutely.
never.to.be.denied.motss.relevance

or some such, so that my friends can post without apologising.

I'm bloody sick of the ``motss relevance'' line.

You're here, You're Queer, and You want to talk about something.
Don't apologise for anything.

If people want a more orderly, queers-only-talking-about-being-queers
group, let them get off their behinds and create one.

Damned if we should censor our posts because somebody thinks that
the odd thing we want to talk about isn't directly relavent to
whatever Politically Correct Queerfolk deem ``Gay Issues''.

I'm real bloody pissed about this.

Fuck off!  Build your own goddamned newsgroup.  I didn't
help build this one so that gay people can apologise
for being curious about what an ISBN number is.  Being
curious about Bear-Codes is fine, Bar Code is not.

Feh!

We used to welcome every new poster.  Now there are too
many for that, but the least we can do for the muffins
among us is to not lead them into the belief that if
they don't have a particularily ``motss-relevant'' (excuse
me while I barf) question, then they are not welcome.

I am well and truly  bloody pissed about this.

For you muffins out there who are intimidated by the
``motss relevance'' lines, please post, and accept an
early welcome from one irate motsser -- but not at you.

GRRRRR  (`motss-relevant'  bears take note)
GRRRRRRRRR
GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: thaaang@cwis.unomaha.edu (John Dorrance)
Subject: Re: after the fact de-muffing
Organization: University of Nebraska at Omaha
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 08:11:36 GMT

She uses the phrase 'thanks bunches'... she has to be good people.
Welcome, and stop in for lemonade and to take me with you!!!

John, gleeful

--
John Dorrance        * Sexyfunky Motherfuckerdiva *   thaaang@cwis.unomaha.edu

		I bet if you threw that ass into the air
			It'd turn into sunshine!
Xref: sparky soc.motss:47056 alt.politics.homosexuality:7047 co.politics:1800 co.general:1716 talk.politics.misc:59618 co.politics.amend2.discuss:13 boulder.general:1006
From: frankm@microsoft.com (Frank R.A.J. Maloney)
Subject: Re: The Hate Gene (was Re: Social Democracy)
Date: 10 Nov 92 16:43:43 GMT
Organization: Microsoft Windows/DOS Users Ed Group

Why would anyone hate Gene?

-- 
Frank Richard Aloysius Jude Maloney
	"Well, I'm a little muddled." -- Glinda
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: tom@flood.com (Tom Chatt)
Subject: Re: Gay Ski Week boycott?
Organization: The Flood Group, Inc.  Torrance, Ca.
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 92 07:49:05 GMT

wanek@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (John Wanek) writes:
| Does anyone know who sponsors the Gay Ski Week in Aspen, and whether
| there is a campaign to boycott it?

The upcoming Advocate issue (Nov 17) will include a message
from the editors urging a boycott of Colorado. I do not know
if they will specifically mention Gay Ski Week.

I myself believe that Aspen has been gay-friendly for a long
time, and I do know that locally they trounced Measure 2.
(Pitkin County was 2026 (28%) for, 5187 (72%) against.)

I haven't discussed it yet with my group of 8 who have
already put a deposit down on a fabu Victorian house,
but my inclination is toward going anyway. (And it's *not*
because of the deposit. I could forego the deposit, if
I felt sufficient moral imperative. I know others who
have already done just that. But I think a boycott of
Gay Ski Week is the wrong think to do. See my comments in
response to Steve Carpenter's post <Bx9HKK.4LK@fig.citib.com>.

See you there?

-- 
Tom Chatt                        \   Don't take offense, take action.
Internet: tom@flood.com           \    Speak up. When we remain silent,
UUCP: ...!uunet!flood!tom        / \     we oppress ourselves.
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: gsmith@clio.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de (Gene W. Smith)
Subject: Re: Our Gummint (was Re: Gay Sailor Reinstated)
Organization: IWR, University of Heidelberg, Germany
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 92 10:46:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.163032.2252@panix.com> mara@panix.com (Mara
Chibnik) writes:
>dyer@spdcc.com (Steve Dyer) writes (first quoting):

> >I like the word "hypocracy", however.  It deserved to
> >be invented if it hadn't already.

>Yeah, I think this about says it.  But I want to know if you have to
>go to med school before you can register as a Hypocrat.

Jahowl, but I would prefer hypocrapy or even hippocrapy.
Now *that* says something.

-- 
     Gene Ward Smith/Brahms Gang/IWR/Ruprecht-Karls University 
               gsmith@kalliope.iwr.uni-heidelberg.de
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: max@queernet.org (Max J. Rochlin)
Subject: Re: Gay Ski Week boycott?
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:16:44 GMT
Organization: QueerNet

In article <7660110@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> wanek@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (John Wanek) writes:
>Does anyone know who sponsors the Gay Ski Week in Aspen, and whether
>there is a campaign to boycott it?

I haven't heard of one yet.  IN yesterday's LA Times, though, some Aspen
Tourist offical said that there wouldn't be a boycott by the 4000 or
so GLBO* folks.  He stressed that GLBO* folks are welcome in Aspen.

...Max

-- 
+-----------------------------------------+
|  max@queernet.org  |   Max J. Rochlin   |
+-----------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: soc.motss
From: mattm@apple.com (Matthew Melmon)
Subject: Re: Moonshine, the election, and you
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:30:47 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.
Followup-To: soc.motss

In article <1992Nov5.011931.11510@reed.edu>, nelson@reed.edu (Nelson Minar)
wrote:

> What's up with this term limit stuff - how come people didn't campaign
> against it? Do all the career politicians assume the courts will turn
> the laws over?

Yes.

*X*