HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: Bar-Ilan University Computing Center, Israel
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 15:59:20 IST
From: Danny Rothenberg <X68147@BARILVM.BITNET>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: JANET/Internet
 <1992Nov11.085949.25026@rdg.dec.com>

In article <1992Nov11.085949.25026@rdg.dec.com>, evansg@uproar.enet.dec.com
(Gwyn Evans @ IME) says:
>
>In article <92315.142837X68147@BARILVM.BITNET>, Danny Rothenberg
><X68147@BARILVM.BITNET> writes:
>>
>>Is JANET part of Internet, or is there just a gateway?
>
>   Well, if you'd care to define the Internet, (isn't it just a
>collection of networks joined by gateways?), I might be able to
>answer that question.
>
>   In practice, mail from/to JANET normally goes through a gateway
>machine that converts the JANET (UK *academic*) address of the form
>'uk.ac...' to/from the form '...ac.uk'.
>
>   On a more general note, many people on JANET believe that all of
>the UK domain uses the JANET form of addressing. I'm afraid that
>they're misinformed but anyone who wishes to contact me to discuss
>it may do so at the address below or at 'gwyn@cix.compulink.co.uk'.
>
>--

What I really meant was that is it possible to 'talk' from a 'normal'
Internet node to somebody on JANET?


>+======================================================================+
>| Gwyn Evans  | evansg@uproar.enet.dec.com |  Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK  |
>| DESISCo - Digital Equipment Service Industries Solutions Company Ltd |
>|  Views expressed and statements made are mine and not those of DEC   |
>+======================================================================+

thanks
-------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Danny Rothenberg    |
Internet:           |   quis custodes ipsos custendiendos?
X68147@vm.biu.ac.il |
Bitnet:             |   "Well.  Apart from that, what have the Romans
x68147@barilvm      |    ever done for us?"  -Reg  ('Life of Brian')
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
From: anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker)
Subject: Re: The amazing disappearing British Constitution
Reply-To: anw@maths.nott.ac.uk (Dr A. N. Walker)
Organization: Maths Dept., Nott'm Univ., UK.
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 14:49:58 GMT

In article <lfqqn8INNa2s@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM> linden@positive.Eng.Sun.COM
(Trelford Pinkerton) writes:

[various UK Acts roughly equivalent to the USA Constitution deleted]

>We've already established that mere laws cannot comprise a constitution.
>A Constitution is a framework within which all laws are made, and with
>which all laws must agree.   It's a "meta-law" in comp sci terms.

	This is confusing two concepts.  The framework within which our
laws are made has nothing to do with Habeas Corpus and its friends;  it's
the set of rules by which law-making progresses.  Habeas Corpus, on the
other hand, is a perfectly normal law which could be repealed.  In the
UK, repealing HC would be straightforward, provided at least that all the
main parties agreed that its repeal was called for.  In the USA, such a
repeal could presumably be struck down by a bolshie Supreme Court.  There
would instead have to be a two-stage process:  either (a) you would first
have to amend the constitution and then proceed, or (b) you would first
have to replace the members of the Supreme Court until they agreed with
you.  The final effect is the same in both countries, however.

	The meta-laws in the UK are perfectly well written-down;  but
they are for the most part not themselves laws [as you indeed require].
(Some are -- eg, the laws governing who can vote.)  An example of such
a meta-law is the one banning hybrid Bills (of which, according to Urban
Legend, the most famous was one in which some obscure new measure to do
with sewage disposal had tacked on to it by some disgruntled clerk that
"J Arthur Boggis of 123 Acacia Avenue, Sometown was hereby divorced from
his wife Mildred").  Accusations of hybridicity have occasionally been
made, and invariably result in much behind-the-scenes scurrying by party
functionaries attempting to patch things up.

>Perhaps you could provide a list of recent laws in Britain that have
>been overturned as "unconstitutional" by the courts?

	The UK courts don't have this role, though I seem to remember a
few cases where courts have essentially given up and deemed particular
laws to be so incomprehensible as to be unenforceable, and Lord Denning
in particular was famous for [mis-]interpreting laws that he felt were
unfair.

