HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: User's Guide to the Changing USENET
Date: 13 Dec 92 22:38:50 GMT
Article-I.D.: gaia.1gge1qINNgr3
Organization: Oregon State University, College of Oceanography
NNTP-Posting-Host: skyking.oce.orst.edu

In article <EMCGUIRE.92Dec12123804@mother.intellection.com> emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire) writes:
>In article <2B2756A2.6E3C@tct.com> chip@tct.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
>   According to ross-c@scs.leeds.ac.uk:
>   >If you can't attack the argument, attack the newsreading software.

>I have had no trouble following the article references included both
>in the header and the body of Ross-c's articles.  Neither, I suspect,
>did John Stanley, who was the originator of that ridiculous comment
>facetiously quoted by Ross-c.

Apparently, you have had serious trouble following the references.

The "ridiculous comment facetiously quoted by ross-c" first appeared in

]Date: Tue, 8 Dec 92 22:35:20 GMT
]Message-ID: <12689.9212082235@csparc12.scs.leeds.ac.uk>
]From: ross-c@scs.leeds.ac.uk
]
]Hmmm. If you can't attack the argument, attack the newsreading software :-)

Which I then quoted in a reply:

]From: stanley@skyking.OCE.ORST.EDU (John Stanley)
]Date: 9 Dec 1992 19:28:57 GMT
]Message-ID: <1g5hdpINNbov@gaia.ucs.orst.edu>
]References: <12689.9212082235@csparc12.scs.leeds.ac.uk>
]
]In article <12689.9212082235@csparc12.scs.leeds.ac.uk> ross-c@scs.leeds.ac.uk writes:
]>Hmmm. If you can't attack the argument, attack the newsreading software :-)

Which, you will note, is quite properly attributed. 

Now, try again. Who originated the "ridiculous comment"?
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.native
From: emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire)
Subject: Re: soc.culture.aboriginal.american?
Organization: Intellection, Inc.
	<EMCGUIRE.92Dec10102232@fuller.intellection.com>
	<1992Dec13.201327.23092@spdcc.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 06:12:25 GMT

In article <1992Dec13.201327.23092@spdcc.com> gst@spdcc.com (Gary S. Trujillo) writes:

   I could accept the term "aboriginal" as a replacement for "native."
   However, I would like to note that the term "aborigine" is one which I
   have never heard anyone in Canada use (and I lived in that country for
   three years).  The terms currently in most widespread use are "First
   Peoples" or "aboriginal peoples" - but NEVER "aborigines" - which I
   have only heard used (often with a derisive intent) about the First
   Peoples of Australia.

As far as the derisive use of "aborigine," I regretfully add that any
common name for an aboriginal culture is often used derisively.  I
can't be the only person who has heard "indian" used by one of my
fellow citizens with the same tone of fear or disrespect as "nigger."

I really don't remember whether the Canadian media used both, or just
"aboriginal."  "First Peoples," on the other hand, is not a term I
ever heard before the present discussion.  Of course that merely means
it may not be current among whites in Iowa and Texas.

My thesaurus lists the following synonyms for "native:" "local,"
"original," "indigenous," "domestic," "aboriginal," and "primitive."
Some of these are not worth considering.  What remains:

  o  native -- considered by some to be unclear

  o  indigenous -- I personally dislike this because of the easy
     confusion with "indigent," that is, "penniless"

  o  aboriginal -- clear enough, and you say it's used widely
-- 
Ed McGuire                   1603 LBJ Freeway, Suite 780
Systems Administrator/       Dallas, Texas 75234
 Member of Technical Staff   214/620-2100, FAX 214/484-8110
Intellection, Inc.           <ed@intellection.com>
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: phardie@nastar.uucp (Pete Hardie)
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL: Yes votes >= 200+2*No Votes
Organization: Digital Transmission Systems, Duluth, GA.
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 17:28:20 GMT

In article <werner-101292165353@128.32.157.31> werner@soe.berkeley.edu (John Werner) writes:
>There seems to be an implicit assumption that new groups are bad.  Why?  If
>100 (or 200 or whatever) people want to create a new group on some esoteric
>topic, why not let them?  It might keep their boring, esoteric topic out of
>the groups you like to read.