	By the time UK legislation becomes law, it has *already* been
through the nearest we have to your Supreme Court:  it has been considered
by the Law Lords in the House of Lords and by the Privy Council in advising
the Monarch.  My expectation would be that anything that the LL or the PC
thought was unconstitutional would be referred back [quietly], rather than
involve the Queen directly in a controversy.

-- 
Andy Walker, Maths Dept., Nott'm Univ., UK.
anw@maths.nott.ac.uk
From: mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Private Uni's
Date: 6 Nov 92 16:12:54 GMT
Organization: Computer Science Dept, QMW, University of London, UK.

From: matt@castle.ed.ac.uk (M P Taylor)
>
>Err excuse me but bollox...
>
>In article <1992Nov6.103222.3273@dcs.qmw.ac.uk> mmh@cs.qmw.ac.uk (Matthew Huntbach) writes:
>>illuminating. Many of the misconceptions about English
>>universities arise because people tend to think in terms of
>>Oxford and Cambridge. In fact these two are not very typical of
>>the rest, they have a lot of peculiarities due to being the
>>only ones founded centuries ago.
>>
>Oxford and Cambridge are NOT the *only* ones founded centuries ago.
>
>Durham, Bath, Bristol to name but 3 English ones. As for other British
>then how about St Andrews, Glasgow and Edinburgh?
>
>Beware of sweeping statements please readers and writers.

The University of Bath was a technical college until a few decades
ago. I think the University of Bristol was founded earlier in
this century. Durham may go back as far as the 18th century
(both these facts are checkable, but I'm not going back to the
library now) but it is nowhere near as old as Oxford or Cambridge.
When I say "centuries" I mean as in "more than two".

And I very deliberately said "English" not British.

So bollox to you too.

Matthew Huntbach
From: wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: The dog in the House of Commons
Date: 5 Nov 92 19:48:11 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

In article <Bx8K6E.Lws@sci.kun.nl>, caspar@sci.kun.nl (Caspar Terheggen) writes:
> I hope you didn't expect some political observation, because this
> is about a real dog.  ;-)
> 
> Watching the debates about the Maastricht treaty, I saw a dog
> lying on the floor on "Labour's side" of the House of Commons
> (sp?).  This was quite a surprise, because I don't think they
> would allow a dog in the "tweede kamer" of the Dutch Parliament.
> I had noticed it before, but it's not always there.  Whose dog
> is it?
> 
It belongs to David Blunkett, who is blind and one of Labour's front bench
team. And it is not just any dog---it is his guide dog.

Now can anyone tell me. Is this Offa? For some reason I thought Offa was a
labrador. I also have a vague recollection that he/she had been retired earlier
this year. Am I right?

-- 

Stephen Wilcox             |   Remember what happened to the dinosaurs!
wilcox@maths.oxford.ac.uk  |    I did---and look what happened to me.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
From: dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com (Dave Jones)
Subject: Re: An astonishing Guy
Organization: Vonnegut Tent Rentals, Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 16:33:13 GMT

Steven Bellovin (smb@ulysses.att.com) wrote:
> In article <8200.9211060924@thor.cf.ac.uk>, spxsjm@thor.cf.ac.uk (Mr S J Morris 92) writes:
> > As for non-Catholics, there was virtually unlimited religious freedom.
> > The period saw an enormous proliferation of religious groups -
> > Presbyterians, Independents, Baptists, Quakers, Levellers, True
> > Levellers, Diggers, Fifth Monarchists... - who so long as they toed the
> > line and didn't start using violence against those who disagreed with
> > them (the Fifth Monarchists fell down here) could say and do what they
> > liked.
> 
> Sure -- since as I recall the Jews had been expelled from the country
> some years earlier, even they didn't have to worry...

Try centuries, not years.  The expulsions and massacres occurred in the 14th
century, if memory serves.  Hardly a stick you could beat the 17th cent.
with.

ObGuyFawkes: one of the more infamous massacres occurred in GF's home town
of York.  Something about a wooden tower, a lot of people inside it, and
fire.  I used to live just up the street from there.

--
||Halloween Candy: the office snack    |
||from Nov. 1st onwards............... |Puff the Magic Dragon
||-------------------------------------|Lived by the sea
||Dave Jones (dj@ekcolor.ssd.kodak.com)|Who knows what's in the autumn mists
||Eastman Kodak Co. Rochester, NY      |In the mind of Yadallee?
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn)
Subject: Re: Accent, Dialect and Rabbie Burns
Organization: Digital Equipment Co. Ltd., Reading, England
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 11:46:40 GMT


In article <1992Nov10.102526.16570@osf.org>, david@postman.gr.osf.org (David George) writes...
>In article <1992Nov10.085302.25302@rdg.dec.com>, cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com (Craig Cockburn) writes:
>|> Many Scots (one 't') are abandoning Burns because the Scottish Education
>|> Department is no doubt influenced from England. I saw the "English" 
>|> examination papers this year, and whilst it was evident that the pupils
>|> were studying Shakespeare, there was no mention of Burns at all. Burns
>|> is probably the world's best known poet and he's not being studied in his
>|> home land!
> 
>Probably... you're beginning to sound like a lager commercial.  A quick poll
>of the office reveals the knowledge of Burns to be about zero amongst none
>English speakers.
> 
Which lager commercial? I don't drink much lager, and I don't watch much TV.

>Still take heart Craig, I'm sure that people are reading Burns outside of the
>'O' level syllabus in Scotland and elsewhere and it's a well known factoid that
>forced study of poets or authors is enough to put you off their works for life.
>Maybe this is the trump card of the S.E.D ?
> 

Is anyone reading Sorley Maclean in your office?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Craig Cockburn, Digital Equipment Co. Ltd, Reading, England.     Suas
  Internet: cockburn@edieng.enet.dec.com                           leis
  UUCP:..!decwrl!edieng.enet.dec.com!cockburn                      a'
                                                                   Gha\idhlig!
  Views here are my own, and are not necessarily those of Digital
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: bets@matt.ksu.ksu.edu (Beth Schwindt)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,alt.folklore.urban
Subject: Re: Anglican vs C of E
Date: 10 Nov 1992 23:33:34 -0600
Organization: Kansas State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: matt.ksu.ksu.edu

In <1992Nov10.105829.10026@vax.oxford.ac.uk> wilcox@vax.oxford.ac.uk writes:
OB
>In article <lfqrt4INNa64@exodus.Eng.Sun.COM>, linden@positive.Eng.Sun.COM (Trelford Pinkerton) writes:
>> I would like to hear what the difference is between
>> the Anglican church, and the Church of England.  This is in
>> the context of the Monarch being the Supreme Head of Britain's 
>> official state religion.
>> 
>Simple. The Anglican Church is world-wide, on a similar basis to the Roman
>Catholic Church, and includes the American Espicopalian Church an various
                                            ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Just a small thing, but the American branch of the Anglican church is
the Episcopal church, its members Episcopalians.  (Since I am one, I'm
honor-bound to correct the error when I see it....... :)  )



Beth



-- 
"We are not free; it was never intended we should be.  A book of rules
is placed in our cradles, and we never get rid of it until we reach
our graves."--E.W. Howe, 1924  
bets@matt.ksu.ksu.edu              bets@ksuvm.ksu.edu
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: An astonishing Guy
Date: 10 Nov 1992 22:47:10 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com


In article <MATTHEW.92Nov10185411@eeyore.uk.tele.nokia.fi>, matthew@uk.tele.nokia.fi writes:
> 
> Maybe I've missed something, but I always thought that Habeus Corpus was a
> law enacted to prevent people being tried for murder when there was no body
> of the deceased to prove that murder was indeed done...

You might be thinking of corpus delecti.   The corpus in habeas
corpus is the corpus of the bod being accused, not the bod that
got bumped off.    It says that you have to produce the accused
bod before a magistrate within a certain period of time, or face
various penalties.    It's a rather complicated and very important
Act, and well worth the read.

> What's this got to do with fat lords and adjudicators?

Beats me.

jon.
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Date: 9 Nov 92 21:54:07 GMT
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <1992Nov9.174526.17794@gssec.bt.co.uk> cwilson@gssec.bt.co.uk (Colin Wilson) writes:
>
>When I lived in London, some years ago, I can remember serious matters being
>discussed on the TV, in a Cockney accent, by Janet Street-Porter, Danny Baker
>and so on.