Because:
a) it might split discussion along uselessly fine lines
	(comp.ibm.pc.486dx and comp.ibm.pc.486sx, for example)
b) it might be badly named
	(sci.aquaria, rec.pederasty, comp.std.cobol... (ok, the last one's a joke))
c) it might duplicate existing, but otherwise-placed discussions
	(comp.unix.folklore vs. comp.society.folklore)
d) new groups *always* take up more disk space (a directory entry, at least,
	as well as the additional traffic they engender)


-- 
Pete Hardie:  phardie@nastar  (voice) (404) 497-0101
Digital Transmission Systems, Inc., Duluth GA
Member, DTS Dart Team           |  cat * | egrep -v "signature virus|infection" 
Position:  Goalie               |
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: durrell@pinball.arcade.uiowa.edu (Bryant Durrell)
Subject: Re: RFD: rec.games.cyber renaming and unmoderation
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 01:38:54 GMT
Organization: University of Iowa

In article <1992Dec11.050834.2048@archtwr.tower.nullnet.fi> elandal@archtwr.tower.nullnet.fi (Ismo Peltonen) writes:
>  I'd very much like to see unmoderated rec.games.frp.cyber, but if that
>fails, I'd like to see rec.games.cyber UNmoderated. How about:

>1> unmoderate rec.games.cyber
>2> create rec.games.frp.cyber unmoderated, and remove rec.games.cyber if
>this passes.

That pretty much works.  It doesn't solve the problem of dealing
with the difficulties of unmoderating a group.  I don't have the
technical knowledge to know if this is really a problem.  I've
seen conflicting statements on this matter.  Sigh.

-- 
Bryant Durrell					   durrell@chop.isca.uiowa.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 I feed on the flesh of the living, and I vote.
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.native
From: emcguire@intellection.com (Ed McGuire)
Subject: Re: Give up, Dave, you've lost!
Organization: Intellection, Inc.
	<cuz.723904780@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu>
	<1992Dec9.222402.17001@jato.jpl.nasa.gov>
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 17:38:12 GMT

In article <1992Dec9.222402.17001@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> dave@jato.jpl.nasa.gov (Dave Hayes) writes:

   Someone (I think his name is Ed) pointed out that no matter what
   the outcome of a revote, the users lose either way. I can't help
   but agree at this point, since there will be enough admins who are
   and are not acknowledging this vote as to cause the group to remain
   split.

I don't know if I'm the Ed you are think of, since there was at least
one other Ed involved in the dispute.  I think the users are best
served by not screwing around with the newsgroup any more.  That
opinion is supported by the results of the straw poll I conducted
earlier, if you believe the results were representative of the *.synth
readers.

Is the group really split due to admins ignoring the vote?  I don't
think we'll know until the rmgroup is issued.
-- 
Ed McGuire                   1603 LBJ Freeway, Suite 780
Systems Administrator/       Dallas, Texas 75234
 Member of Technical Staff   214/620-2100, FAX 214/484-8110
Intellection, Inc.           <ed@intellection.com>
Lines: 9
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 92 13:23:28 MST
From: gritton@alaska.et.byu.edu (Jamie Gritton)
Organization: Brigham Young University, Provo UT USA
Newsgroups: news.groups,us.groups
Subject: Re: Court Rulings Hierarchy
Reply-To: gritton@byu.edu
	<adams.724019037@spssig> <1992Dec11.163132.9799@u.washington.edu>

tzs@carson.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:

> Even though there has been some divergence since then between the common
> law in the United States and the common law in England (and in Canada,
> and in Australia, etc.), there is still much in common.

... that part being known as the "common common law".
--
James Gritton - gritton@byu.edu - I disclaim
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: Andrew McCallum <andrewm@zooid.guild.org>
Subject: Re: STRAW VOTE ON NAME FOR NATIVE AMERICANS NEWSGROUP
X-To: JOEL FURR
Organization: The Zoo of Ids
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 00:00:00 GMT

From jfurr@polaris.async.vt.edu (Joel Furr)
>soc.culture.native
>soc.culture.native.american (recognizing that there is no soc.culture.native
>                             group for this to hang under at present)

    Hmmm. I think that

>soc.culture.native-america

    might be better, but leaving the .native there also leaves the
possibility of adding on other extentions, like different tribes or groups.

>soc.culture.amerind

    Who?  This one's confusing.