Yes, and no one took them seriously.

--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk
From: livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Rule Britannia
Date: 12 Nov 1992 21:12:37 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: solntze.wpd.sgi.com


In article <1992Nov12.114753.8084@infodev.cam.ac.uk>, gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk writes:
> In article <1dslaaINN3k@fido.asd.sgi.com> livesey@solntze.wpd.sgi.com (Jon Livesey) writes:
> >
> >As I said before, I don't think that I have to show that in
> >each and every case, PR has led to disaster.  I merely observe
> >that for every Germany, where some form of PR seems to work
> >fairly well, there is some other country where it does not seem
> >to work well at all.
> 
> But this is precisely my point.  By talking about "PR" as though it
> were a single homogeneous entity, you obscure the issue.

That may be your point, but unfortunately you are not the
only person who supports *some* form of PR.   As far as I
know, there is some support for almost every variety of PR,
and I'm not going to turn myself into an expert in PR in
order to deal with them one by one.

> What would be constructive would be to look at the political stability
> of countries with a German-style system as a group,.....

It could be constructive if stability were the only issue.
However, there are other aspects of PR that I find
problematic - I raised my objections to coalition
government already - and they appear to me to be features
common to PR in general, rather than breaking neatly across
a German/non-German divide.

This may not be your intention, but I sometimes wonder if
the German version of PR gets boosted in order to appeal to
our natural tendency to assume that whatever the Germans do
must work fairly well.   But this has been a bad week for
Germany.  The President and Chancellor physically
attacked.   What looks very much like a political trial
starting.   The admission that the German Army played host
to Neo-Nazi Groups carrying out "military-sport"
exercises.   The admission that several German soldiers
have been indicted for participating in neo-Nazi
anti-refugee riots.

I'm not sure sure any more just how great Germany is, as a
model.   And by the way, I'm not a knee-jerk Germany-basher.
I've defended Germany on the net more than once.   But that
was before recent events.

jon.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: sue@netcom.com (Sue Miller)
Subject: Re: How to insult a Brit (reprise)
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:39:28 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.183620.13479@math.ucla.edu> pugh@pico.math.ucla.edu (David Pugh) writes:
>>>>   Also, we need a gender-
>>>>   neutral form, or both masculine and feminine forms. If 'Britishwoman' is
>>>>   preferred, so be it. But 'Briton' sounds like you paint yourself with
>>>>   woad.
>>>>
>>>How about Britperson?
>>>
>>>David
>>
>>Would that be pronounced "Brittperson" or "Brightperson"?
>>
>>Gerry
>
>Brittperson I guess. As a Brit myself I don't think Brightperson would
>be appropriate.
>
>The plural would of course be Britpeople.
>
>Someone said that a Merkun should therefore be called Ameriperson implying
>I suppose that all Merkuns are happy. Is this true?
>

Naturally.

Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: jharrel@domo.claremont.edu (John Harrelson)
Subject: English Terms (40's, 50's,'60's)
Keywords: Ted, Mod, et al 
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 01:39:58 GMT


Help, please...
TeddyBoy= male, bad boy 
Mod= ? 
Rocker= ? 
FEMALE ROLE NAMES, please...
 If yo' momma was a ______ who married a Rocker, what was she? 
 If yo' momma married a Mod, what was she? 
 If HER mama married a Ted, what was she? (yeah, pregnant...I don't need that)
 I'm looking for the "street"names... not the press lingo...and anything else  
that this might stir up (like where is Lewisham?) is welcome...
	Britons only, please 
				My thanks, 
				John H. 
				jharrel@ptnext.claremont.edu
From: gdb15@grebe.cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
Subject: Re: Magnus Pyke (was: BBC election coverage
Date: 8 Nov 92 23:12:29 GMT
Reply-To: gdb15@cl.cam.ac.uk (Guy Barry)
Organization: U of Cambridge Computer Lab, UK

In article <92313.1657132893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA> 2893684@QUCDN.QueensU.CA (andy) writes:
>
>What ever happened to Magnus Pyke anyway, I loved him on "Don't Ask Me!"