                                                  Andrew

Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.native
From: speights@iear.arts.rpi.edu (Arlen Speights)
Subject: soc.culture.native
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 01:43:35 GMT

I'm in favor of creating soc.culture.native, with a few reservations:

-- discussion has appeared on alt.native a few times about splitting
   the group so that a group serves discussion of issues dealing only
   with Native Americans exists.  But like the proposed group a few months
   ago, the idea was defeated in discussion or vote.
   If we transform alt.native into soc.culture.native with the future
   possibility of creating within the soc.culture.native hierarchy a
   soc.culture.native.american, we might find the same difficulty and
   opposition (which seemed to be centered around nomenclature rather
   than the issue of a newsgroup being formed).  This of course depends
   on how great the degree of increased traffic will be in the new
   hierarchy.  What I'm suggesting is the creation of soc.culture.native
   AND soc.culture.native.american, at the same time.
   On alt.native, there has been a steady but low traffic; probably not
   enough traffic to warrant the creation of a specific group for just
   Native American issues.  But I think it's a good idea to consider
   such a group.  My own interest is first in Native American issues and
   then in larger concerns of sustainable cultures worldwide.  There are
   times that I don't have the time to read postings about non-NA issues
   although they affect my personal situation.  A strictly NA group would
   be good for those cases, and this is how many hierarchies work on
   UseNet.
   Another consideration is the nature of postings on alt.native, which
   quite often are either informational postings or discussion-oriented
   postings.  The NativeNet mailing list seems to have dealt with this
   situation very nicely by the creation of nn.general and nn.chat.  This
   might be a worthwhile idea for soc.culture.native, as it seems to be
   a compatible match for linking the UseNet group(s) to the mailing list
   which generates a good part of the alt.native traffic.

Arlen
-- 
:-(-:-(-:-(-:-( speights@iear.arts.rpi.edu )-:-)-:-)-:-)-:
"Even now, we scarcely feel our hearts beat before they break in protest"
                                                         -Stanley Diamond
                                                                       --
Xref: sparky news.groups:24496 alt.native:1447
From: gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us (Gary S. Trujillo)
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.native
Subject: Re: soc.culture.<whatever>.*   [ native/indigenous/aboriginal ]
Date: 16 Dec 92 21:46:25 GMT
Article-I.D.: gnosys.1992Dec16.214625.10366

Oops.  I just realized that some people may not have the benefit of news-
reading software which keeps track of article threads even when the subject
changes, so I think I should have kept the word "native" in the subject
line in my recent posting to news.groups, to make it easier to spot.  In
any case, if you missed it and you're interested in the discussion of the
new newsgroup(s) for discussing and exchanging information about native/
indigenous/aboriginal people(s), please check out my article with the title

        soc.culture.<whatever>.*

In that article, I attempt to justify the initial creation of two newsgroups,
along the lines recently suggested by Floyd Davidson.

Thanks.

Gary
--
    Gary S. Trujillo                            gst@gnosys.svle.ma.us
Somerville, Massachusetts              {wjh12,bu.edu,spdcc,ima,cdp}!gnosys!gst
From: bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray)
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: RFD: talk.politics.patriot
Date: 20 Dec 92 19:57:19 GMT
Reply-To: bu008@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Brandon D. Ray)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


In a previous article, visser@convex.com (Lance Visser) says:

>In <1gjc0uINN2qa@news.UU.NET> brians@atlastele.com (Brian Sheets) writes:
>
>+>I would like to propose a newsgroup for the patriot movement in the U.S.
>+>This would include discussions on rights violations by legislation, gold 
>+>and silver as payment for debts, freedom organizations and many other basic 
>+>US Constitutional topics.
>
>	How about talk.politics.reactionary as an alternative?
>
>
This would only be reasonable if a group were also created called
talk.politics.tax-spend-and-regulate were also created, to give the liberals
someplace to go.
>
>
>

-- 
******************************************************************************
The opinions expressed by the author are insightful, intelligent and very
carefully thought out.  It is therefore unlikely that they are shared by the
University of Iowa or Case Western Reserve University.
Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.config,alt.folklore.computers,alt.fan.john-palmer
From: scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons)
Subject: Re: RESULT: comp.society.folklore unmoderation fails 729:151
Organization: Industrial Technology Institute
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:29:48 GMT

weave@apache.dtcc.edu (Ken Weaverling) writes:

>In article <1992Dec17.020351.23814jp@tygra.Michigan.COM> jp@tygra.Michigan.COM (John Palmer) writes:
>>
>>PS: I'm sending you a Christmas present :->

>Pretty cute, unfortunately, the rest of us have to deal with your present...

>In article <1992Dec17.020219.23751news@tygra.Michigan.COM> it *appears* you 
>   sent a control message:

>> newgroup comp.society.folklore
>... with the comment ...
>> As per voting.
>>   FOR: 729
>>    AGAINST: 151
>>   FOR COUNT > 100? YES

Before getting too excited, it's worth doing a bit of research . . .

The Path: on the article when it arrived here was 
  hela.iti.org!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!caen!destroyer!Tygra.Michigan.COM!news

A few quick connects to the nntp servers on destroyer, caen and uunet show
that neither of the first two has the article while the third does.  I
was not able to retrieve the article from uunet, so cannot say what the
path looks like there.  Cs.utexas.edu refuses connections (correctly)
from all machines I have access to.  Usc is our feed.

Steve "not a fan of John Palmer but not a fan of lynchings either" Simmons
-- 
	"You can't get here from here."
Newsgroups: news.groups
Subject: Re: PROPOSAL:  Yes votes >= 200+2*No Votes
From: peter@ferranti.com (peter da silva)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 16:44:19 GMT
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC

In article <1992Dec17.154456.8812@nastar.uucp> phardie@nastar.uucp (Pete Hardie) writes:
> >A bigger problem is how to measure and how much credibility to
> >give NO votes.

> How can you tell the reasons behind a NO vote, with enough objectivity to
> satisfy the news admins?  For every poorly-movitated NO vote there is
> another, equally vehement, but valid NO vote.

Well, yes. That's why it's a bigger problem. We had the "NO votes counter
YES votes 1:1" rule (the original rule), and then we had the 2/3 rule, which
made the NO votes a bit stronger on popular votes. What I'm proposing is that
if simple popularity should not be enough to put a bad group through (which
is the logic behind the 2/3 rule) then NO votes should be completely decoupled
from YES votes.
-- 
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
From: StarOwl@uiuc.edu (StarOwl)
Subject: Re: STRAW VOTE ON NAME FOR NATIVE AMERICANS NEWSGROUP
Reply-To: StarOwl@uiuc.edu
Organization: Actuarial Science Program at UIUC
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 18:07:46 GMT

jfurr@polaris.async.vt.edu (Joel Furr) writes:

>Okey-dokey.  It's becoming increasingly clear that what we need here, to avoid
>the "my name is best," "no it's not" stuff that's otherwise going to take a
>native Americans newsgroup down in flames, is a straw poll.

I know that this suggestion might not be all that well received, but if
there is going to be a straw poll, would someone please take charge
for it *now* or could the poll please be held off until 
after New Years' at least?

Remember, a lot of University-related net.folks will begin to disappear
this week.  Is it really fair to them to hold a vote/poll while they are
gone?

Also, please remember to crosspost the "formal" straw poll announcement
to alt.native.

>I'd suggest the following as possible names, with people of course being free
>to suggest others:

[...]

My first preference for a group name would be soc.culture.native.american,
as it is probably the *least* confusing, commonly used "politikally korrekt"
possible name.

Soc.culture.native runs a close second in my mind, for the reasons other
people have expressed.  My primary reservation is that the group's 
purpose might not be as immediately clear with the name s.c.n rather than
s.c.n.a.

I don't like the "feel" of soc.culture.indigenous, and I have a problem
with anything that hints at the "Indian" misnomer -- that problem being
one of using correct terminology, and a fear of another s.c.i.a fiasco.

I suppose that soc.culture.aboriginal.american would be another 
acceptable alternative, so long as the .american is included
to prevent possible confusion between "Aboriginies" and aboriginal
Americans.  But somehow I don't like the feel of this one either.
--
Michael Adams				| Science without religion is lame;
Actuarial Science Program @ UIUC	| religion without science is blind.
StarOwl@uiuc.edu			| 		-- Thomas Edison
NBCS: B1f+t-w+g+k++s+me+h-qv		|	
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: thietaniemi@cc.helsinki.fi
Subject: Re: RFD: soc.culture.baltic/balticum?
Followup-To: news.groups
Organization: University of Helsinki
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 1992 18:14:29 GMT


In article <1gacd1INNltk@rodan.UU.NET>, sommar@enea.se (Erland Sommarskog)
writes:

> This is a request for discussion of creating of the newsgroup
> soc.culture.baltic, which I think is long overdue.