He died about a week ago.

>By the way, is Geoffrey Palmer still around, he was mysteriously replaced
>on one series, I think it was called "Executive Stress" and I'm worried
>he might have passed on.

He's alive as far as I know.

--
Guy Barry, University of Cambridge | Phone: +44 (0)223 334757 
Computer Laboratory                | Fax: +44 (0)223 334678
New Museums Site, Pembroke Street  | JANET: Guy.Barry@uk.ac.cam.cl 
Cambridge CB2 3QG, England, UK     | Internet: Guy.Barry@cl.cam.ac.uk 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british
From: graikund@jupiter.newcastle.edu.au (Gitesh Raikundalia)
Subject: Private Uni's
Organization: Uni of Newcastle, Australia
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:13:32 GMT

Dear British Netters
	
	I was hoping to ask if anybody out there can give me an "order of
reputation" of private universities (if any) in England. How well-accepted
are they compared to the public uni's, like Oxford, Cambridge, etc.? Do
the public universities take postgraduate/research students via personal
funding?

	I will appreciate if anybody can give me such information. BTW,
I am from Australia.
								Gitesh

-- 
Regarding the supposed return of Jesus Christ on the 29th October, 1992, 
Jesus says in the Bible:

"So if anyone tells you, 'There He is, out in the desert,' do not go out;
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british,soc.culture.celtic
From: cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Chris Cooke)
Subject: Re: Accent and Dialect, the politics there
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, Scotland
	<A.Grant.20.721307237@ucs.cam.ac.uk>
	<1992Nov10.064324.23292@philmtl.philips.ca>
	<A.Grant.24.721429206@ucs.cam.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:32:58 GMT

In article <A.Grant.24.721429206@ucs.cam.ac.uk> A.Grant@ucs.cam.ac.uk (Alasdair Grant) writes:

   For communicating, for getting closer to people from other countries.
   For experiencing the world's great literature, theatre and films in their 
   original languages. For getting a better job. For helping Britain's import/
   export balance. Whatever your priority is.

So we experience the world's great literature and theatre in their original
languages, while remaining totally ignorant of our own great literature and
theatre in its original language, because it's not on your list of "approved"
languages?  No thanks.

   So everyone else should be subjected to this stigma too?  The reason Gaelic
   (and Welsh) were suppressed in schools was because this was educational
   policy, i.e. with the intention of benefiting the children themselves.

It was more likely to produce generations of tongue-tied illiterates, not
properly fluent in either their native language or in English.  Bilingualism
is a far, far better idea.

   But why is Scotland special?  Should children be allowed to write essays
   in Cockney rhyming slang?  

If the education authorities can identify a standard Cockney language, with
identifiable Cockney grammar and so on, then there's no reason why children
shouldn't be educated as bilingual Cockney and English.  But confusing the
two in the same lessons, as you seem to imply above, would be a bad idea.  I
know nothing of Cockney Rhyming slang other than what I've seen on a zillion
TV programmes, but I'd be surprised if it was classed as a language in its
own right.  (I get the impression that some other posters on this group are
arguing against the pro-Scots articles for a similar reason - they simply
doubt that it's a language, because they've only ever heard Scottish people
speaking distorted English, rather than Scots.)

   Possibly. When are you suggesting Scots should be taught - as a first,
   second or third language? Bear in mind that most schools teach precisely
   _one_ language to everyone (other than that which is used for teaching), 
   and that others are for highly-motivated students only.

That's because most schools aren't bilingual!!!

   If the Welsh experience is anything to go by, language issues divert
   energy that ought to go into a serious look at economic problems.

I'm not such an expert on the Welsh language experience, but I'll say one
thing: right now, having a "serious look at economic problems" is pretty
pointless if it's the Tories who constantly rule, whatever the result of the
elections are.  Language is something we can do something about; economic
matters largely aren't, but are dictated to us from outside.
--
	-- Chris. 	cc@dcs.ed.ac.uk   (on Janet, cc@uk.ac.ed.dcs)

		
Newsgroups: soc.culture.british