After today's heated discussion, I think I second the motion!

> The group would be unmoderated.


Don't you think there might be some need of moderation?


> The group would be devoted to the countries Estonia, Latvia and
> Lithuania, often lumped together under the label "The Baltic states".


This creates some problems.
Finland is a Nordic and a Baltic state, the majority of population
of which consist of Baltic Finns (most of them Eastern Balts).

According the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact, Finland, Estonia and
Latvia were "the Baltic countries". In the document:
"Die Baltischen La"nder, darunter Finnland, Estland und La"ttland".
According to these "gentlemen", Lithuania belonged to central Europe.

And in the history there were still another Baltic province in Russia,
the Ingrian lands.

What unites the "Baltics" (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) is the
Soviet occupation. This is a sign of NEGATIVE identity.

Estonia - perhaps even Latvia - belongs to the Nordic countries.
And Finland and Estonia are twin nations in the same manner
as Latvians and Lithuanians are. And Lithuanians have more things
in common with Poland than with Estonia, I suppose!

Should we stick with the NEGATIVE IDENTITY of Baltic
countries or create a new definition instead?

Of course, we could start "re-thinking" Baltic as a cluster
of states and cultures (even some Polish and Danish affairs
concern us, Sweden and St.Petersburg).

Why not call the group soc.culture.balticum?

Today, the Baltic sea unites our cultures and economies,
when the iron curtain does not exist any more! This might
denote a new POSITIVE identity.


> Topics would include culture, networking, language, politics,
> shortly anything you expect from a soc.culture.* group.
>
> The prime language in the group would be English, but the use of
>local
> languages should not be condemned.

Wonderful!


> Despite the existance of BALT-L, I think there is a need for s.c.baltic.
> If nothing else, a lot of the material in 
>talk.politics.soviet,  once
> you filtered away Mutlu/Arigc, concerns the Baltic countries.


Still, unfortunately, the "Baltic" discussion belongs to the "Soviet"
group as long as Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania are occupied
by the Russian army, against their will. This is a shadow from
the past, which we should get rid of as soon as possible.


> My planned schedule is to let the discussion period go before
> Christmas, and the start the vote around January 7th, when things
> are back to normal.


I support soc.culture.balticum - let us work for the future!


with Baltic regards
Tapani Hietaniemi, Universitas Helsingiensis
                   urbs fennorum


Newsgroups: news.groups
From: jdahl@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Jared Dahl)
Subject: Re: RESULT: comp.society.folklore unmoderation fails 729:151
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 01:38:51 GMT
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester

In article <1gltddINNhq7@news.UU.NET>, msb@sq.sq.com (Mark Brader) writes:
|> (c) 3 people who each voted once or twice each way, with no clear
|>     statement that the later vote was intended as a correction:
|> 		
|>       Drucker     mertwig!xyzzy@uunet.UU.NET (Daniel Drucker)

Our 14 year-old network wizard... what a surprise!!

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
| Jared Dahl             | "My heart is human, my blood is boiling, | 
| Systems Programmer     |  my brain IBM"                           |
| IBM - Rochester, MN    |              -- STYX,  "Mr. Roboto"      |
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Opinions expressed are mine, not my employer's.
Don't send e-mail - I won't get it.
Newsgroups: news.groups
From: shephard@fraser.sfu.ca (Gordon Shephard)
Subject: Re: RFD: comp.os.ms-windows.networking
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 03:30:38 GMT

dean@deans.frontiertech.com writes:

>This is a formal Request For Discussion regarding the establishment of
>a newsgroup to discuss issues and questions related to Windows
>networking.

>NEWSGROUP

>  comp.os.ms-windows.networking 

I fully support this.  I'm not particulary interested in Windows 
(At this time) but the issues involving Networking and Windows are
of great interest to me.

I can think of no serious objection to this group.
(Have a sneaking suspicion it may be overun with Questions dealing
 with Novell and Windows, But so be it. )


-- 
| Gordon Harry Shephard         | Distributed Computing Support Group  |
| Academic Computing Services   | Phone: (604)291-3930   (604)464-4991 |
| Simon Fraser University       |                                      |
| Burnaby, BC, Canada. V5A 1S6  | shephard@sfu.ca                      | 
|                                                                      |
| Disclaimer: In No Way am I speaking for my Employers or Simon Fraser |
| University.                                                          |